Well i dont necessarily agree with you here. The only damage a engine management mod would do is blow your motor. It certainly isnt going to kill you. You cant tap into the ABS system to work some magic on your brakes and such. Ive been modifying engine parameters since the early 90s and never heard or seen any evidence of aftermarket tuning being the cause of a persons death. Now, we cant control the idiot who points his car into on coming traffic or trees., driving like an idiot in rain or snow, now can we?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Who wants dibs on the XEDE PnP System?
- Thread starter SAVAGE70
- Start date
Well i dont necessarily agree with you here. The only damage a engine management mod would do is blow your motor. It certainly isnt going to kill you. You cant tap into the ABS system to work some magic on your brakes and such. Ive been modifying engine parameters since the early 90s and never heard or seen any evidence of aftermarket tuning being the cause of a persons death. Now, we cant control the idiot who points his car into on coming traffic or trees., driving like an idiot in rain or snow, now can we?
I was just ellaborating on the previous post. Coming from a background of Microchip Design (ASIC), Systems of Systems design, Performance Analysis and Test and Integration, my intent was to remind people that until a system and its interfaces is COMPLETELY tested, there is no way you can predict with 100% certainty that any particular subsystem won't incurr unexpected behaviour in the whole system.
As for the ABS brake example, how do you know for sure that the device installed doesn't interfere in any way with the data going to the ABS controller? You can deduce that it won't based on your knowledge of your system, but that doesn't ensure that you won't have any anomalous failure modes in the whole system. Be careful, major companies for many years have experienced unpredicted behaviours in systems that resulted from undetected failure modes. For example, Darkstar failed and crashed on its second takeoff due to inadequate SW testing. Changes were made in one box and the system wasn't adequately tested to find the problem that caused the crash.
My 2 cents....
As for the ABS brake example, how do you know for sure that the device installed doesn't interfere in any way with the data going to the ABS controller? You can deduce that it won't based on your knowledge of your system, but that doesn't ensure that you won't have any anomalous failure modes in the whole system. Be careful, major companies for many years have experienced unpredicted behaviours in systems that resulted from undetected failure modes. For example, Darkstar failed and crashed on its second takeoff due to inadequate SW testing. Changes were made in one box and the system wasn't adequately tested to find the problem that caused the crash.
My 2 cents....
I was just ellaborating on the previous post. Coming from a background of Microchip Design (ASIC), Systems of Systems design, Performance Analysis and Test and Integration, my intent was to remind people that until a system and its interfaces is COMPLETELY tested, there is no way you can predict with 100% certainty that any particular subsystem won't incurr unexpected behaviour in the whole system.
As for the ABS brake example, how do you know for sure that the device installed doesn't interfere in any way with the data going to the ABS controller? You can deduce that it won't based on your knowledge of your system, but that doesn't ensure that you won't have any anomalous failure modes in the whole system. Be careful, major companies for many years have experienced unpredicted behaviours in systems that resulted from undetected failure modes. For example, Darkstar failed and crashed on its second takeoff due to inadequate SW testing. Changes were made in one box and the system wasn't adequately tested to find the problem that caused the crash.
My 2 cents....
Why are you comparing an aircraft to a car? Aircraft have a hell of a lot more going on inside than an automobile. Secondly, you're tapping the pinouts on the harness that goes strictly to engine management, not abs, climate control, traction control, etc. If you want to get really technical, same can be said with people modifying their stereos or nav units. I think your point is really ridiculous and you're letting your text books get the better of you. Like most engineers, they cant lead a group... when you throw Murphy in their face, they freak out because the book told them something else. Your're over analyzing this device...
I work in the Nuclear industry and deal with people of your caliber all the time. Its always a knee jerk reaction with them when common sense comes into play. Take a chill pill and relax.
Why are you comparing an aircraft to a car? Aircraft have a hell of a lot more going on inside than an automobile. Secondly, you're tapping the pinouts on the harness that goes strictly to engine management, not abs, climate control, traction control, etc. If you want to get really technical, same can be said with people modifying their stereos or nav units. I think your point is really ridiculous and you're letting your text books get the better of you. Like most engineers, they cant lead a group... when you throw Murphy in their face, they freak out because the book told them something else. Your're over analyzing this device...
I work in the Nuclear industry and deal with people of your caliber all the time. Its always a knee jerk reaction with them when common sense comes into play. Take a chill pill and relax.
The difference between me and the ppl you talk about (or try to compare me to) is that I can take a chill pill and relax. I just openned an ice-cold beer and am feeling relaxed.
My point was to play devil's advocate and from your response, i'm successful. So, just remember, your idea of common sense may look like idiocy to someone else.....
Cheers.
Why are you comparing an aircraft to a car? Aircraft have a hell of a lot more going on inside than an automobile.
