will the e-manage ultament from greddy work for a cobalt ls

 

No. Its application list is only Japanese cars.

 

is there any management sys that work for the cobalt, like the e-management sys

 

besides standalone no

 

People would have you believe that the Perfect Power SMT-6 could work as a universal piggyback. However, there are no known applications in the Cobalt so far.

 

Arent the GM ones running AEM EMS's?

 

I guess the MoTeC ECM is out of the question then? hehe, I know, it's a racing application

 

I believe you are talking about the Race cars. Not street cars.

 

true but you can program them with whatever parameters you want including, i assuming, factory ones such as running the gauge cluster, correct?

 

what about the aem management sys, (plug and play)

 

The only AEM systems that are "plug and play" are the ones that are already for that specific application and probably OBDI computers as well.

If you were to use one, it would have to be a "universal" AEM EMS. It's not as easy as you might think...

 

is there any kind of management sys to help tune my engine

 

Currently, No unless you go standalone but with that you'll lose some features that your stock PCM controls.

 

damn, that sucks, so what can i do to build up my engine

 

Do what I'm doing... WAIT. Until we know that tuning becomes available, don't mess with it.

 

Let me start by making a true, but abrasive statement: Anyone who contradicts this post doesn't really know what he or she is talking about.

Now understand a few simple and key facts:
EVERY system controller (ECU) takes in analog signals from the sensors in 3 basic forms: Current, Voltage, and Frequency.
Piggyback controllers accept these signals and change them based on internal programming defined by the end user.
As long as the Piggyback you choose accepts the inputs for your specific ECU then it can be configured and programmed to accomplish what you wish.

To answer the thread question: Yes, the E-manage and E-Manage Ultimate both will take in and control your ECU. This holds true for just about every Piggyback controller on the market. The advantage to this over a stand-alone is that you can easily change only the system controls needed to work with your set-up and still have complete OEM function of the rest of the system.

The problem is that only limited work has been done with Piggyback controllers and GM engines/ECU’s so valid information is not as readily available like with applications that are more popular with tuning. Also each year ECU’s become more complex and there is a very good chance that the logic used with the Piggyback isn’t complex or fast enough to fully control all operating conditions the engine can see.

To make it happen:
Use the #1 coil ground line or EST line to drive the RPM signal (pulse/Frequency)
Use the MAP signal line to drive the Load (N/A-stock load range) or external MAP for map range beyond the stock) MAF signals are much harder to get to work when the application is not supported, but not impossible.
Use the Crank position sensor, cam position sensor and/or EST lines to address timing
Also relays often need to be used on timing lines during crank/start to keep the PCM happy, but after that the Piggyback can take over without causing any problems.
Also the inlet air temp, charge air temp, and coolant temp sensors can be referenced and manipulated.
Installing a WB02 can almost always be added to a Piggyback and one of the best inputs of all.


A Piggyback will never do as good of a job as an ECU retune, but when a retune isn’t available the piggyback will get the job done if it’s properly configured and tuned.

 

So, are trying to **** people off?

I know exactly what I'm talking about. And I don't have to be arrogant about.

There are two problems with tuning the L61 engine that make piggy back unit pretty much useless.

First, they use returnless, constant pressure fuel systems. Most piggybacks rely on the ability to change fuel pressure.

Second, they use a waste-spark, compression sense ingition system that doesn't have a cam position sensor.

But I don't know what I'm talking about.

 

I dont think he knew about that did he.......get him halfcent!

 

i havent been on this site in a few months, since my cobalt was totaled and i bought a 2006 chevy aveo, it was funny, today i got called from AEM asking about my cobalt that i used to have, turns out that they are R&D a piggy back system for the 2.2 cobalts and they needed a test car but i dont have my cobalt anymore, so tahts a heads up, they told me to be quiet, but i couldnt resist! lol sorry AEM.

 

Returnless fuel system has not much to do with tuning the engine.
As long as you know the fuel pressure and pressure delta in the manifold then you can adjust an injector to flow the correct volume for a given A/F ratio.
Weather it's 40 psi or 90 psi rail pressure as long as you are running around 30psi delta (between the fuel pressure and manifold pressure) any injector pulse can be timed to support the engine. Most piggyback controllers can either delay or totally change the injector pulse width by either attaching to the injector ground or having injector drivers on the board. The E-manage for example can do both.

Wasted spark CSI has been around since 1991 in GM vehicles and makes no difference to the piggyback controller. It does however **** off the PCM if you don't let the start-up sequence pass through from the ignition control module. The solution for this is to use relays triggered by the ignition "start" signal to switch between the stock EST lines and piggyback filtered lines during start up.

Additionally the crank position sensor can be manipulated through most piggyback controllers by delaying the signal to the PCM; so much so that the PCM can actually see it as timing advance in some cases.

Any experienced Electronics Engineer can make this work and even someone like me who deals with just data acquisition, but knows a little about electronics can figure it out. It’s not 1, 2, 3 easy, but at the same time not impossible if you know what you are working with.
The act of running a Saturn 1.9L and even the L61 have both been outlined over the years on many sites including the e-manage forum.

 

HE SAID PRETTY MUCH USELESS NOT IMPOSSBLE.....

by the time you get all of the sht figured out and down to a pat on a piggyback, programming will be out therefore this sht is useless for now..... btw i wouldnt start with halfcent, you wont win lol

 

im with hazzard and probably everyone else.....u might have a point but keep it on the D/L lol or cent's gonna have to lay the smack down!

 

so could u use a stand alone as a piggy back to take over after the engine is runing ? is that workable

 

Sorry but what you said was an oxymoron.

 

The guy at this performance shop I stopped by, that actually knew a bit about the eco and that surprised me, said if I gave him a few hours he could get a SAFC or similar product to work very well with the stock computer. I dont know how but he said its actually easier on returnless fuel systems and he could intercept the comp to comp communications and run them through the unit to keep all the auxillary computers happy as well. I dont want to be a guinea pig after hearing about the problems that someone was having with the SAFC, and I dont have the $$$ right now for 60$ an hour labor that might not actually gain me anything.