Haltech engine management systems
#1
![Question](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon5.gif)
Hello everybody,
I hope that everyone had enough turkey for last couple of days to slow their cars...
I like to know if somebody have, had any experience with Haltech systems? Something like E11v12..? I know it's not as popular as Motec is.
Any feedbacks will be appreciated.
Thanks an advance.
lipam
I hope that everyone had enough turkey for last couple of days to slow their cars...
I like to know if somebody have, had any experience with Haltech systems? Something like E11v12..? I know it's not as popular as Motec is.
Any feedbacks will be appreciated.
Thanks an advance.
lipam
#2
Nordschleife Master
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I have had a lot of experience with Haltech, in particular, the E11 series ECUs. I'd look elsewhere. The software is buggy, especially when the upgrading firmware and software versions which you need to do to apply the latest bug fixes Fundamentally, the hardware is good, but the software needs to mature for it to be a reliable platform. It is not a set it and forget it ECU.
Last edited by Geoffrey; 11-24-2007 at 12:39 PM.
#4
Nordschleife Master
![Default](https://rennlist.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I have used both version 1 and 2 as most recently as this summer. Updates have come out every several months with a ratio of about 3 software versions for every firmware. In other words, about every third software version requires a firmware update. I have yet to have a firmware update that has gone smoothly. Sometimes the original programming is locked. Sometimes it password protects the ECU, sometimes some of the channels no longer work after the update and you have to load the Haltech default file, then load your file to get it to work. The wideband is an innovate module and the channel it is assigned only returns lambda voltage, not lambda value (They may have fixed this in their last release). Not all of the functions of the software have been programmed, although advertised. The software has specific breakpoints for the tables and if you want to add an additional site it requires a complex time consuming exercise of manually copying the values of the cell around. The crank triggering for 60-2 is not reliable at times, and the gap of the sensor is key in getting it to run. I could go on...I believe they released the product early without sufficient testing and sufficient software flexibility and if you talk with them, they'll agree. The software for the E8X is the same basic style of software with similar issues.
Their older ECUs like the E6K is a good solid piece with software that works, unfortunately, it is outdated by today's standards.
It has been my experience that the extra labor spent figuring out how to make this system work is more than the cost of a MoTeC M48 ECU by a factor of 2x.
Their older ECUs like the E6K is a good solid piece with software that works, unfortunately, it is outdated by today's standards.
It has been my experience that the extra labor spent figuring out how to make this system work is more than the cost of a MoTeC M48 ECU by a factor of 2x.
Last edited by Geoffrey; 11-24-2007 at 07:51 PM.