ForeverCar’s ITS Journal

[ForeverCar]

Besides software and hardware, I think it's important to have a pretty good foundational understanding of the mechanical aspects, the physics, and control system theory as well.

The software side is also likely very different than what you are used to (speculating on my end from what you have listed). At the highest level, you might get to work with C-like programming languages. However, syntax is just a minor aspect. The concepts usually are much lower level and close to the hardware.

On the hardware side, getting comfortable with the basics of how binary code executes on a simple architecture is a good place to start.

To get a taste of this, I would suggest looking into the CAN bus and understanding how 2 wires can communicate data between modules. From there, see if you are comfortable figuring out how to go from raw CAN captures to meaningful messages.

Granted, I am still very early in my own journey so this is my own speculations at this point. I have only started to look at the binary file with WinOLS. Just looking at raw binary file and using pattern recognition to identify "maps" is pretty basic and suboptimal for what I want to accomplish so I might jump down the reverse engineer the code route to see if I can get a more comprehensive understanding of the control code.

This sounds amazing. Seems like you're at least a step or two ahead of me from a software development/reverse engineering background perspective but I'd love to go down that rabbit hole as well. If you happen to have a good handful of resources that would allow me to catch up on researching automotive software engineering, I've been looking for an opportunity to get into that. I honestly don't even know where to start... I've got a ton of resources for web/full-stack/cloud/ai/data analysis, etc. but car-specific stuff I guess that's just a sphere of influence I'm not plugged in to.

Sponsored

 

[kjechel]

Does anyone know how speedometer correction can be done in our platform?

Sorry I'm late to this conversation, but this might work: https://www.yellr.com/
I asked them if it works for an FL5 (because DE5 is so new) and they said:

I believe the Yellow Box should be compatible. Not sure if Plug-n-play Harness would be available. Most likely it will be Splice Harness only. Compatibility/installation process is determined by the type of Output Speed Sensor (or the specific source of the speed signal pulse for the speedo/odometer). An easy way to check the speed sensor type is to confirm the number of wires/pins to the Output Speed sensor (or source speed sensor for the speedometer signal, such as ABS sensors or ABS module). Below information may be helpful to identify the speed sensor details for your vehicle...​

Followed by a very detailed set of instructions (with photos) on how to tell (which I can forward via PM if anyone wants it). At least we know their customer support is responsive.

I plan to try this, but not until I wear out my OEM tires and replace with a different size. If anyone else goes this route, please let us know how it works.

 

[ForeverCar]

I took the ITS out for a fun drive this morning. It’s about 120 miles and take around 3 hours. I continue to be impressed by the ITS. Even with my RWD preference (almost snobbery), the ITS delivers. As long as one respects the traction circle of the front tires, the suboptimal (IMO) FWD dynamics is hardly noticeable.

I have been trying to understand what makes a car enjoyable to drive. I think the combination of mindset, emotional state, driving conditions, and the car’s characteristics interact in complex ways. In other words, I think there are many ways a car can be enjoyable and there is likely no universal answer.

The ITS delivers for my unique combination by having power that gives sufficient acceleration while delivering it in an exciting way (at the limit of traction, carries well in the high rpm range, and allow for relatively long application of WOT). The shifter, pedals, and steering work cohesively with the performance envelope and feel of the car. Various touches add to the specialness of the experience (flared arches for the looks, exhaust pops for sound, perforations on the steering wheel).

As tempting as it is to modify the car, I am pretty confident that I would upset the amazing balance and will never be able to achieve as great a package as stock.

 

[Tw1stedlog1k]

I'm going to ramble but my personal thoughts are that they delivered on the "S" (street) badge in all regards when they developed this car. All out power, grip, and performance numbers are not what the street is for. The day to day consists of stop-and-go, winding back roads, and highway driving, not glass-smooth tracks. Drivetrain configuration and dynamics would play much less of a role because a street car is not driven 10/10ths. Below a certain threshold, most cars feel the same once in motion.

Acura did right by appealing to the more emotional side of the car. Leave the racing to the R.

