razori Posted May 3, 2021 Report Share Posted May 3, 2021 On 5/2/2021 at 7:36 PM, Dangerous Dave said: That's because the auto/manual location in the 609 binary is different to the 608. For the 609 binary add the flag parameter and point to 0xC8FC Thanks, have to try that. With the 608 the car "feels" less responsive than with 609 at low revs. And no wonder, left the tcv and target loads "as is" but upon comparing the maps one could actually see why it's less responsive. Duh btw love your work on your 850 awd On 5/2/2021 at 7:36 PM, Dangerous Dave said: Can you post a screenshot of your Definition setup in tunerpro? Post the ADX Header Data and the engage logging Images attached 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dangerous Dave Posted May 3, 2021 Report Share Posted May 3, 2021 1 hour ago, razori said: Thanks, have to try that. With the 608 the car "feels" less responsive than with 609 at low revs. And no wonder, left the tcv and target loads "as is" but upon comparing the maps one could actually see why it's less responsive. Duh btw love your work on your 850 awd Images attached Let us know if it works any better Thanks bud, it's a long work in progress lol. Ok, from the images you posted it is sending the wrong letter to engage logging. If you see it says 0x74 and below it says 't'. It needs to send an 'l' so if you just change that 't' to an 'l' it should change the 0x74 to 0x6C and should work. Then in the ADX Header Data tab change the Connection command to 'Engage logging' and change the Monitor command to 'Listen for data frame'. That should remove the listen silence and give you a faster data stream. Hope this helps 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razori Posted May 5, 2021 Report Share Posted May 5, 2021 On 5/2/2021 at 7:36 PM, Dangerous Dave said: For the 609 binary add the flag parameter and point to 0xC8FC With this at least the value in the hexdump changed (was 00 now it's 01). Though not with the flag but with scalar. On 5/3/2021 at 10:12 PM, Dangerous Dave said: Ok, from the images you posted it is sending the wrong letter to engage logging. If you see it says 0x74 and below it says 't'. It needs to send an 'l' so if you just change that 't' to an 'l' it should change the 0x74 to 0x6C and should work. Then in the ADX Header Data tab change the Connection command to 'Engage logging' and change the Monitor command to 'Listen for data frame'. That should remove the listen silence and give you a faster data stream. Still haven't tried this since I live somewhere else in relation to where the car is at. Maybe in the weekend. Logging wise there isn't an option besides the 608 bin? Of course I could copy all the LPT maps from the 609 bin to 608 but I have a gut feeling there's more to it. Or could it be that simple 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dangerous Dave Posted May 8, 2021 Report Share Posted May 8, 2021 On 5/5/2021 at 4:04 PM, razori said: Logging wise there isn't an option besides the 608 bin? Of course I could copy all the LPT maps from the 609 bin to 608 but I have a gut feeling there's more to it. Or could it be that simple There is a logging version of the 609 that I've created (I don't know if anyone else has done any). I'll have to dig it out and check it before posting it. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdog Posted May 9, 2021 Report Share Posted May 9, 2021 11 hours ago, Dangerous Dave said: There is a logging version of the 609 that I've created (I don't know if anyone else has done any). I'll have to dig it out and check it before posting it. Yes, please; post on the wiki if possible. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turboforslund Posted May 9, 2021 Report Share Posted May 9, 2021 Hi, Will the immo still be intact but with an added logging feature for 609 equipped cars? If so, it's a great step forward! Really great news! // Turboforslund 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razori Posted May 9, 2021 Report Share Posted May 9, 2021 On 5/2/2021 at 7:36 PM, Dangerous Dave said: For the 609 binary add the flag parameter and point to 0xC8FC Finally had the change to try this. With flag parameter it still throws a fault code that the VolFRC sees, but no CEL. With scalar both fault code and CEL is present. What does the flag param. excatly do? Kill the CEL? On 5/3/2021 at 10:12 PM, Dangerous Dave said: Then in the ADX Header Data tab change the Connection command to 'Engage logging' and change the Monitor command to 'Listen for data frame'. That should remove the listen silence and give you a faster data stream. Hope this helps This helped. Now the logging rate is at ~15Hz 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dangerous Dave Posted May 9, 2021 Report Share Posted May 9, 2021 (edited) 13 hours ago, Turboforslund said: Hi, Will the immo still be intact but with an added logging feature for 609 equipped cars? If so, it's a great step forward! Really great news! // Turboforslund I ran my modified 609 binary (logging, also with COP and WB control) on my 850 and it worked ok, so either there is no immo enabled on the 609 or it worked due to my ecu being originally a 609 (just I have fitted an ostrich to it). The logging is added to the binary and doesn't remove the evap diagnosis like in the 608rev5b. This means that not all the parameters can be logged due to the 608rev5b version re-purposing some addresses from the evap routine. And also doesn't include map switching. Theoretically (not been tested, though should work) I have added logging to other binaries: 448/449/611/612. 5 hours ago, razori said: Finally had the change to try this. With flag parameter it still throws a fault code that the VolFRC sees, but no CEL. With scalar both fault code and CEL is present. What does the flag param. excatly do? Kill the CEL? This helped. Now the logging rate is at ~15Hz A flag/switch sets the byte to 0 or 1, a scalar will allow you to set it to any value (up to 255). As it needs to be 1 or 0 I just used a flag/switch. Have you restored the original value at 0xC8ED in your 609 binary? It should be 0x79 (118 decimal). Good news on the logging rate! Did changing the 't' to an 'l' work? Edited May 9, 2021 by Dangerous Dave 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razori Posted May 10, 2021 Report Share Posted May 10, 2021 6 hours ago, Dangerous Dave said: A flag/switch sets the byte to 0 or 1, a scalar will allow you to set it to any value (up to 255). As it needs to be 1 or 0 I just used a flag/switch. Have you restored the original value at 0xC8ED in your 609 binary? It should be 0x79 (118 decimal). Thanks for the explanation. Didn't touch 0xC8ED, have to check that. 6 hours ago, Dangerous Dave said: Good news on the logging rate! Did changing the 't' to an 'l' work? Oh I forgot to reply this YES it worked, no more realterm witchery With 608 bin yesterday the car went nuts. To this date everything had been fine but yesterday the STFT, LTFT_I and LTFT_PL went all over the place. STFT was -25% so it was "drowning" from fuel. One could smell the excess fuel burning in the exhaust. Adjusted the part load map a little and it got a little better but it didn't make any sense since all has been fine to this day. Revert back to my B-revision (my last functional map) and fired up the car. It was a little unstable at first but settled after a few mins and all is well again. I have absolutely no idea what caused the issue. Difference between my C and B revisions were the TCV duty and TL maps, which should't affect idle as far as I unterstand 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dangerous Dave Posted May 10, 2021 Report Share Posted May 10, 2021 13 hours ago, razori said: With 608 bin yesterday the car went nuts. To this date everything had been fine but yesterday the STFT, LTFT_I and LTFT_PL went all over the place. STFT was -25% so it was "drowning" from fuel. One could smell the excess fuel burning in the exhaust. Adjusted the part load map a little and it got a little better but it didn't make any sense since all has been fine to this day. Revert back to my B-revision (my last functional map) and fired up the car. It was a little unstable at first but settled after a few mins and all is well again. I have absolutely no idea what caused the issue. Difference between my C and B revisions were the TCV duty and TL maps, which should't affect idle as far as I unterstand It could be something got corrupted or you inadvertently change a setting somewhere, it can happen (I once managed to change my fuel cut speed to 0 mph so as soon as I moved the engine died ) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
razori Posted May 10, 2021 Report Share Posted May 10, 2021 1 hour ago, Dangerous Dave said: It could be something got corrupted or you inadvertently change a setting somewhere, it can happen (I once managed to change my fuel cut speed to 0 mph so as soon as I moved the engine died ) Got completely new 609 bin and the value at 0xC8ED is 0x76 (118) decimal, not 0x79 as you described. Value at 0xC8FC changes from 00 to 01 when flag is applied. Fault code remains, but no CEL. Do I even have the correct bin? There are two bins at m4.4 wiki and I've tried them both. Been hunting a mysterious fault at idle for a couple of days now when using 608 bin. Today was a success and got that event logged. All in all everything is good at volvoland and suddently it pulls timing -2 degrees idle becomes unstable, my wideband goes grazy (afr dives to sub 10s'). The event lasts 1.2 seconds and in that time timing is pulled from ALL cylinders, not just one. No indication of knocking whatsoever or any other paranormal activities. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdog Posted May 17, 2021 Report Share Posted May 17, 2021 (edited) The 609/610 ecu is for the 1998 MY S/V70 GLT (2.4L LPT) turbo (yes?), but which is for the auto trans? The 609 or 610? TIA! On 5/2/2021 at 12:36 PM, Dangerous Dave said: That's because the auto/manual location in the 609 binary is different to the 608. For the 609 binary add the flag parameter and point to 0xC8FC Looks like I can use the 609 for either trans then? Cool! NM then.. Edited May 17, 2021 by gdog 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roll Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 Hi! I just purchased a 98 C70 T5 and it was imported from Italy. It has a B5204T3 engine and from my understanding its the same as the 2.3/2.4 variant that everyone else got but essentially just destroked. My question is does anyone know if the ECU file is the same? My thought is the same file could technically be used as the only difference is airflow, which the MAF sensor is scaled for airflow. By any chance has anyone pulled the bin file from B5204T3? If not can someone provide which eeprom chip it is on the ecu so I can read it out? I think I still have a eeprom chip reader somewhere.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turboforslund Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 Hi, The numbers of the Bosch ECU will tell what bin to use. // Turboforslund 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck W Posted June 24, 2021 Report Share Posted June 24, 2021 (edited) Motronic Suite has the bins for the 0261204444 and 0261204446, which are shown as the ECUs for the B5204T3. Edited June 24, 2021 by Chuck W 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.