|
| EDXR8 |
|
|||
|
Yeah you will find some have the same memory locations and obviously with those it is easy to make chips, but Ford did change the V8 locations quite a bit and I would assume they did the same with the I6's.
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Vic |
|
|||
|
data_mine wrote: EDXR8 wrote: data_mine wrote: That'd be easy, as long as someone can send me a SA ecu I can dump it, and burn chips with it easy. Copying EECs I can do now, tuning them is another matter. But you can't just copy one EEC binary and burn it on a chip to use in another EEC, unless by luck that EEC had the same memory locations. From my HUGE sample size of EECs (two), I can 100% safely concur that they are all the same.  !So it appears that the ECU's are the same ( so far ) except for the Eproms. I'd been guessing that they were as it's always easier to just change the data than redesign a successfully working board even if its reused in successive models.
_________________ 5.6L of carbon footprint. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| EDXR8 |
|
|||
|
Vic wrote: So it appears that the ECU's are the same ( so far ) except for the Eproms. I'd been guessing that they were as it's always easier to just change the data than redesign a successfully working board even if its reused in successive models.
They don't redesign the board, just the base programing which points to the memory locations. I can tell you that they do change V8 EEC memory locations, I have half a dozen binaries here and they are all different (except for 2). You will find the I6's will probably change too, but if the police or XR6 EECs are the same as the some base EECs then you can make some nice cheap chips. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Walkinshaw |
|
||
|
This is some damn good info.
Ive got a spare EL ECU here, although it has the same catch code that your stock EL ECU has it may reveal a change in memory locations or it may show that they are the same. The diffrneces between stock and cop ecu's should be limited to raised speed limiter and shift point changes.. What software are you useing to look at the dumps and to compare them? Ive got a few weeks spare at the moment. If you could e-mail me the dump's and give me the name of the programme i could sit down for a few days and try and look at the dumps.
_________________ Soo many idiots. So few bullets |
||
| Top | |
||
| Waggin |
|
|||
|
Walkinshaw wrote: Ive got a spare EL ECU here, although it has the same catch code that your stock EL ECU has it may reveal a change in memory locations or it may show that they are the same.
. Same catch codes means same memory locations.
_________________ WAG363: AUII LTD Supercharged 363 Dart Stroker [Supercharged 363 LTD Build] |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Walkinshaw |
|
||
|
Well in that case, ive had in my possesion at one time or another 5 stock EL ECU's (from Fairmonts & Gli's). ALL had the same 6DBD code. 6's are going to be much harder to crack as they run large tables relating to MAP/rpm/coolant sensors, where as the v8's will have a MAF scalar table with bap sensor output to do all of that.
Im yet to find an EL 4speed auto (wether from Gli or Fairmont) that doesnt have 6DBD.
_________________ Soo many idiots. So few bullets |
||
| Top | |
||
| EF 4.9 |
|
||
|
Ford lists the following
ECU'S STAMPED 96DA12A650 AC 96DA12A650 BD 96DA12A650 DA / DB 96DA12A650 DC 96DA12A650 FC / FD 96DA12A650 GE 96DA12A650 HE 96DA12A650 JC 96DA12A650 LC 96DA12A650 LE 96DT12A650 AA 96DT12A650 AC 96DT12A650 BA 96DT12A650 BD 96DT12A650 EC 96DT12A650 ED 96DT12A650 GB 96DT12A650 GD 96DT12A650 GE 96DT12A650 HC 96DT12A650 KB 96DT12A650 NB So you meant to tell me that Chiptorque has done a memory dump of each one of these EEC's because the memory locations are diffrent on them all? it seems odd that there would be so little diffrences between a standard EL EEC and A Pursuit EEC, Surely if there was going to be anny major diffrences between EECs that diffrence would be evident here?
_________________ They say people don't believe in heroes anymore. Well damn them! You and me, Max, we're gonna give them back their heroes! |
||
| Top | |
||
| EDXR8 |
|
|||
|
Walkinshaw wrote: 6's are going to be much harder to crack as they run large tables relating to MAP/rpm/coolant sensors, where as the v8's will have a MAF scalar table with bap sensor output to do all of that.
