Stupid Question About Dealer Software
Discussion
Yeh, hitting F5 to toggle on/off searching for the ECU isn't documented either I think.
It was a post from Joo where I learned of the F10 magic key. So I tried all the others as well but only F5 and F10 do anything.
19200 worked fine once I had a decent charge in the battery. (2 days and nights at a 4 amp trickle to get it back to fully charged !)
Haven't had any com problems since. But prior to charging it the software kept dropping the connection every few seconds. Even on a fast tickover it was still problematic. (I really must get an Accumate charger
Although 19200 baud really only makes a difference when downloading the maps.
Have you done anymore on your switchable EPROMs project?
>> Edited by mikesr on Saturday 7th January 21:12
It was a post from Joo where I learned of the F10 magic key. So I tried all the others as well but only F5 and F10 do anything.
19200 worked fine once I had a decent charge in the battery. (2 days and nights at a 4 amp trickle to get it back to fully charged !)
Haven't had any com problems since. But prior to charging it the software kept dropping the connection every few seconds. Even on a fast tickover it was still problematic. (I really must get an Accumate charger
Although 19200 baud really only makes a difference when downloading the maps.
Have you done anymore on your switchable EPROMs project?
>> Edited by mikesr on Saturday 7th January 21:12
Nope, got heavily sidetracked by normal work and in my spare time the need to have a diagnostic system for a BMW , so been delving into OBD and DS2 systems.
Although I will give you a laugh. I put a link to the last verion of the eprom emulator I designed. I even went as far as having a circuit board routed.
www.albionsurgery.com/Files/EE.pdf
The problem was that a simple pic chip with a parallel or I2C interface ram was not even at the fastest pic speed of 40MHZ going to turn round an eprom request from an 11MHZ MBE in the required time, cos if it had the circuit would have been really simple. I tried dual port rams but they were terrible to control and very restrictive on timing.
So the circuit above used a simple system of swapping where the processor could update the silent ram on the fly while showing the exposed copy to the car. I was building this inteface while cursing PIC microcontollers for only putting a max of 3K internal ram in their chips when Jools needed his ECU back.
The project is currently sitting in a shoebox, although I think events have probably overtaken it for good as trial and error changing will eventually get you to where you want to be. And when a circuit gets as complicated as the one above you have to sit down as a designer and think you might be missing something obvious.
, so been delving into OBD and DS2 systems. Although I will give you a laugh. I put a link to the last verion of the eprom emulator I designed. I even went as far as having a circuit board routed.
www.albionsurgery.com/Files/EE.pdf
The problem was that a simple pic chip with a parallel or I2C interface ram was not even at the fastest pic speed of 40MHZ going to turn round an eprom request from an 11MHZ MBE in the required time, cos if it had the circuit would have been really simple. I tried dual port rams but they were terrible to control and very restrictive on timing.
So the circuit above used a simple system of swapping where the processor could update the silent ram on the fly while showing the exposed copy to the car. I was building this inteface while cursing PIC microcontollers for only putting a max of 3K internal ram in their chips when Jools needed his ECU back.
The project is currently sitting in a shoebox, although I think events have probably overtaken it for good as trial and error changing will eventually get you to where you want to be. And when a circuit gets as complicated as the one above you have to sit down as a designer and think you might be missing something obvious.
what a circuit. That is getting a tad complicated.
Hardware isn't really my thing (who am I kidding its not my thing at all) so I went for the software route.
Although I have been delving into some very simple hardware whilst looking at launch control and traction control. Launch control can be done fairly simply but traction control is a bit more involved on the hardware side of things.
Like yourself its getting the time to sit down and do it thats the limiting factor. Well that and my amateurish soldering
I assume your intercepting the input to the ecu or modifying the output.
I thought when my device was working it could change maps on the fly. The beauty of this concept was that simply changing the map on the fly with a perminently connected device could be both a traction and a launch control with simple wheel sensing.
Still theres a lot of work there. I havn't given up (exactly) but as you say a lot of time required, and it def on the shelf at the moment.
I thought when my device was working it could change maps on the fly. The beauty of this concept was that simply changing the map on the fly with a perminently connected device could be both a traction and a launch control with simple wheel sensing.
Still theres a lot of work there. I havn't given up (exactly) but as you say a lot of time required, and it def on the shelf at the moment.
No modified inputs or outputs. I'm just exploring what the ECU software is capable of.
There are launch/traction features that can likely be enabled but aren't as sophisticated as the solution you are thinking about.
If I was going to go for launch and traction control and general playing about in my own car I would go the Emerald route. Soooo much easier to modify the maps and settings. And software upgradable on the ECU.
I'm still running a standard chip in the MBE since the 4.2 doesn't gain much in HP or 'drivability'. Amazing how the 4.2 chip is so close to optimal and a 4.5 remap can yield 10s of bhp and much smoother delivery in the bottom half of the revs/throttle sites.
I've still got cats and standard back box as well. Definitely a family car
There are launch/traction features that can likely be enabled but aren't as sophisticated as the solution you are thinking about.
If I was going to go for launch and traction control and general playing about in my own car I would go the Emerald route. Soooo much easier to modify the maps and settings. And software upgradable on the ECU.
I'm still running a standard chip in the MBE since the 4.2 doesn't gain much in HP or 'drivability'. Amazing how the 4.2 chip is so close to optimal and a 4.5 remap can yield 10s of bhp and much smoother delivery in the bottom half of the revs/throttle sites.
I've still got cats and standard back box as well. Definitely a family car
ECU software is capable of, does that mean you have a dissasembly of the ECU program?
If so how the hell did you get your hands on that?
My ECU was code locked and no attempt to read out the program memory worked for me. I assume this was a no brainer from MBE to lock their ECU's and prevent reverse engineering
If so how the hell did you get your hands on that?
My ECU was code locked and no attempt to read out the program memory worked for me. I assume this was a no brainer from MBE to lock their ECU's and prevent reverse engineering
No I didn't disassemble the code. It would take me far to long to work out what went where and I'm way too lazy for that
I approached it from the point of view of a software engineer tasked with 'locking' the ECU. How would I have done it? Not my field professionally (City trading systems and the like) but I have done embedded development in the past so it wasn't too difficult to think through the alternatives.
I approached it from the point of view of a software engineer tasked with 'locking' the ECU. How would I have done it? Not my field professionally (City trading systems and the like) but I have done embedded development in the past so it wasn't too difficult to think through the alternatives.
Gassing Station | Cerbera | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff