With Lotus 190 ECU CO 7%, HC 1000+ppm (So rich the engine would eat its liners etc)
With Emerald ECU CO 0.19% HC 58ppm
It PASSED!!!
Didn’t need to play with the map or anything.
Chuffed.
Don’t be tempted if you have similar readings to me, to get it passed by a dodgy garage who will do the emissions on another car etc. The Lotus 190 ecu is so rich it will eat your engine over time, and hit your pocket. The emerald is now about a third better on fuel consumption.
Why did Lotus create such a [censored] map, and then claim that its not a road ecu, and its lumpy because its such a high performance engine. That’s crap, with a decent map it can run sweet…rant over…
[quoteThat’s because most of the original owners soon wanted more power, & with the Lotus ECU they kept the warranty intact! In other words “we woz conned!” [/quote]
well the 190 ecu was only part of a number of options that formed part of what was known as the “190 upgrade” and on its own wasn’t that expensive
The 190 upgrade wouldnt have been necessary if Lotus had got it right from the start. They didnt , hence the Emerald/verniers upgrade which cured the hunting, upped the power and torque and removed the juddering and off cam misbehaviour.
The main reason for the better behaviour is the change of load determination strategy from MAP based to Alpha-n (throttle position). With wilder cams and throttle bodies the MAP signal is very poor and inconsistent. This can (and does) confuse the ECU at idle and during progression/off cam, this is what causes the poor running. It can also prevent the ECU entering closed loop which in turn can lead to MOT failing characteristics. These problems simply do not occur when the engine uses throttle position to determine load, the MAP signal is ignored and the engine runs much more happily as a result. MAP based load determination is in my experience innappropriate for an engine like the VHPD.
I have added Emeralds to a large number of VHPDs in Caterhams and Exiges and the transformation is always a huge and pleasant surprise to the owners. The savings in fuel alone justify the expense and the drivability of the engine when converted make the car a pleasure to drive even in the slowest moving stop/start traffic.
I’s not really a question of ‘need’ I have upgraded at least half a dozen 190 Exiges to an Emerald and all so far have been very pleased with the transformation it has made to the engine. Not a single one of them had the cams properly timed when they were checked even those with the modified 190 inlet pulley. Three of those who had the 190 upgrade had the new pulley installed incorrectly which meant the inlet cam was running in its original position…
I have upgraded at least half a dozen 190 Exiges… Not a single one of them had the cams properly timed when they were checked even those with the modified 190 inlet pulley.
Dave - you must be forgetting SeanB’s car - "No, didn’t need verniers. Mine had the revised Lotus pulleys fitted as part of the 190 conversion. Dave cehecked and double checked the cam timing and it was spot on what he wanted it to be. But I have to say I didn’t ask him what it was actually timed up at.
With Lotus 190 ECU CO 7%, HC 1000+ppm (So rich the engine would eat its liners etc)
With Emerald ECU CO 0.19% HC 58ppm
The Lotus 190 ecu is so rich it will eat your engine over time, and hit your pocket. Why did Lotus create such a [censored] map, and then claim that its not a road ecu, and its lumpy because its such a high performance engine. That’s crap, with a decent map it can run sweet…rant over…
Your experience is different then than on THIS THREAD
and I think its unfair to scare new owners reading this thread - all the variance in HC is in whether the cat was or was not fitted and so is not a consideration in “eating your engine”.
Could the problem with the CO reading have been something else other than the ECU (or indeed you have a damaged one) -either way as you can read on the other posting the Lotus ECU is fine at reducing CO to an acceptable level??
Dave - do you really mean this - or is your prose in need of an Emerald (ie running a little rich )?
A fag packet calculation based on:
190ecu mpg of 26
emerald mpg of 32.5 ( a 25% increase)
fuel costing 92p a litre
emerald & ancillaries costing �1,200 (inc VAT)
means that the payback would be over 37,300 miles. I have done @25,000 over 5.5 years, which means I would breakeven in 8 years, 2 months, 14 days, 3 hours, 35 minutes, and 47 seconds
The drivability of the engine when converted make the car a pleasure to drive even in the slowest moving stop/start traffic.
Sorry to be argumentative, but the nature of the drivability of the 190ECU actually adds to my driving pleasure - maybe its more show than go but don’t write it off as not being part of the experience.
One particular owner was acheiving around 18MPG before the conversion and over 35MPG following, that is a staggering amount of wasted fuel. You could say that I was stretching a point to make a point. If your mileage was a little higher the payback period would be a lot lower and fuel is unlikely to stay at 92p for long. The ECU will have a good residual value should you wish to decommission it before selling the car. Redo the maths based on those criteria and it looks a lot more favourable.
The last upgrade I did cost a lot less than �1200.
You may enjoy the driveline shunt, continual hunting and stalling and fuel wastage, not everyone does, the usual line is that the engine is ‘race tuned’ and owners should expect misbehaviour. In my view it is simply poorly managed and the poor running reflects this. The fact that the engine’s behaviour and output is transformed when the Emerald ECU is fitted makes a lie of the ‘race tuned’ argument.
If your regular route in an Exige involves stop/start traffic then the ‘charm and character’ of p*ss poor running soon begins to wear thin.
redoing the calc based on 18mpg before and 35mpg afterwards, with an all up cost of �1000 and annual mileage of 10k = a payback in just over 10 1/2 months.
So, it can be done - although I reckon both the above examples may be at the extremes.
At 18mpg to 35mpg there must have been more than the ecu wrong?
From what I have read also is that very few 190 bhp upgrade acctualy made that and was more close to around 175-180bhp! I have an emerald on mine and have had mine RR at 196bhp
I’d rather save the �1k plus of costs and put it towards a new engine after the original eats itself
Steve, the 1k you’d spend would stop the engine eating itself. It’s only eating itself because its over fueling so much. Fix that, and get a remote thermostat, then you’ll get much more reliability and longevity than farting about in a smelly, down on power, ineficient, Lotus ‘190’ (we wish) kit.
Then you’d not have to think about what you’d do when the ‘k’ eats itself…not for a long time anyway.
Stop playing devils advocate and get with the program man!
Three of those who had the 190 upgrade had the new pulley installed incorrectly which meant the inlet cam was running in its original position…
Dave
I can vouch for that, since one of them was me… Williams in Bristol even got the specialist in from Hethel to work out why my car had poor performance, but they didn’t find this mistake!!
I have a video of Dave chuckling away to himself, when he found what they had done!!
Although I no longer run a K, I can see no point of buying the 190 upgrade - go straight for the Emerald!!
From what I have read also is that very few 190 bhp upgrade acctualy made that and was more close to around 175-180bhp! I have an emerald on mine and have had mine RR at 196bhp