 

[ABPDE5]

I'm going to ramble but my personal thoughts are that they delivered on the "S" (street) badge in all regards when they developed this car. All out power, grip, and performance numbers are not what the street is for. The day to day consists of stop-and-go, winding back roads, and highway driving, not glass-smooth tracks. Drivetrain configuration and dynamics would play much less of a role because a street car is not driven 10/10ths. Below a certain threshold, most cars feel the same once in motion.

Acura did right by appealing to the more emotional side of the car. Leave the racing to the R.

I still think the S / R and street / track delineation between the two models is nonsense. The Type-R has overly aggressive damping, even for track use, and... that's it. Aside from that, it has zero performance advantages on track over the Type-S; they are mechanically identical (exceptions being slight chassis and exhaust differences, which are likely immaterial and, if they do anything, favor the Type-S). In fact, the Type-S tune probably serves you better (and many would tell you the Type-S dampers are better on track, too).

Both of these cars are "track-ish" cars, that are very well balanced and tuned stock, in terms of chassis / power / inputs / feedback, and that makes them excellent cars on the street. While they are certainly track capable, the F/F layout still shows its weaknesses there.

TLDR: they're both excellent street cars; neither one is a track car first, and (LogR aside) neither is any more capable on track than the other.

 

[Indialantic]

I took the ITS out for a fun drive this morning. It’s about 120 miles and take around 3 hours. I continue to be impressed by the ITS. Even with my RWD preference (almost snobbery), the ITS delivers. As long as one respects the traction circle of the front tires, the suboptimal (IMO) FWD dynamics is hardly noticeable.

I have been trying to understand what makes a car enjoyable to drive. I think the combination of mindset, emotional state, driving conditions, and the car’s characteristics interact in complex ways. In other words, I think there are many ways a car can be enjoyable and there is likely no universal answer.

The ITS delivers for my unique combination by having power that gives sufficient acceleration while delivering it in an exciting way (at the limit of traction, carries well in the high rpm range, and allow for relatively long application of WOT). The shifter, pedals, and steering work cohesively with the performance envelope and feel of the car. Various touches add to the specialness of the experience (flared arches for the looks, exhaust pops for sound, perforations on the steering wheel).

As tempting as it is to modify the car, I am pretty confident that I would upset the amazing balance and will never be able to achieve as great a package as stock.

Agree about modifying - my ITS seems really well tuned as is. Everything is seemingly balanced. They could have forced more HP or whatever else but the offset would be the harmony you feel when driving the car as it was designed (plus my wife says I can't screw up another car)

 

[Tw1stedlog1k]

I still think the S / R and street / track delineation between the two models is nonsense. The Type-R has overly aggressive damping, even for track use, and... that's it. Aside from that, it has zero performance advantages on track over the Type-S; they are mechanically identical (exceptions being slight chassis and exhaust differences, which are likely immaterial and, if they do anything, favor the Type-S). In fact, the Type-S tune probably serves you better (and many would tell you the Type-S dampers are better on track, too).

Both of these cars are "track-ish" cars, that are very well balanced and tuned stock, in terms of chassis / power / inputs / feedback, and that makes them excellent cars on the street. While they are certainly track capable, the F/F layout still shows its weaknesses there.

TLDR: they're both excellent street cars; neither one is a track car first, and (LogR aside) neither is any more capable on track than the other.

I don't doubt the marketing behind it at all, it's definitely worked on me. As a whole, I do think the Type R is more "to the right of center" whereas the Type S is "to the left." The ITS softer tuned suspension, burble tune, and sharper styling is what drives the point home for me.

Source: none

 

[ABPDE5]

I don't doubt the marketing behind it at all, it's definitely worked on me. As a whole, I do think the Type R is more "to the right of center" whereas the Type S is "to the left." The ITS softer tuned suspension, burble tune, and sharper styling is what drives the point home for me.

Source: none

And the items you identified are fair distinctions!

I think, for me, it's not so much your interpretation as the popular media-recited mantra of "the Type-R is built for the track, whereas the Type-S is built for the street" That kind of irks me, because: (i) all the "go fast" bits are identical; (ii) neither was really built for the track first (hence the cooling issues d/t power unit packaging and a priority placed on street conditions re: thermostat and loop design -- i.e. "make sure it gets up to temp" over "make sure it stays as cool as possible").

The Type-R definitely plays to the track vibe, with its seats and aesthetics, whereas the Type-S doesn't -- just as you've outlined. But, I think that's my point, really... the track / street distinction is an amenities one, if you will, not a performance one, as many are led to believe from reading publications or reviews.

Full disclosure: If I was looking to make a FWD track star, I would start with the CTR, for its lower buy-in, better seats, and Log-R, knowing I would end up addressing the tune, exhaust, and suspension anyway.

 

[optronix]

I still think the S / R and street / track delineation between the two models is nonsense. The Type-R has overly aggressive damping, even for track use, and... that's it. Aside from that, it has zero performance advantages on track over the Type-S; they are mechanically identical (exceptions being slight chassis and exhaust differences, which are likely immaterial and, if they do anything, favor the Type-S). In fact, the Type-S tune probably serves you better (and many would tell you the Type-S dampers are better on track, too).

Both of these cars are "track-ish" cars, that are very well balanced and tuned stock, in terms of chassis / power / inputs / feedback, and that makes them excellent cars on the street. While they are certainly track capable, the F/F layout still shows its weaknesses there.

TLDR: they're both excellent street cars; neither one is a track car first, and (LogR aside) neither is any more capable on track than the other.

Nailed it. It's still like nails on a chalkboard every time someone references "sharper turn-in" or "flatter through corners" when talking about the Type R. Sure, that's possible- at the expense of being undriveable on a typical real-world road.

I'm glad both cars exist, I think it makes sense and they definitely cater to different types of enthusiasts... but the comparison stuff has to end at some point.

Also regarding modifications. I've been pretty determined in my own mind that I was going to do at the very least wheels and coils heading into this track season... but when I started to try to make plans to actually follow through on it I decided against it. The car just plain doesn't need anything to fulfill 100% of what I want and expect out of it, including anything I may want to accomplish on a track. I'll probably upgrade the brake pads and likely swap out to Cup2s or RE-71Rs when my tires wear out, but I've lost whatever interest I had in modifying this car.

So I applied part of the funds I was beginning to set aside towards a new monitor and a 4090. Money better spent IMO.

 

[ABPDE5]

Nailed it. It's still like nails on a chalkboard every time someone references "sharper turn-in" or "flatter through corners" when talking about the Type R. Sure, that's possible- at the expense of being undriveable on a typical real-world road.

I'm glad both cars exist, I think it makes sense and they definitely cater to different types of enthusiasts... but the comparison stuff has to end at some point.

Also regarding modifications. I've been pretty determined in my own mind that I was going to do at the very least wheels and coils heading into this track season... but when I started to try to make plans to actually follow through on it I decided against it. The car just plain doesn't need anything to fulfill 100% of what I want and expect out of it, including anything I may want to accomplish on a track. I'll probably upgrade the brake pads and likely swap out to Cup2s or RE-71Rs when my tires wear out, but I've lost whatever interest I had in modifying this car.

So I applied part of the funds I was beginning to set aside towards a new monitor and a 4090. Money better spent IMO.

I'm pretty much doing the same... although, I do have some rigid collars and a PRL rear mount I'll likely add. I don't see the rigid collars as something that has a potential downside (essentially just "tightening the screws"), and the RMM is easy enough to take off if it's too aggressive.

You looking at these new OLEDs coming out? Been waiting for a 32" 4k / 240hz / OLED for awhile now, and it looks like we're finally getting it (while I'll probably wait on objective measurements from tftcentral, etc., OLEDs are a pretty known quantity at this point, and we've already got the first iteration / teething pains out of the way). I do think I'm going to try and hold out for the 50xx series if I can... kicking myself for not picking up a 4090 on release.

 

[Integra23]

I'm pretty much doing the same... although, I do have some rigid collars and a PRL rear mount I'll likely add. I don't see the rigid collars as something that has a potential downside (essentially just "tightening the screws"), and the RMM is easy enough to take off if it's too aggressive.