I think you will find that the I6 tables and functions will be almost identical to that of the V8's, but obviously the MAF function will be repalced with the MAP input (which is a 2x30 table for the V8's and I would assume smaller for the I6s if anything). |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| EDXR8 |
|
|||
|
EF 4.9 wrote: So you meant to tell me that Chiptorque has done a memory dump of each one of these EEC's because the memory locations are diffrent on them all? it seems odd that there would be so little diffrences between a standard EL EEC and A Pursuit EEC, Surely if there was going to be anny major diffrences between EECs that diffrence would be evident here?
Yeah chiptorque do a bin bump of all these EEC's and run the data through their own software which looks for the typical table and function values. Most chip manufacturers will only really be interested in standard fuel and timing maps which should be fairly easy to identify with the correct software so it wouldn't take them that long to do. If you want more functions it will take a long time to do in most cases I would imagine. BTW just looking at the binaries for 2 different ED XR8 EEC's, there was not one function, table or scalar in the same memory location so that just shows how much they change their programming sometimes. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| EF 4.9 |
|
||
|
Why would they change the memory locations soo much? I know nothing about this (as you already know) but what is stoppping you from puting all of the memory loactions in a logical order and changing the header that points the ecu to diffrent locations for diffrent info. That way you couls have a generic EEC? (hope that makes sense)
_________________ They say people don't believe in heroes anymore. Well damn them! You and me, Max, we're gonna give them back their heroes! |
||
| Top | |
||
| 4.9 EF Futura |
|
|||
|
EF 4.9 wrote: Why would they change the memory locations soo much?
To prevent people from doing exactly what data mine is attemption to do here, lol. Also the issue of intellectual property I suppose... people tend to bag out ford for their programming... too rich, kills power, etc. etc. but at the end of the day, Ford had a mandate and would have spent massive amounts of time and money developing the maps in our cars... infinitely more time than your average enthusiast would spend on the dyno. So, shift the memory locations around and make it a bit harder for people to rip off the maps.
_________________ I promise..... I will never die. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| EDXR8 |
|
|||
|
EF 4.9 wrote: Why would they change the memory locations soo much? I know nothing about this (as you already know) but what is stoppping you from puting all of the memory loactions in a logical order and changing the header that points the ecu to diffrent locations for diffrent info. That way you couls have a generic EEC? (hope that makes sense)
The only reason I could think of is to stop people modifying the data easily. It is their product which they have spent a huge amount of money developing and like most other software/hardware designs they want to protect it. |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| data_mine |
|
|||
|
table/function/scalar changes sure, nice and easy (therefore cheap).
Code changes, due to the immense reliability condidtions required for the likes of an ECU (think what could happen if your ECU crashed in the middle of a highway run). Alot more difficult and expensive. So why change the code once it's good. Coming from an IT (development) background, I do exactly what Ford have done... write code in small sections, and thoughly test them. Don't hard code any data into your programming. It makes it harder later on. The downside of course is it's easier to reverse engineer. But in this case it's good for me. Now, anyone with a EL XR6 Auto ECU?
_________________ 1998 DL LTD in Sparkling Burgundy, daily, 302W, stereo, slow |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Walkinshaw |
|
||
|
Walkinshaw wrote: Well in that case, ive had in my possesion at one time or another 5 stock EL ECU's (from Fairmonts & Gli's). ALL had the same 6DBD code. 6's are going to be much harder to crack as they run large tables relating to MAP/rpm/coolant sensors, where as the v8's will have a MAF scalar table with bap sensor output to do all of that.
Im yet to find an EL 4speed auto (wether from Gli or Fairmont) that doesnt have 6DBD. Sorry i was wrong, the ECU i pulled from my 1997 Fairmont 4.0L auto was a 6DDB not 6DBD
_________________ Soo many idiots. So few bullets |
||
| Top | |
||
| data_mine |
|
|||
|
Brief update.
Got the car to start from the chip with a customised bin - just. Idle was very poor, revving was near non existant, had trouble getting it past 1500! As such I didn't both with a test drive. But a better start than I had expected for a first go. Spent the rest of the weekend pouring over the code and tables, I think I now have a better understanding, and I've loaded up two bin onto the chip for testing this week. And added a three way switch, for Off/B1/B2.
_________________ 1998 DL LTD in Sparkling Burgundy, daily, 302W, stereo, slow |
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests |
