# cis basic vs. cis-e



## Uberocco83 (Jul 15, 2008)

Ive been using cis basic on all my cars for a while because its so simple and I like old school stuff........I ran a VWMS setup and just a regular basic setup but lately Ive been thinking about running cis-e. Ive had cars in the past with cis-e but I usually swapped it out to run basic. I like the tunability of cis-e and I love basic but sometimes Im concerned with running out of fuel in higher rpms because there is no way to have wot enrichment. Plus, it can be a pain to start when its freezing outside in the winter. The more I think about it, I feel like a properly tuned cis-e with an enrichment module would probably make more power than a basic setup. Anyone have experience running both and have any thoughts or preference?


----------



## ABA Scirocco (May 30, 2001)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*

It's off topic but I've got a comment, you say, "it can be a pain to start when its freezing outside in the winter", if that's true, you've got a problem somewhere. I know from personal experience, a proper functioning CIS-basic system starts easily down to AT LEAST -35°C. 
And a bit more on topic, I kind of like CIS-Lambda for tuneability, it's a little easier to manipulate than CIS-e.


_Modified by ABA Scirocco at 9:48 AM 5-23-2009_


----------



## BSD (Jul 8, 2008)

My car started pretty quick in the winter, and it got -18 this year.








Steve-


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*

You might think about CIS-L. Probably an easier upgrade and the L does permit fuel tuning. The chief engineer at Innovate told me abut a CIS-L he set up with a LC-1 driving the O2 input thru a relay. He simulated a stock NB at part throttle and at WOT fed it a NB looking signal that enrichened the engine to about .85 Lambda (the WOT switch was disconnected from the ECU so it stayed closed loop all the time and the relay was operated by the WOT switch). I wanted to do this with the CIS-E but the ECU would fault when I tried it.


----------



## Uberocco83 (Jul 15, 2008)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (wclark)*

Ive got an 85 Scirocco with CIS-L and the frequency valve is wired so its on all the time and its always run fine. Ive got cis-e, cis-basic and cis-lambda setups sitting in parts bins. I just got a Golf that has no wire harness in it and built a 9a with a decked and port matched head with a Schrick 260 intake cam only. Ive looked at lots of info on here about building a simple fuel enrichment relay/module for my cis-e harness and using that with the car. Like I said before, I love basic because its no BS and it runs smooth but it feels like it sometimes runs out of fuel a little on the top with a worked 16v and with out wideband you dont really know whats going on. My concern with cis-e though is that if you install an enrichment module for more fuel at WOT and you floor the car from a low rpm will it bog or have lag because the fuel system is going rich before you need that much fuel because you usually need it on the top end? Something like the setup wclark is talking about would be awesome but I dont really have the money for the Innovative stuff. Im not really a fan of motronic cis either...... However, Ive driven a couple GLI's that ran great with just a euro cam and had great throttle response.


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*

I have CIS-E in the GTI I am racing with a 2.0 16V. While it was still running a race build 8V RD I came up with a variant of the above enrichment. I happen to use the LM-1 but the LC-1 works the same (minus the data logging and display). While the relay on the O2 sensor didnt work I was able to put a relay on the CTS input to the KE-Jet ECU and at WOT I feed a signal from the LM-1 (or LC-1) that drives the fuel to a .85 Lambda (about 12.5 AFR) at WOT regardless of load, or engine RPM. To avoid having 2 O2 sensors (the stock NB and the LM-1 WB) in the exhaust I programmed the second analog output of the LM-1 to look like a NB and send that to the ECU.
With the LC-1 and sensor only $199 I dont see where that is particularly expensive for someone running a built motor. You spent a lot of time an money getting the motor set up but to save a couple hundred bucks you are willing to leave available power untapped or chance damaging a motor that is running to lean or too rich because the cheap enrichment solution still leaves you with an AFR that can varies from 10:1-18:1 depending on RPM, load and where you set the pot.


----------



## Uberocco83 (Jul 15, 2008)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (wclark)*

$200 is not bad, where can I find an LC-1 at that price? Also, if I go this route would you mind helping me out if I have some questions? Although, I read a lot of information you posted about this setup in a diy fuel enrichment module thread. Forgive me if I sound like an idiot but Im not sure what your abreviation NB is for.


----------



## Uberocco83 (Jul 15, 2008)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*

Acutally, I searched and found it. This is for sure the way to go......any info on your setup and how you wired it would be great.


----------



## Uberocco83 (Jul 15, 2008)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*

Ohhh......narrow band.


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*

Pretty simple wiring. The relay can be any 12VDC relay (small current single pole double throw types from Radio Shack will work fine).
The LC-1 should be connected using the LC-1 manual, with its analog outputs going as shown here:








A reader noticed a labeling error on the above. The LM-1 Analog 1 and 2 should be labeled as "outputs" of the LM-1.
The NB output is the same as the default values from Innovate. 
The CTS drive output from the LC-1 will need to be fine tuned for your car but you can start with 1.0V=.8L and 2.5V=.93L. This sends from 1V out (if the LC-1 is reading .0 Lambda) to 2.5V (if the LC-a is reading .93 Lambda), driving the OXS unit to increase DPR current if it is leaner than .85 and decreasing it if it is richer than .85. 
The Analog NB simulation and Analog ground should be tied into the OXS CU at pin 8 and 7 to minimize noise. If your LC-1 does not have an analog ground make sure you have the heater and system grounds for it tied well to the car ground as in the LC-1 manual.

_Modified by wclark at 7:08 AM 5-28-2009_


_Modified by wclark at 5:53 PM 7-14-2009_


----------



## Uberocco83 (Jul 15, 2008)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (wclark)*

That is pretty simple. Im new to wiring and reading schematics, I learned some in the past working on my guitar amplifiers but thats old point to point, tube stuff. A couple questions(not to sound like an idiot): on your diagram what is that between full throttle switch from oxs cu pin 5 v and battery/chassis ground at the top? And is that coming off of the two terminals you are bridging on the relay from input from CTS to output to OXS CU CTS input? 


_Modified by Uberocco83 at 7:44 PM 5-27-2009_


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Uberocco83* »_That is pretty simple. Im new to wiring and reading schematics, I learned some in the past working on my guitar amplifiers but thats old point to point, tube stuff. A couple questions(not to sound like an idiot): on your diagram what is that between full throttle switch from oxs cu pin 5 v and battery/chassis ground at the top? And is that coming off of the two terminals you are bridging on the relay from input from CTS to output to OXS CU CTS input? 

The thing between the WOT switch and ground is the coil of the relay. By the way, I didnt show it but it is usually good practice to put a diode like a 1N4001 - or 4002, 4003, 4004 - across the coil leads (banded side toward the WOT switch) to "debounce" the relay.
The other object is the SPDT contacts of the relay shown in its de-energized state with connection between what would becalled the "C" and NC" terminals (which is standard practice). The contact arm (sloped line in the drawing) rotates about the single contact point and the other end moves between the other 2 points. When energized by the WOT switch, the relay moves the contact path between the output to the OXY CU and the LM-1 Analog 2 input. I dont show specific terminals for a particular relay here because one can use a wide variety and they all have different layouts - but they all have the same elements (coil, contacts and contact arm). Generally you want the following features in the relay: 12VDC/SPDT/1A The 1A part can actually be any current rating but higher rated relays (e.g. the 20A, 30A. 40A "Bosch" automotive type) are like using a sledge hammer to drive thumbtacks. Something like the Radio Shack 275-241 is more than adequate as is small gauge wire (e.g. 22ga) for all these hookups.

Other things I dont describe: 
The wire between the CTS and the OXY CU is cut and the ends then become the 2 wires labeled "Input from CTS" and "Output to OXY CU CTS input".
The original NB O2 sensor is removed and the coaxial cable (single wire large diameter wire that is green on many VW) that used to be the O2 sensor signal wire to the OXY CU is either removed or the LM-1 Analog 1 output is connected to the end formerly used by the NB sensor. If you get a 6 wire LC-1 (which has no analog ground) plugging the Analog 1 signal into the connector at the end of the O2 coax is the easiest and most easily reversed choice. The 7 wire version can also be connected to that end but you will need to solder the Analog 1 and signal ground to both the signal sire and shield (which I have labeled "OXS CU O2 ground" which makes cutting the connector off and stripping back the insulation to get to both a necessity.
The WOT signal from the throttle body to the OXY CU and KSCU is tapped (spliced) into, not cut for this. It is not critical where one splices into this wire.


_Modified by wclark at 7:53 AM 5-28-2009_


----------



## chois (May 12, 2000)

Why would it matter to keep the O2 circuit in closed loop for this approach? You are really performing the O2 feedback function externally and using the CTS signal as a 'back door' into the system to make the adjustments. Seems to me that hardwiring the WOT system to remain open loop would prevent the 'simulated NB' signal, and the 'simulated CTS' signal from both trying to do different things at the same time.
With current flow moving from ECU (OXY CU) CTS 'input' to ground throught the stock sensor - is there any concern of feeding current back into the LM/LC-1? What is the supply voltage of the CTS signal?
thanks,


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: (chois)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chois* »_Why would it matter to keep the O2 circuit in closed loop for this approach? You are really performing the O2 feedback function externally and using the CTS signal as a 'back door' into the system to make the adjustments. Seems to me that hardwiring the WOT system to remain open loop would prevent the 'simulated NB' signal, and the 'simulated CTS' signal from both trying to do different things at the same time.
With current flow moving from ECU (OXY CU) CTS 'input' to ground throught the stock sensor - is there any concern of feeding current back into the LM/LC-1? What is the supply voltage of the CTS signal?
thanks,

The ECU is in normal closed loop operation when not at WOT. When at WOT the O2 sensor input to the ECU is ignored (open loop) and fueling becomes a function of tables or rules which include the CTS, RPM, Vacuum (load) and probably some other things. So at WOT the LM-1 NB O2 sensor simulation doesnt matter, it does the rest of the time though since there is no NB sensor in the car (the WB is in its place).
There is a bias voltage created by the ECU at the CTS input to the ECU (5V) is current limited to just a couple milliamps so the LM-1 has no trouble driving the connection to whatever voltage level it wants when switched in. I do not have both the CTS and the LM-1 connected at the same time so the LM-1 does not "see" the CTS itself as a load.
When the CTS is warmed up, the voltage seen at the ECU CTS input is around 1-1.2V. 


_Modified by wclark at 11:16 AM 5-28-2009_


----------



## chois (May 12, 2000)

Ah. I misunderstood, and thought you were forcing the system to remain closed loop all the time.


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: (chois)*


_Quote, originally posted by *chois* »_Ah. I misunderstood, and thought you were forcing the system to remain closed loop all the time.

Probably because I suggested that as away to enrich CIS-L systems in an early reply to this. It seems the L systems will happily allow the O2 sensor signal to be switched, thus one could wire the LM-1 analog outputs thru a relay to the OXY CU O2 input so that normally one got a simulated NB signal that had its mid point around 1.0 Lambda but under full throttle the input switched to one that had its simulated Lambda NB signal midpoint at .85 Lambda. In this case the WOT switch would be disconnected from the OXY CU (it would be used only to control the relay) and it would remain in closed loop all the time. I found the VW CIS-E system is not happy with switching between the 2 signals (I dont know how it knows). What it does when I switched inputs was to not change the fueling immediately, but to only do so over a period several (maybe 10) seconds. That delay made the whole thing work poorly. 
Good point though. I went off describing how I have the LM-1 set up on my CIS-E system as though it was a foregone conclusion that the OP was going CIS-E. The CIS-E implementation wont work on the CIS-L because the cold enrichment is done differently. According to Innovate's VP Klaus Allmendinger, the set-up I described for the CIS-L does work with the VW implementation.


_Modified by wclark at 5:08 PM 5-28-2009_


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: (wclark)*

This is how I see using the LM-1/LC-1 in a CIS-L setup:


----------



## blown020 (Jan 9, 2009)

*Re: (wclark)*

reading this at 1:30am just blew my mind. must do....


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (wclark)*


_Quote, originally posted by *wclark* »_
The CTS drive output from the LC-1 will need to be fine tuned for your car but you can start with 1.0V=.8L and 2.5V=.93L. This sends from 1V out (if the LC-1 is reading .0 Lambda) to 2.5V (if the LC-a is reading .93 Lambda), driving the OXS unit to increase DPR current if it is leaner than .85 and decreasing it if it is richer than .85. 


A little more info here. The above voltages worked pretty well with my built RD 8v (P&P, race pistons, A5000T intake, TT 4-1 header, TT cams, etc.). I had my moderately built 9A (TT cams, P&P) on a dyno this week to dial in ignition and fuel and came away with the .93 Lambda voltage at 3.4V to get the high RPM Lambda down under 13:1 and top end power up. The downside to this is the KE-Jet electronics noticeably over reacts to the steeper slope of the CTS drive, so when the WOT switch first switches in the relay, the AFR drops into the 10:1 range for a fraction of a second and you can see some hunting of AFR for a second before it settles out under WOT. Lower voltages for the .93 end of the scale reduce this. This is more pronounced under light loads, such as WOT in 1st gear. This is not a problem where the target is around 12.7:1 but I can foresee an issue if one is trying to dump extra fuel like in a turbo setup to get to 10:1 as a much lower AFR (e.g. 9:1) can cause fuel to collect on and wash down the cylinder walls. I plan to do some experiments with the slope of the Analog 2 output to see if the overshoot can be dialed out. The nice part of the LM-1/LC-1 is I can do that without having to return to the dyno.


----------



## Uberocco83 (Jul 15, 2008)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (wclark)*

Bringing this thread back.........I just got my LC-1 w/ gauge in the mail. Wclark, what value resistor are you running on your relay or do you use a pot? Im getting this setup going this week probably.


----------



## Uberocco83 (Jul 15, 2008)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*

Wow........Just got this CIS-E setup with the Innovate LC-1 and fuel enrichment module running and there are huge gains over CIS basic! Its not even tuned perfect but it still pulls harder, starts better and gets better gas mileage. At WOT Im leaning out a little on top, around 15.0 and at the richest its at 13.2ish so there is some tuning left to do for sure. I know now that my CIS basic setup was not set up properly and was pig rich the whole time. Thank you....


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Uberocco83* »_Bringing this thread back.........I just got my LC-1 w/ gauge in the mail. Wclark, what value resistor are you running on your relay or do you use a pot? Im getting this setup going this week probably. 

No series resistor needed as the relay switches the LM-1 analog 2 output directly into the OXY CU input for the CTS and drives it with its own voltage.


----------



## chois (May 12, 2000)

Yeah I always find the CIS-E gradually leaning out. Mine varies from 12.4/12.5 - about 14.
I am getting closer to testing an odd solution that should allow programable fuel control using CIS type injectors. The fuel no longer sprays all over the engine bay when I pressurize the test rig...


----------



## wclark (Mar 28, 2001)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*

This is part of the log from my last hillclimb. Purple is Lambda, Gold is the CTS drive voltage from the LM-1, Black is RPM and Red is EGT. This is from a 2,3,4th gear sequence. 
You can see that when I lift off WOT (CTS reverts to about 1.08V from the sensor) and the ECU is managing Lambda it is all over the place but when I stand on the throttle and the LM-1 is driving enrichment it quickly settles.


----------



## Jettaboy1884 (Jan 20, 2004)

*Re: (blown020)*


_Quote, originally posted by *blown020* »_reading this at 1:30am just blew my mind. must do....









I just skimmed through this now. There is some excellent information in here. I need to come back and spend some time to absorb it all.
This is something that I was already planning to do, but need a better understanding of the CIS system before I go tinkering.
Combined with Megajolt, I think this will give a CIS fueled motor a nice gain in power. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## EL DRIFTO (Jul 11, 2004)

*Re: (Jettaboy1884)*

have this good friend
been in vw 30 yrs
called me
said his car kept super rich when the muffler hanger broke








turns out his cis e system had an open ground
the muffler touching the axel was turning the cis e back on
since he had cranked the idle allen screw till it ran
rather than discover why the cis e wasn't working
it was too rich to idle when it all came back on
he had put some 20,000 miles on that thing that way
30 mpg


----------



## Uberocco83 (Jul 15, 2008)

*Re: cis basic vs. cis-e (Uberocco83)*

Quick bump.......... this really is worth the effort and even if you dont use the LC-1 this way you need to know whats going on when you tune. Wclark is awesome!


----------