Oh and by the way, You ask why I compare an aircraft to a car? Actually, cars now days have more, higher technology than the average aircrat and the safety factor in the automobile industry is much higher than in aircraft. Structural design in a car has a safety factor higher than 2.5 whereas in an aircraft, because of weight, has a safety factor of less than 2. Also, getting new technology approved for an aircraft takes much more red tape than a car, which results in an out-dated design(thank the FAA for commercial and the government for military) which is proven, but limited. Look at the space shuttle which could use some high performance AMD or intel processors, but still uses old style 8086 technology. Current military aircraft use CAN busses just like cars for subsystem controller communications, but the version lags behind the automobile industry. Commercial arcraft use ARINC 429 standard communications, which are VERY outdated and limited. So, yea, I am comparing cars to aircraft, because cars are the new benchmark in reliability of those systems.
Oh and by the way, You ask why I compare an aircraft to a car? Actually, cars now days have more, higher technology than the average aircrat and the safety factor in the automobile industry is much higher than in aircraft. Structural design in a car has a safety factor higher than 2.5 whereas in an aircraft, because of weight, has a safety factor of less than 2. Also, getting new technology approved for an aircraft takes much more red tape than a car, which results in an out-dated design(thank the FAA for commercial and the government for military) which is proven, but limited. Look at the space shuttle which could use some high performance AMD or intel processors, but still uses old style 8086 technology. Current military aircraft use CAN busses just like cars for subsystem controller communications, but the version lags behind the automobile industry. Commercial arcraft use ARINC 429 standard communications, which are VERY outdated and limited. So, yea, I am comparing cars to aircraft, because cars are the new benchmark in reliability of those systems.
Explain to me how you would benefit from using an intel or amd processor onboard opposed to a stable, low voltage 8086/8088 chip that requires no heatsink, no northbridge chipset, no southbridge chipset, easily failing ddr2 memory, higher latency bus to run basically an os lighter than dos? I dont think you want BETA hardware stuffed into a plane at 30,000 feet now do ya? They are already seeing the limitation using tail pieces made of carbon fiber.
A car doesnt have to run some way out nav system, nor does it have to have a series of hydraulics on board, compensate for extreme elevation with adjustable cabin pressure, extreme weather, wind, etc. You're comparing apples to oranges.
Explain to me how you would benefit from using an intel or amd processor onboard opposed to a stable, low voltage 8086/8088 chip that requires no heatsink, no northbridge chipset, no southbridge chipset, easily failing ddr2 memory, higher latency bus to run basically an os lighter than dos? I dont think you want BETA hardware stuffed into a plane at 30,000 feet now do ya? They are already seeing the limitation using tail pieces made of carbon fiber.
A car doesnt have to run some way out nav system, nor does it have to have a series of hydraulics on board, compensate for extreme elevation with adjustable cabin pressure, extreme weather, wind, etc. You're comparing apples to oranges.
We shouldn't be jacking this thread......Yes, it is apples to oranges, but my original point was that you can't forsee the effects of adding another system to the car without a complete and rigorous test, which requires knowing the internal, functional workings.
AutoXRacer
Member
Any updates on Xede PnP...?
So far there are estimates for the first quarter of 2008...
So far there are estimates for the first quarter of 2008...
Sorry all but PnP Xede is DOA. Spoke to the manufacturer (Chiptorque in Australia) and they have written it off. After exhaustive efforts to source key components but without any success the project has been terminated.
I think hearing that from Bell would be appropriate.
Alexthedon22
Member
there are still selling the chip for 899$ on they web site,
they said its available. and comes with the pnp harness
http://chiptorque.com
why everyone said its terminated,
are they talking only about the PNP feature ?
cause the chip is still on sale,
I tought its came with the pNp harness,
they said its available. and comes with the pnp harness
http://chiptorque.com
why everyone said its terminated,
are they talking only about the PNP feature ?
cause the chip is still on sale,
I tought its came with the pNp harness,
desperado-c
Member
- :
- Mazdaspeed3
there are still selling the chip for 899$ on they web site,
they said its available. and comes with the pnp harness
http://chiptorque.com
why everyone said its terminated,
are they talking only about the PNP feature ?
cause the chip is still on sale,
I tought its came with the pNp harness,
I see nothing about PnP. I think Stephanie would have let us know if it was available.
The XEDE is not just a chip. It is a programmable piggyback. The harness it comes with is only the part that plugs into the XEDE, not the part that plugs into your car. The part that plugs into your car is what everyone is talking about to make it PNP. Hope this helps.
AutoXRacer
Member
I gave up on the PnP for piggy backs... Now my sight is set on the Cobb AP...hopefully they can come up with something...?
Though, I am not holding my breath...
I was so psyched about the Xede with PnP... (sad2)
I've just given up hope...
Though, I am not holding my breath...
I was so psyched about the Xede with PnP... (sad2)
I've just given up hope...
New Posts and Comments
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 329
- Replies
- 58K
- Views
- 6M
