What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

SDS/ EFII Support

Status
Not open for further replies.

rv6ejguy

Well Known Member
As most of you have probably figured out now, SDS is no longer associated with EFII as of early Sept. of this year.

We've had quite a number of EFII customers come to us for tech help and ask about software updates/ upgrades. As per our standard policy, we help anyone with SDS manufactured products, no matter which dealer they were originally purchased from. Be aware that we can really only support/ repair/ upgrade the ECUs, programmers and Hall sensors as these were the only parts we supplied to EFII before. EFII did their own things with wiring, sensors and other externals which we have little knowledge about.

If you're interested in EM-5 ECU software upgrades or optional features not offered by EFII- PC data logging, individual cylinder fuel trim, direct fuel flow output etc., we can reflash ECUs and sell you these options plus offer the tech support for rewiring if required.

There are also hardware upgrades available like the variable brightness displays, head mounted injectors, barometric compensation etc. we can help you with.

Anyway, I just wanted to tell people they don't own an orphaned system, it's still supported by the factory and will continue to be in the future as we continue to work on new features, hardware and software.

We can help you immediately with your needs.
 
Last edited:
EFII moves forward

No orphans with our customers,
We have tons of gold boxes coming back from customers upgrading to System32. We're trying to figure out what to do with these?

We will always have lots of legacy SDS parts available for maintenance of the old systems.

We also have an attractive upgrade program for existing customers moving to System32.

Osh, Reno, and Copperstate were great shows to see the new parts.
http://www.flyefii.com/system-32/

2018 will be an exciting year for all!

As always, please contact us directly if you need more information. www.flyefii.com

Robert Paisley
EFII
 
SDS boxes coming back

Most of the boxes coming back are EM-5 units.
We might put them on Ebay.

Robert
 
Would an EM-5 ECU originally produced for EFII but obtained from a secondary market, say Ebay, work with an SDS LCD Programmer?
 
Would an EM-5 ECU originally produced for EFII but obtained from a secondary market, say Ebay, work with an SDS LCD Programmer?

EFII never sold the dual board programmer that we did even though it was offered to them. This allowed you to access 2 ECUs with a single programmer without unplugging cables.

As mentioned above, they also chose not to offer these features that SDS offered:

Individual cylinder fuel trim
Internal fuel flow output (no external box) The SDS one is accurate across the entire spectrum of load and rpm ranges
PC data logging
Dimmable programmer display

Only SDS can give you these capabilities on EM-5s, rechip EM-4s and reflash EM-5s with new software.

We're actually selling proven systems at this time also. (20 years since we supplied our first customer Lycoming system).
 
Last edited:
SDS problems

As Ross infers, the weakest link in our system was always the SDS parts.
Their new "features", like most of the parts they supply never passed our requirements for value, function, and safety. This is well known to people who are familiar with SDS components.

The SDS salesman is very good at promoting their products with his thousands of Internet posts. Even with that, they never had any measurable penetration into this market until we made a reliable, well engineered kit using their ECU in 2007. We have over 400 installations now worldwide on experimental aircraft. The SDS salesman would like to say these are SDS installations. However, they are EFII systems with SDS ECUs. This is something very different from SDS kits - so don't be fooled by the hype.

Fortunately, this is all in the past now.
http://www.flyefii.com/system-32/
The EFII System32 components will be available soon - thankfully!

Robert
 
As Ross infers, the weakest link in our system was always the SDS parts.

Robert

Robert,

I?ve been to your shop and you gave me the nickel tour. This was a couple of years ago before I?d even heard of SDS, and Ross was just some ?Subaru guy? on a forum? So you might appreciate some perspective from a ?lost opportunity?. You machine some nice shiny stuff and you are personable. When it comes to technical content however, you gave me pause. Some of your ideas just didn?t click with me. Your ?backwards? fuel nozzles and your bus manager device, for example. And more importantly, you did a very poor job articulating the technical aspects of ?your? ECU. In the time since, your unfamiliarity with the ECU makes perfect sense, as you simply resold some one else?s technology. You didn?t have to know how it worked ? you?re just the middleman. In short, I left your shop impressed with the possibilities, but wary of your execution.

So Ross comes along with CPI and since I was tired of waiting for the 6 cyl P-mag, I take a leap of faith. Turns out he knows EXACTLY what his stuff does, and he doesn?t have to sugar coat it. Based on that one excellent product, I started looking at his EFI stuff and low and behold, you ALSO selected his product to base your business on. Looks like you and me both recognize a winner when we see one.

So frankly, you had the opportunity to have me as a customer but couldn?t close. Your loss. I wish you the best of luck, because we consumers need you vendors to compete. I only hope that you understand your new supplier?s ECU better than your last one, because as a brand new, unknown product with zero track record, you are bound to have some tough questions from potential customers. Tell them the straight scoop, understand the technical side, and don?t BS anyone. In other words, learn from Ross. This obvious "sour grapes" post above is not a good sign.
 
However, they are EFII systems with SDS ECUs. This is something very different from SDS kits - so don't be fooled by the hype.

Ok, factual questions. What hardware and/or software was different, and why is the EFII-supplied component better than the comparable SDS component?

Setting the ECU aside, we have:

Fuel Pumps
Hoses
Injectors
Injector mounts
Pressure regulator
Throttle body
Coils
Wiring and connectors
Spark plug adapters
Spark plug wires, clips, and boots.
Magnets
Hall pickup(s)

Take it one at a time please.
 
Last edited:
Robert,

I?ve been to your shop and you gave me the nickel tour. This was a couple of years ago before I?d even heard of SDS, and Ross was just some ?Subaru guy? on a forum? So you might appreciate some perspective from a ?lost opportunity?. You machine some nice shiny stuff and you are personable. When it comes to technical content however, you gave me pause. Some of your ideas just didn?t click with me. Your ?backwards? fuel nozzles and your bus manager device, for example. And more importantly, you did a very poor job articulating the technical aspects of ?your? ECU. In the time since, your unfamiliarity with the ECU makes perfect sense, as you simply resold some one else?s technology. You didn?t have to know how it worked ? you?re just the middleman. In short, I left your shop impressed with the possibilities, but wary of your execution.

So Ross comes along with CPI and since I was tired of waiting for the 6 cyl P-mag, I take a leap of faith. Turns out he knows EXACTLY what his stuff does, and he doesn?t have to sugar coat it. Based on that one excellent product, I started looking at his EFI stuff and low and behold, you ALSO selected his product to base your business on. Looks like you and me both recognize a winner when we see one.

So frankly, you had the opportunity to have me as a customer but couldn?t close. Your loss. I wish you the best of luck, because we consumers need you vendors to compete. I only hope that you understand your new supplier?s ECU better than your last one, because as a brand new, unknown product with zero track record, you are bound to have some tough questions from potential customers. Tell them the straight scoop, understand the technical side, and don?t BS anyone. In other words, learn from Ross. This obvious "sour grapes" post above is not a good sign.

Well said.
 
Robert,

I?ve been to your shop and you gave me the nickel tour. This was a couple of years ago before I?d even heard of SDS, and Ross was just some ?Subaru guy? on a forum? So you might appreciate some perspective from a ?lost opportunity?. You machine some nice shiny stuff and you are personable. When it comes to technical content however, you gave me pause. Some of your ideas just didn?t click with me. Your ?backwards? fuel nozzles and your bus manager device, for example. And more importantly, you did a very poor job articulating the technical aspects of ?your? ECU. In the time since, your unfamiliarity with the ECU makes perfect sense, as you simply resold some one else?s technology. You didn?t have to know how it worked ? you?re just the middleman. In short, I left your shop impressed with the possibilities, but wary of your execution.

So Ross comes along with CPI and since I was tired of waiting for the 6 cyl P-mag, I take a leap of faith. Turns out he knows EXACTLY what his stuff does, and he doesn?t have to sugar coat it. Based on that one excellent product, I started looking at his EFI stuff and low and behold, you ALSO selected his product to base your business on. Looks like you and me both recognize a winner when we see one.

So frankly, you had the opportunity to have me as a customer but couldn?t close. Your loss. I wish you the best of luck, because we consumers need you vendors to compete. I only hope that you understand your new supplier?s ECU better than your last one, because as a brand new, unknown product with zero track record, you are bound to have some tough questions from potential customers. Tell them the straight scoop, understand the technical side, and don?t BS anyone. In other words, learn from Ross. This obvious "sour grapes" post above is not a good sign.

My experience has completely mirrored your experience however I don?t think I could have possibly articulated it quite as well. Well said.
 
As Ross infers, the weakest link in our system was always the SDS parts.
Their new "features", like most of the parts they supply never passed our requirements for value, function, and safety. This is well known to people who are familiar with SDS components.

The SDS salesman is very good at promoting their products with his thousands of Internet posts. Even with that, they never had any measurable penetration into this market until we made a reliable, well engineered kit using their ECU in 2007. We have over 400 installations now worldwide on experimental aircraft. The SDS salesman would like to say these are SDS installations. However, they are EFII systems with SDS ECUs. This is something very different from SDS kits - so don't be fooled by the hype.

Fortunately, this is all in the past now.
http://www.flyefii.com/system-32/
The EFII System32 components will be available soon - thankfully!

Robert

I'm not interesting in a boxing match here but I'd ask you qualify your statements above with facts rather than emotion. I'm not sure where you think I inferred SDS parts were inferior somehow?

Dave Anders, Rusty Crawford, Josh Pepperd, Andy Findlay, Michael Robinson and Ronnie Smith all considered EFII or actually flew with it but now all fly with SDS along with many hundreds of others. Each one of these guys is rather discerning on what goes into their aircraft.

Our clients love the new features you casually dismiss here but have now incorporated into your new system. These features work as designed as many who have been flying them will attest. You've seen the posts here on VAF yourself. It was your decision to offer "dumbed down" systems to your clients which made them migrate over to SDS while you worked on your new system which still has not even flown yet.

At this time, we've supplied over 1850 ECUs and systems for aviation. Subtract the 400 ECUs you purchased in the last few years and that leaves 1250 which we sold without your help. I'll let the rest of our track record speak for itself.

In any case, I am eagerly awaiting your responses to Dan's questions.
 
Last edited:
As a long time race car builder an 1st time airpane builder,I was pleasantly shocked with tremoundous support and helpful knowledge supplied by ROSS @ SDS!
 
SDS problems

Most impressive rhetoric,
No one doubts that SDS kits represent the cheapest solution in engine managment.
SDS has pretty much been kicked out of the automotive market.
The electronics are 20 year old out of date designs. The rest of the kit is cheapo on top of cheapo. From poorly designed wire harnesses to cheap fuel pressure regulators to poorly engineered mechanicals to non-airworthy cheap hot rod fuel filters - the list is long. This is how EFII got started. We had to make all of our own system to make an airworthy product. The SDS ECU was the only useful item from them in our opinion (limited as it is).

A great example of how bad the "new" SDS stuff is - two ECUs are required to run together to make the fuel trim work on 6 cyl engines - oops. Mechanical relay boxes are used to make dual ECU setups work. It's really bad.

So, if you're into cheap, and you are enamored by tons of internet rhetoric, Calgary has some great stuff for you.

BS wears thin quickly,
We are so happy to be rid of this vendor. It was an eight year nightmare of work arounds and compromises.

No one (except SDS) knows their products better than we do. We have setup many hundreds of systems. Way more than them for Lyc powered experimental aircraft. No one knows their problems as well as we do. Shedding the SDS burden was a great relief.

And so, onward to newer and better. System32 represents the fullfillment of a ten year wishlist of functionaity. We finally have an engine management system specifically designed for the needs of this market. We are very excited about it as are our customers.
http://www.flyefii.com/system-32/

Robert
 
Last edited:
I'm not interesting in a boxing match here but I'd ask you qualify your statements above with facts rather than emotion. I'm not sure where you think I inferred SDS parts were inferior somehow...

Yes, good points Ross.

