AEM Fuel / Ignition Controller (F/IC-8)

[adamwahhab]

Has anyone seen this new fuel/spark controller? If it works, this opens a whole new world for the lx platform

[Tim@NCTSLLC]

Has anyone seen this new fuel/spark controller? If it works, this opens a whole new world for the lx platform

It is a similar concept to the iEMS3, however the AEM units have serious complaints from their users on their own forum, they have been on the market and off the market numerous times, and even though they claim they have been used on a Hemi, they could not give me any information directly when I went to them when they first announced it.

Their methods of performing the functions are not that intuitive, most inputs are based on vague percentages not actual numbers that equate to physical tuning properties, and the software is more difficult to use. A tune can only be changed by hooking up the laptop and loading the new tune in the unit (it can store two tunes internal). It can not store multiple tunes on memory cards and tunes loaded on the fly as with the iEMS3.

It's wiring harness is 24 inches long, so it will require some serious cutting up of the factory harness, making it difficult to locate in the passenger compartment. The iEMS3 harness is three meters long and comes with male/female injector connectors to prevent having to hack up the factory injector harness.

It also does not have all the same features, number of inputs/outputs as the iEMS3, which by the way has been around far longer than even the AEM 4 cyl version. They don't mention anything specific in regards to an injector load board, and unless one is built into the unit, I can tell you straight off that without one, your Hemi will never start.

Their approach to O2 sensor input modification is wrong for the Hemi, it is based on the old style O2 sensors that produce a variable voltage output, not the new Titania sesnors that produce a variable resistance that modifies the O2 sensor output to the ECU.

The iEMS3 costs more, but you get a lot more, and you get a product with direct support, and one that has been proven with real world testing on your vehicle. In fact, the latest generation 3 changes in the unit and the software were specifically changed based on real world testing on the Hemi platform.

After seeing all the issues with the 4cyl versions and the intial 8 cyl versions, and the lack of data from them regarding chrysler/dodge applications, I dropped pursuit of becoming a distributor for the units quite some time ago. Yes I am biased, I just don't want to see someone run out and get one and then find out there are significant issues trying to use it. With the funds I invested in the iEMS3, I could have become an AEM WD for the product. Why didn't I? All the published issues with the units from users, lack of data for use on the Hemi, and the fact that the iEMS3 was proven to work on the Hemi, and that the iEMS3 manufacturer is more than willing to make changes to support the Hemi platform.

[adamwahhab]

Have you installed the AEM controller on a hemi before? I have one coming in the mail, if its trash, then i'll return it, But its worth a shot to give it a try.

[Trojan]

Is that the same system CMW has been toying with? Seems like they got it figured out as well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm2aiNjLp6I

[hemidup]

I have them all. AEM, FAST and iEMS3 plus all the conceivable piggy backs that have been introduced for our boosted Hemi's in the past 4 years. I still want all my stock factory options, so the iEMS3 is going on mine.

[adamwahhab]

The AEM claims you can keep your factory options also.

[Tim@NCTSLLC]

The AEM claims you can keep your factory options also.

I am pretty sure he was speaking of the AEM EMS stand alone. The F/IC8 is similar to the iEMS3 in that it uses PMW control of the injectors and not MAP sensor voltage skewing like previous piggybacks did. So in theory that portion of its functionality would be okay.

The issues I see with it, and I have studied it at length, is that obviously it was designed from a low cost standpoint. It is limited to an overall (all eight) injector offset trim, whereas the iEMS3 allows overall, left bank and/or right bank, and individual injector trims.

While the F/IC8 has a similar number of analog input/output channels, five out of the seven it has, have a dedicated function which really limits their functionality on the Hemi (at least 3 of the seven would not be applicable).

The iEMS3 has 8 analog in/outs and all 8 are user configurable for either frequency or voltage sensors, type of output functionality, and user definable sensor parameters (IAT shows in degree F versus simply the 0-5 Volt sensor output).

The F/IC8 has one PWM output to drive a boost control solenoid, but it only functions in a basic open boost mode (there is no processor feedback to allow closed boost control mode where the processor will adjust the pulse width to maintain the target boost setting), and the F/IC8 has one additional switched 12v trigger.

The iEMS3 has 2 PWM outputs, one which can run in the closed boost feedback mode to adjust the pulse width 20 times a second to maintain the target boost minimizing upper rpm boost drop off, a second PWM for control of other equipment (Water/Meth pump, nitrous solenoid, etc), and it has two additional configurable digital 12 v outputs for component control.

The big issue is that the F/IC8 has two dedicated O2 sensor modification channels, and their configuration and function is completely wrong for the Hemi O2 system configuration and type of sensor function. The F/IC8 is setup to control using either an aftermarket wideband sensor (can't use that input to an OBDII vehicle) or control of the old style narrowband sensor using a simulated squarewave pattern or a fixed output, either of which the Hemi ECU will detect and throw an O2 code almost immediately. It does not work with the Hemi O2 systems functionality, but simply the F/IC8 replaces or overides the stock signal with something the ECU will see as abnormal.

