Super VXer
Tapping does cause retard - I said advance drops, which I can see is confusing. My bad.
At around 22% TPS it is using 38° advance and there is mild activity on the knock sensor. 3% more TPS and ign is at 16° with no activity on the KS. That clearly aint max timing for that load....!
The CAS chopper wheel is on the crank inside the crankcase, and the pickup bolts into the block with no adjustment
The answer is more power! What was the question?
Super VXer
38-deg advance sounds about right for light load conditions and medium rpms. I'm sure you know (as I) that TPS position doesn't necessarily correspond to load conditions. Going up a hill with 25% throttle requires difference mapping than 25% throttle downhill.
Assuming the physical load on the motor didn't change drasticcally, I agree that a drop from 38 to 16 degrees (with only 3% more TPS increase) is perplexing. The only place my SBC has advance that low is in the lowest rpms for maximum load (to avoid knocking during anything resembling engine lugging.)
In a quick search thru this forum, I didn't find anyone knowing of a successful ECU reprogram. Do you know any way to hack into the fueling and/or timing tables? What tool(s) do you use to monitor the conditions you're seeing.
BTW...Interesting that you say "My bad" in Oz.
2001 Ebony VX and 1989 Custom 383 Corvette
Super VXer
We have got as far as seeing the code. We dont know what we are looking at or what it meansOriginally Posted by 89Vette
Need to find a Supernerd who can take the time to dig thru it. Its a Delphi but we no speekee its lingo. As a side chore we are looking for which programmable GM ECU can interface. Ign is the sticking point - the one on the Gen IV Chev V8 comes closest so far in that the crank chopper is the same, but cam position signal isnt
We have a GM Tech 2 and a bunch of other OBD tools, + the dyno can display a lot of info in real time, not to mention the 'closed road testing with professional drivers under controlled conditions' that we *cough* dont do.....
Super VXer
One of the reasons I ask relates to my knowledge of my vette programming. It's got (had) some weird stuff. And, the thing I didn't like the most was how the timing tables were set up.
In 89, GM used a primary timing table with columns for load and rows for RPMs. It also used secondary tables for PE (power enrichment). In the secondary tables, additional timing and fuel were added (summed) to the primary tables (creating a final total of fuel/timing for extra zippy-do-da-day.) Oddly, I found errors in the tables...or at least the ones claiming to be stock tables as stored on programmers websites (like Moates/Tunerpro).
To confirm the stock tables on tuner websites appeared accurate, I burned a chip with one...made the minimal changes for my 383 (FI size, min rpm, etc) and installed that chip. I observed very similar behavior to stock.
I could post pics of tables if you thought it might be relevant, but in the higher load columns, primary timing dropped -- fairly significantly. That's where the PE values were added back in...putting total timing back in the same ball-park as the lower load columns. (Keep in mind higher loads still have less total timing than lower rows but the table would not look linear w/o seeing the PE adders.)
There were also a stray cell here and there that was unexplainable. One were timing was 5-10 degrees lower than values in all adjacent cells. It made me wonder if timing tables were created using a mildly faulted algorith, if GM engineers were drunks, or if the tuner sites recreated tables while on drugs. In either case, I corrected the handful of timing table cell errors to observed driving performance. It was a bit smoother/better.
Finally, I removed all PE values (common practice in DIY tuner circles) and made my primary timing table show the summed timnig curves. This resulted in significantly smoother transitions since PE didn't pop in here'there. IOW, I no longer could feel the transitions while driving the car -- which was good.
If GM and Isuzu shared any timing technology, maybe the later ODB2 systems use similar techniques in their timing formulas. If so (and depending on how you're seeing your timing values), it could explain the sudden drop in timing. Since 25% TPS is where you see fuel PE, maybe that's also where timing PE kicks in. And, if the PE table has a starting value of something like 10-degrees, you may need to add it to the 16-deg in the base table -- for a summed value of 26-deg total timing.
Just a guess here, but it's the only thing I can think of after seeing (and recoding) my older GM ODB1 system.
Super VXer
Its quite possible thats what is going on. All we get is a screen full of ascii at this point. Hence the need for an intrigued supernerd! We cant see anything intelligible - yet.
Most of the Isuzu sensors seem identical to the across the board GM stuff. The Gen IV V8 ECU is crackable/programmable, has a crank angle wheel identical to the Isuzu, but has 4 cam position triggers to the Isuzus one. Thinking of setting up an external drive that will take the V8 cam position wheel and just seeing if we can get it going - but the time for that has to fit in around customers....!
I have seen the 'rogue setting in one box' on GM ECUs too - it does make you wonder.
Super VXer
Bit more homework last nite. Gen 3 V8's have the right cam signal input, but the wrong crank angle wheel. Gen 4's have the right crank angle wheel but the wrong cam signal....!
No doubt all this - like the number of O2 sensors to be read - can be turned on and off in software once access is gained
I can send you the .bin file from the Isuzu ecu if your interested
Last edited by Robbomaz : 04/12/2012 at 06:47 PM
Super VXer
I'd probably need a TunerPro mask to make any sense of it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote