Sjoe Rory that is a mouth full in one post. ;)
First before trying to answer, let me rip you first
Rory wrote:Land Rover(sorry guys)
No need to apologise to us, it you who are stuck with the Landy, but at least we can offer condolences.
![Twisted Evil :twisted:](./images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif)
You must follow the example of our other member here called Landy who saw the light and is now busy buying a SFA Lux
Enough ripping:
GoTech vs Dicktator. This is a very interesting question, which will get you different responses from different fields. I will offer you my personal opinion based on my personal investigation.
I do not know the Go-tech that well, so I can not really endorse or knock it, I see it is more popular amongst Cape Town lads, but not that popular up here with the Vaalies. What I saw is, that it is a bit more expensive than the Dicktator (IIRC since it has been a while since I did the comparison)
If you take the cost issue a bit further, converting from a Dizzy to Wasted spark is going to cost you considerably more. You are going to need a coil pack, more than one igniter and a crank/flywheel pick up. Therefore, from that perspective I would say stay with a standard dizzy set-up.
During my investigation to determine the best system for my 3.0l Supra engine in my Lux (7MGE) I spoke to Chris Dicks from Dicktator and asked him what route to go for my 7MGE engine since it might be an easy option for me to convert to wasted spark as the 7MGTE comes stock in that configuration. He told me that the reason why you would need the "stronger spark" from the wasted spark set-up is if you were running a turbo. When you are boosting (especially if your boost were turned up) the multi coils would perform better then a single coil, but on a NA engine it is not really necessary to convert (hence the stock 7MGE run a single coil vs the 7MGTE running wasted spark)
Regarding the Lambda sensor, my investigation turned up the following: Closed loop Lambda control works mostly in the low RPM range and adjustments to the fuel ratio is done in that range. Once the engine is running past 1/4-1/2 throttle the Lambda sensor does not have any influence on the system in any case. Again, I asked Chris why his system does not do Lambda when his biggest competitor out here the Mr Turbo does. He laughed and told me that he too can add an extra wire or two to his system and another programmable field to GUI but that the effectiveness of it is virtually zero and an eye blind. He said that to have decent Lamba control you need a more complex 5-wire Lambda Sensor and then still the effect of it has more to do with pollution (the CAT-converter thing etc) then the engines fuel efficiency.
Regarding the comment on optimising CO's at higher RPMs that is not true. With a after market ECU you can optimise the engine over the complete rev range on a proper dyno (load cell not free running dyno), since the car is stationary the gas analyser stays connected all the time. So even without the Lambda sensor, the engine can be optimised to 99%+ over the complete rev range on the Dyno if the guy knows what he is doing.
Regarding the knock sensor (And this is something I would have liked very much myself, since my engine does have such a sensor available) Chris' and the guy from Mr Turbo's response were as follows: The portion of any OE ECU that controls the knock sensor is normally twice as big and complex as the rest of the ECU. The knock frequencies and harmonics of every model engine on the market differ. Even for a stock vs optimised engine is not the same. That wil mean that they will have to develop a different algorithm for the different engines on the market, and multiple circuits for the different make sensors, which will make theses after market ECUs too expensive for anyone to afford without a sponsorship on his vehicle, and this is not the market for which they build these ECUs . There are guys building such systems but at R 15-20K vs R 2-3K they play in a different market altogether.
BTW my neighbour removed a Mr Turbo with a modified dizzy (Hall sender) which was giving problems on a Landy running a Rover 3.5 V8, and installed back a standard Rover dizzy and then installed a Dicktator system. The owner was pleased afterwards with the results, as his OE ECU and the Mr Turbo system gave him endless problems. The problems he had with the Mr Turbo was not so much the ECU as it was the modified Dizzy, but the inability of the Mr Turbo to interface with the OE Dizzy was the Achilles Heel of that set-up.
You can also read my previous posts, in this and other topics, about the timing set-up of the Dicktator and see why it is so much superior over other systems on the market. Its ability to have more detailed timing adjustments negates the use of a knock sensor and makes it work so much better then some of its competition in the off-road market, as you alluded to in your post, since many of the other systems are more focused on the Street-, Drag and Track racing markets.