Robert, when I was in your shop a couple of years ago you expounded on the virtues of ?your? ECU. Though you didn?t name the company, you spoke highly of its reliability and how it was used in military aviation and automotive applications with years of service, etc. So now you now talk of how it?s the ?weak link? in your system. Which is it? In any case, it sure looks like you were either lying to me 3 years ago or you are lying now. No big deal to me at this point, but you have told that lie to at least 400 of your customers? How do you think that makes them feel? You ?sold? 400 people on the strength of the ECU, and now you say it?s a weak link? That?s pretty sleazy, at best.

I?m also wondering about your marketing differentiation. You have told us in the past that you want your system to be plug and play, no adjustments, and ?just works?. You also in this very thread talk of those features offered by SDS ?don?t meet the value standards?? of your offering ? Yet your new system has copied the SDS features almost one for one! I have to wonder: Do you have a product differentiation plan, or are you just going to ride SDS innovation from here on out?

You have also gone to some lengths to explain how your backwards injection scheme is superior to the conventional systems, yet here you are, abandoning that feature and offering the direct mount injectors ? again, just like SDS. If ?backwards? is technically superior, why abandon it?

In short Robert, we consumers need your company to survive ? but you are not going to do it by badmouthing SDS one day and then copying their stuff the next. We need your product to stand on its own, and we need you to show some integrity by picking a compelling technical strategy and sticking with it.

BTW, let?s not forget about Dan?s questions. You made some pretty sweeping accusations in front of the world, Dan called you on them, and honor pretty much demands that you defend your position.
 
It's time to close this thread. The type of bashing being done by Paisley has no place on this forum.
 
It's time to close this thread. The type of bashing being done by Paisley has no place on this forum.

Yep, have to agree. Though it's entertaining to watch Robert self destruct in public, the original intent of the thread - SDS will support legacy EFII customers - has been met.
 
An increasing number of our customers here at SteinAir are opting to include SDS or EFII systems into their projects. When I design a panel, I need to make certain all the correct switches and controls are provided, and our panel-build techs need to understand how to wire everything. They differ a little from what we've been used to. Both Ross and Robert have been immensely helpful and are a pleasure to work with.
 
BTW, let’s not forget about Dan’s questions. You made some pretty sweeping accusations in front of the world, Dan called you on them, and honor pretty much demands that you defend your position.

My intent was not to "call 'em out". I think readers really would like to hear a factual explanation of why Robert believes each of his supplied components is better than the SDS-supplied equivalent.
 
SDS problems

I will apologize to the experimental public for the rant (not that it isn't deserved).

There are historical reasons why we are all in the current situation.
Most people are unaware of how we got to this place.

Here is a brief summary of recent events:
2015: SDS was on the verge of going out of business and began to market against their distributors in an attempt to save their own skin. This is when you started seeing SDS posts like "here is our new Lycoming crank trigger" (copy of the EFII design), "here is our new coil mount", etc. They are still in this "here is our new part" phase. But wait a minute, didn't they say they have been outfitting these engines for 20 years. This was the beginning of the current SDS Half Truth Era.

This put us in a very difficult position since we were still purchasing parts from SDS. We sat by watching in horror as they started to put together their copy kit to compete against us.

SDS basically gave us a kick out of the nest with their decision to compete against us. So be it, we got a kick in the butt to do what was really needed, design a high quality engine management system for this industry. And that is what is happening now.

In the end, the customer will be the benefactor with more options to choose from. And a BIG leap forward in the available technology.

So, I'll end the rant here. We have a lot of work to do, as always.
System32 ignitions are going into production next month. System32 EFII systems will be ready in the Spring. System32 EFII installation kits are available now for builders who want to get their plumbing, electrical and engine pieces installed.

And life goes on........
Robert
 
Last edited:
A Perspective from the Peanut Gallery

With all due respect to the EFII bashers who started this back-and-forth:

You are obviously tooting your own horn relative to what you have, your own personal opinions, or where you are from.

For many of you, your number of VAF posts is astounding; an apparent attempt to dominate and control the narrative on VAF for whatever reasons, good or questionable, you might have. Frankly, it?s very tiring; for me anyway. Please consider not posting unless you have a specific technical or safety contribution to make.

Ross (SDS) employs continuing VAF posts to increase his visibility and advertise here. He started this thread. He needs to. He is behind in flying installations and particularly technology.

Robert (EFII) does address the technical, quality, and installation differences between EFII and SDS. I assume he will continue to do so as these differences are winners for him. Ross does not address some of these differences for obvious reasons; mainly new technology and additional features which SDS does not offer and has not invested in developing/producing as Robert clearly has; specifically for the experimental aviation market.

EFII?s new System 32 ECU/Programmer represents the first experimental aircraft electronic engine management system (electronic fuel injection plus dual ignition) specifically designed, literally from the ground-up, to manage/enhance Lycoming and Continental engines.

When Ross? automotive business started to dry up, he doomed his ECU supplier relationship with EFII by introducing his own SDS competing system into the experimental aircraft market; a market Robert had worked hard to establish. Ross did continue to sell ECUs to Robert, and this was good for Ross, because he could sell both directly and to Robert. When Ross decided to compete directly, Robert (EFII) did the natural thing by designing and producing a newer, better EFII system to meet and beat SDS? competition. What would you have done if you were in Robert?s shoes? How would you feel and what would you say? Fair questions, I think.

Well, anyway, I know VAF?s readers will see through all the rhetoric, do their own research, and make their own reasoned judgments based on facts and experience; not other?s opinions including my own. I have tried to be factual above, but as I have allowed my own opinions to creep in, please accept my apologies. I?m trying to be good, but I?m not always successful in this regard.
 
I will apologize to the experimental public for the rant (not that it isn't deserved).

There are historical reasons why we are all in the current situation.
Most people are unaware of how we got to this place...

Robert

Robert, as a consumer, I don't care what kind of issues you have with your suppliers. That's between you and them. Please keep it that way.

However, when you confirm what we all suspected - you're trashing Ross because you're pissed off - then it does become the consumers concern. You really let your colors show here, and that's pretty disturbing from a supplier of engine management equipment.

We expect straight talk from you vendors - not emotionally charged BS.
 
My experience has completely mirrored your experience however I don?t think I could have possibly articulated it quite as well. Well said.

Seems unusual, considering I did the exact same thing back in 2014 and had the same experience I've heard about from many many others who took the opportunity.
In fact here's my write up:
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=108661&highlight=trip+efii

Since then I've learned A LOT about systems, engines, electronics and all the available options. I'd still make the same choice.
And for what it's worth, I've put my hands on all the components of the SDS system, it's no contest on build quality. I'm no engineer, so I can't expound on the nuances, but just to the naked eye and feel, it's not even close.

Robert confided in me over a year ago that they were working on a New ECU and programmer for the system, for MANY reasons. Most of which were to have a better, safer system. That has always seemed to be the key. So, this has been a long process for them to make sure it's right. The rest of the parts not made in house, are simply the best available at any price.
Also I noticed that as soon as System 32 was released, there is now a scramble at SDS to come up with something "new". I've watched as Ross and his "associate" spent hours and hours on this forum doing everything they can to keep SDS in the threads, and to bash other systems. All the time EFII has been too busy building and selling systems, developing the new system and providing support to new installations.
I do agree that competition is good in any market and we as the consumer will benefit, but at some point the truth had to come out.
 
With all due respect to the EFII bashers who started this back-and-forth:

You are obviously tooting your own horn relative to what you have, your own personal opinions, or where you are from.

For many of you, your number of VAF posts is astounding; an apparent attempt to dominate and control the narrative on VAF for whatever reasons, good or questionable, you might have. Frankly, it?s very tiring; for me anyway. Please consider not posting unless you have a specific technical or safety contribution to make.

Ross (SDS) employs continuing VAF posts to increase his visibility and advertise here. He started this thread. He needs to. He is behind in flying installations and particularly technology.

Robert (EFII) does address the technical, quality, and installation differences between EFII and SDS. I assume he will continue to do so as these differences are winners for him. Ross does not address some of these differences for obvious reasons; mainly new technology and additional features which SDS does not offer and has not invested in developing/producing as Robert clearly has; specifically for the experimental aviation market.

EFII?s new System 32 ECU/Programmer represents the first experimental aircraft electronic engine management system (electronic fuel injection plus dual ignition) specifically designed, literally from the ground-up, to manage/enhance Lycoming and Continental engines.

When Ross? automotive business started to dry up, he doomed his ECU supplier relationship with EFII by introducing his own SDS competing system into the experimental aircraft market; a market Robert had worked hard to establish. Ross did continue to sell ECUs to Robert, and this was good for Ross, because he could sell both directly and to Robert. When Ross decided to compete directly, Robert (EFII) did the natural thing by designing and producing a newer, better EFII system to meet and beat SDS? competition. What would you have done if you were in Robert?s shoes? How would you feel and what would you say? Fair questions, I think.

Well, anyway, I know VAF?s readers will see through all the rhetoric, do their own research, and make their own reasoned judgments based on facts and experience; not other?s opinions including my own. I have tried to be factual above, but as I have allowed my own opinions to creep in, please accept my apologies. I?m trying to be good, but I?m not always successful in this regard.

Exactly what I was going to say... Thanks Bill... Pure post count should say something... As a business owner, how do you have that much time?... I run my own business and I only have time to check here a couple times a week. (I'm only online right now because my house is an ICU for my dog right now, otherwise I'd be working)
 
...When Ross? automotive business started to dry up, he doomed his ECU supplier relationship with EFII by introducing his own SDS competing system into the experimental aircraft market...

Bill, there are two sides to every story, and I'm sure these two could turn this into a soap opera of epic proportions. However, this backstory has no relevance to us in the peanut gallery, and CERTAINLY has no place on this forum as justification to smear Ross or his product in public.
 
Well said!

With all due respect to the EFII bashers who started this back-and-forth:

You are obviously tooting your own horn relative to what you have, your own personal opinions, or where you are from.

For many of you, your number of VAF posts is astounding; an apparent attempt to dominate and control the narrative on VAF for whatever reasons, good or questionable, you might have. Frankly, it?s very tiring; for me anyway. Please consider not posting unless you have a specific technical or safety contribution to make.

Ross (SDS) employs continuing VAF posts to increase his visibility and advertise here. He started this thread. He needs to. He is behind in flying installations and particularly technology.

Robert (EFII) does address the technical, quality, and installation differences between EFII and SDS. I assume he will continue to do so as these differences are winners for him. Ross does not address some of these differences for obvious reasons; mainly new technology and additional features which SDS does not offer and has not invested in developing/producing as Robert clearly has; specifically for the experimental aviation market.

EFII?s new System 32 ECU/Programmer represents the first experimental aircraft electronic engine management system (electronic fuel injection plus dual ignition) specifically designed, literally from the ground-up, to manage/enhance Lycoming and Continental engines.

When Ross? automotive business started to dry up, he doomed his ECU supplier relationship with EFII by introducing his own SDS competing system into the experimental aircraft market; a market Robert had worked hard to establish. Ross did continue to sell ECUs to Robert, and this was good for Ross, because he could sell both directly and to Robert. When Ross decided to compete directly, Robert (EFII) did the natural thing by designing and producing a newer, better EFII system to meet and beat SDS? competition. What would you have done if you were in Robert?s shoes? How would you feel and what would you say? Fair questions, I think.

Well, anyway, I know VAF?s readers will see through all the rhetoric, do their own research, and make their own reasoned judgments based on facts and experience; not other?s opinions including my own. I have tried to be factual above, but as I have allowed my own opinions to creep in, please accept my apologies. I?m trying to be good, but I?m not always successful in this regard.

Well said Bill!
 
snip...
We expect straight talk from you vendors - not emotionally charged BS.

I will second that! And to add to it, *I* DEMAND civil discourse between advertisers on *MY* website.

I'm locking this thread.

Will I kick an advertiser off the site if they abuse my rules?

Yep. In a nanosecond...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top