You looking at these new OLEDs coming out? Been waiting for a 32" 4k / 240hz / OLED for awhile now, and it looks like we're finally getting it (while I'll probably wait on objective measurements from tftcentral, etc., OLEDs are a pretty known quantity at this point, and we've already got the first iteration / teething pains out of the way). I do think I'm going to try and hold out for the 50xx series if I can... kicking myself for not picking up a 4090 on release.

Hopefully they lower the price on the 50xx series.

 

[ABPDE5]

Hopefully they lower the price on the 50xx series.

We can hope, but... They'll have no competition, and they can make more $ building pro-oriented cards for AI than GPUs for consumers... I see the price going up.

 

[Integra23]

We can hope, but... They'll have no competition, and they can make more $ building pro-oriented cards for AI than GPUs for consumers... I see the price going up.

True they may focus on AI and gaming performance is stagnant. Also the export bans for China may influence future performance cards.

 

[ForeverCar]

Well, marketing and social media are strong forces. At the end of the day, CTR and ITS are so similar that any performance differences due to the car is likely a very small percentage of overall performance as the driver is the key factor in maximizing performance anyway.

@optronix From the system point of view, going to very sticky tires is a non-trivial modification. Sidewall stiffness is part of the overall spring rate and the increase grip level puts different demands into the system. 200TW tires are probably alright. Any stickier, you might start chasing different balance points.

 

[optronix]

I'm pretty much doing the same... although, I do have some rigid collars and a PRL rear mount I'll likely add. I don't see the rigid collars as something that has a potential downside (essentially just "tightening the screws"), and the RMM is easy enough to take off if it's too aggressive.

You looking at these new OLEDs coming out? Been waiting for a 32" 4k / 240hz / OLED for awhile now, and it looks like we're finally getting it (while I'll probably wait on objective measurements from tftcentral, etc., OLEDs are a pretty known quantity at this point, and we've already got the first iteration / teething pains out of the way). I do think I'm going to try and hold out for the 50xx series if I can... kicking myself for not picking up a 4090 on release.

I'll admit another limiting factor for me is finding a place to do the work. Whether it's me doing it myself or paying someone to do it- at this moment, as much as it pains me to say it the only place I trust is the dealer for warranty and (some) maintenance... until I find a semi-local place that more or less specializes in imports/Hondas in particular, or some sort of facility like I enjoyed in the military where I have access to a lift and all the tools I'd need, the ancillary mods are going to have to wait.

As for monitors, I'll try to only derail the thread for a moment but you also hit the nail on the head. That's the exact monitor I got:
https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/ali...5qf/apd/210-blmq/monitors-monitor-accessories

I've actually had the insanely expensive ASUS ROG Swift PG27UQ 27" 4K HDR, but it's not OLED, and little known fact, it's internally cooled by several fans that just got noisier over the 2 years I had it. It's still in my office I have to figure out what I want to do with it; it works perfectly fine but my wife started complaining about the noise!

So I bought the Alienware 34" ultrawide OLED and it was great- but I instantly noticed the "downgrade" in resolution from 4k. It was ok for a while because I was powering it with a 3080, but when this 32" 4K OLED hit the market a couple weeks ago it got me lusting after it. I also noticed that 4090s are now accessible at MSRP, I found one for $1799 at Best Buy and scooped it up. I am QUITE PLEASED with the end result; even though I'm still slightly held back by my 10th gen i9. I'm a huge Cyberpunk 2077 fan and holy shit. The game already looks great but it is next level playing at 60+ frames at 4k in "RTX overdrive" mode.

Well, marketing and social media are strong forces. At the end of the day, CTR and ITS are so similar that any performance differences due to the car is likely a very small percentage of overall performance as the driver is the key factor in maximizing performance anyway.

@optronix From the system point of view, going to very sticky tires is a non-trivial modification. Sidewall stiffness is part of the overall spring rate and the increase grip level puts different demands into the system. 200TW tires are probably alright. Any stickier, you might start chasing different balance points.

200TW is definitely as far as I'll go for something that will also be my summer street tire. I figured I would be mostly safe with Cup2s, but people continue to rave about the Bridgestones so it will be a game time decision.

I also fear that putting stickier tires on may alter my current trajectory as far as desire to do more modifications. But we'll cross that bridge when we get there .

Sponsored