The F/IC8 instructions skate around this in a vague fashion as it talks about using O2 modification on a very infrequent basis, primarily at the race track on your "race" car???

I know the "price" of the F/IC8 is more attractive on the surface, but you have to look at its functionality and usability along with what it actually comes with, and has it really been used on your vehicle. From what I can tell, when AEM says it has "verified" the application, it means that the ability to interface with the injectors and crank triggers has been checked, but not that vehicles have been tuned with it. No where on AEM's site will you find specific information regarding the Hemi or any wiring diagrams associated with the Hemi engines. If they or someone else had actually done something other than verification, it would only make sense it would be published in the Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep section. They will make sure the product will interface, but it is up to the end user to determine usability and to figure out how to make it work (if it will).

The iEMS3 was developed directly from a full stand alone system, so its circuitry and software control is more advanced. It is also manufactured in Sweden versus being produced in China or Taiwan. The Swedish engineers came here to specifcally modify the physical board architecture and software so the iEMS3 works with the Hemi ECU and sensors. It was setup, tested, and the vehicle tuned by them.

If I were to delete the injector load board, power switch, the eight male and eight female injector connectors, and two meters of the universal harness, I could get close to the F/IC8 price, but I choose to include those things for functionality and ease of installation.

I am sure it will function for open loop fuel control. Based on their description of how its O2 modification works, I see a lot of potential issues related to closed loop fuel control, and that is the area people have the most complaints about regarding drivability.

Its one thing to order a product as an investment for potential resell where the cost of the item is justified for actual testing versus future profit, versus ordering a product fully expecting it to work and it does not, then being stuck with it as it can't be returned because it has been installed.

Just my 2 cents worth.

[JonW]

I don't know anything about the functionality of either of these two units, but I do know this...

- a competing vendor is here telling you all the good things about his product and dissing the AEM - take it for what it's worth...

- AEM does make some of the Mopar stand-alone ECU's, so they obviously not only know something about the HEMI, they have info straight from the source...so take that for what it's worth...

Not trying to start anything... Just throwing out my view.

[Blown7]

Ask Jected , by the pics I've seen, it seems he's running one on his Whipple equipted 300


OPPPPPSSSSSS my bad he has a Motec

[srt007]

if aem is having trouble with their piggyback then just give it some time as with all electronics when they first come out have their little bugs here and there. i run a
aem full stand alone system in my 1400hp supra and i love it .they make excellent products and have good prices to.give it some time who knows we might even get a full stand alone system for the lx's in the future if we're lucky

[Tim@NCTSLLC]

I don't know anything about the functionality of either of these two units, but I do know this...

- a competing vendor is here telling you all the good things about his product and dissing the AEM - take it for what it's worth...

- AEM does make some of the Mopar stand-alone ECU's, so they obviously not only know something about the HEMI, they have info straight from the source...so take that for what it's worth...

Not trying to start anything... Just throwing out my view.

I understand exactly what you are saying, no hard feelings here, and my best advice is to anyone is get educated about a product as much as possible. People on here who know me can tell you that I am a straight shooter, and I will readily admit when I am wrong. If I thought the F/IC8 would function, I would have ordered one for testing a long time ago, and would be selling it. I am going by their own published descriptions of how the unit functions and applying that to over three years of testing and tuning on the Hemi ECU's. I know how they work.

There is room for both, they have different levels of functionality that appeals to different consumers. For the OP, I truly hope it works out for him, I hate to see anyone spend hard earned money for something and then be disappointed. I am only trying to provide information so someone can consider what is being said and be educated to ask the right questions to make sure it is right for them.

I have no bones about AEM products, their UEGO is great, and I use other AEM products as well.

The original OP asked if anyone had seen it, I have (a long time ago), and I am simply posting information that I know about it.

[Tim@NCTSLLC]

I don't know anything about the functionality of either of these two units, but I do know this...

- a competing vendor is here telling you all the good things about his product and dissing the AEM - take it for what it's worth...

- AEM does make some of the Mopar stand-alone ECU's, so they obviously not only know something about the HEMI, they have info straight from the source...so take that for what it's worth...

Not trying to start anything... Just throwing out my view.

I am not dissing AEM, I am simply pointing out differences between the two units from a comparative standpoint.

Supplying a stand alone to work on a Hemi crate engine is a lot different as it is not faced with trying to interface with an OBDII compliant ECU and all it's myriad of checks and balances for maintaining that compliance. Yes, obviously they had information on the crate engine parameters, but that would not carry over into functionality of an OBDII ECU that a crate engine has nothing to do with.

And I agree with what you are saying, take it for what it is worth to the individual. An educated consumer is the best consumer.