Tuners Rejoice! Free Tuning For M4.4!


Recommended Posts

Wierd part is that the .bin we pulled works perfect with the 609 xdf. All tables and axis are correct. And the show compareompare to another 609 xdf bin the data and axis display correctly

Only when trying to compare another bin with a 607 xdf do the values in the table get jumbled....

.

Here is my extracted tuned bin being read with 609 xdf, VE table looks fine(upper instance). Below is a rev5607 bin with 607 xdf showing VE table. I note the "offset" values are different below the tables, not sure what that means.

CyxPBKt.jpeg

 

Here is an example of the show compare bin data function displaying correctly between my tuned bin and stock 609 bin, both using 609xdf, everything works, compare data, difference, axis all good.4pnI1go.jpeg

Here is the compare difference between my .bin and stock 609.T8GhXYV.jpeg

And yes I would be happy to share the extracted bin with you, I have a list of what I could see done but I would appreciate your insight. Can you PM me your email?

Edited by NJGreenBudd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't able to use the compare bin between the rev5 bins and the bin from the -936 ('97 GLT LPT) that Turboforslund had extracted for me, either. It required a different XDF, like the -609, and axes, etc weren't compatible.

You could always compare the maps in Excel. I've done that for a couple bins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would have been awesome if Tunerpro would been able to create and handle .dcm files.  I work as an engine calibrator as proffesion and our calibration tools such as ETAS Inca or ATI Vision would compare those bins and create a .dcm file to display all the cal-changes in between them.  

The .dcm could then be "sucked in" to any desired bin to make the desired cal changes.  🙂

// Turboforslund

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok well that's what I'm seeing too so as long as I'm not alone I can work around that easily. I have compared only stock 609, rev5607, and my tuned .bin and, as amateur as I am, was pretty easy to see the big changes. It's helpful for me to look at how the different engines were tuned and then how my old tuner did things, the general trends are becoming apparent to me but I have much to learn. I am rereading the tuner pro manual just to be more informed there and also pulled out my old EFI tuning book for general refresher on some things.

Yes a tool or function like that would be very helpful indeed! Especially for the small changes that may not be so apparent at first glance. I did use the  Difference Tool but that yielded results in a format I'm not familiar with and I didn't see a way to import that differences either. O98gYGr.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, NJGreenBudd said:

Ok well that's what I'm seeing too so as long as I'm not alone I can work around that easily. I have compared only stock 609, rev5607, and my tuned .bin and, as amateur as I am, was pretty easy to see the big changes. It's helpful for me to look at how the different engines were tuned and then how my old tuner did things, the general trends are becoming apparent to me but I have much to learn. I am rereading the tuner pro manual just to be more informed there and also pulled out my old EFI tuning book for general refresher on some things.

Yes a tool or function like that would be very helpful indeed! Especially for the small changes that may not be so apparent at first glance. I did use the  Difference Tool but that yielded results in a format I'm not familiar with and I didn't see a way to import that differences either. O98gYGr.jpeg

TunerPro just compares the binary files, and as one uses an offset of X for that table and the other Y it'll be comparing X in one bin and X in the other even though the table is at Y (if you get my drift). Easiest way for you to work with it is open the bin you want to compare in TunerPro with the correct XDF, and copy the table to another instance with a "working bin" of the 607/608 XDF (if you catch my drift).

I wrote a simple little script to do this for me when I started with my LPT engine so I just dumped all of the 607 offsets and 609 file offsets in a CSV and it'd copy all the LPT tables over to my 607 at the correct places (ofc I had to manually find the necessary offsets in the 609 bin first using IDA, but was quite easy).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 3/8/2022 at 1:12 AM, Roberts0315 said:

Hi,

Have question to all who running LPG and have wideband mod done, have you guys had any problems running LPG or no? And have you done any rewiring for that or not?

Only recall one other person running LPG with DIY VS tuning and think they were in the Netherlands?  I'd ping @Piet if you can.  I assume that's the wideband mod you're referring to?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Been messing with the WBO2 Mod on my '97 T5 for a few weeks and something seems "off".

It's a 608 COP bin with the WBO2 Modulation mod. I also added an MPX4250AP MAP sensor to the ECU as well. I'm using a Spartan2 WBO2.

I did the wiring for the WBO2 inside the ECU, and connected it based on Turboforslund's notes from an older post to the tank pressure ADC.

A27 - +12V Power 
A13 - PWR Ground
B31 - Signal from O2
B28 - Signal ground (Per Aaron's suggestion, vs A13 from Turboforslund's post)

I took the VE Part Load Map and converted it to AFR with the 14.7/(x*0.0078125) XDF conversion factor. I copied the values from that map and pasted them into the "Target AFR" map on the "VE Map Part Load- Alternate Map 1".  I changed the ADX conversion factor on that map to (X/375)+0.68)*14.7. I also used this factor for the ADX parameters 42 (XTANS) and 43 (XPTE). Running for a bit, the "actual" reading from the WBO2 seemed low by about 1.5 (running 13.5 vs 15 AFR that was commanded).

I dug into a couple things and did a smoke test and found a couple leaks after the MAF sensor, which I fixed. I also reminded myself of the Spartan 2's Output Sequencer feature. Digging into that, I discovered that the ECU was seeing AFRs of 11.76 and 15.092 (vs the expected 13.328 and 16.666) at the test voltages of 1.666 and 3.333V. I t looked like I had a linear offset of approx 1.56 AFR (0.8V). I made some adjustments to my WBO2 conversion factors and now when I check the voltage/AFR shown in TunerPro, I get the expected values of 13.328 and 16.666 for AFR and the 1.666V and 3.333V. I also verified these voltages going into the ECU by back-probing the connector I have to the ECU for the WBO2 sensor. (I'm not running a separate AFR gauge)

From what I can tell, the sensor is connected properly (aside from that 0.8V offset in TunerPro, which shouldn't be on that tank pressure ADC). It still doesn't want to fully run to the targeted AFR values though. Still runs "rich" vs the target

The car seems to run OK. We just drove it 6+ hours round trip last weekend, and it was averaging 25 mpg (at 75-80mph). Had we been moving a bit slower, it would've been better. Was fine on power and didn't miss a beat. After that trip, the LTFT_I had settled to around -52, and the LTFT_PT was around 7.81%. I haven't driven it much this week, but we'll be driving it again next weekend for another 8-ish hour round trip.

Nothing crazy on the current set-up. 16T, 3" DP and OBX exhaust, COP, greens (0280155968's).

I did investigate the fuel pressure, and it seems fine for the N motor. Idle is about 38-39 psi at the rail, so the regulator seems to be OK. Holds pressure fine when turned off.

For the greens in TunerPro, I'm running the deadtimes that Piet had posted up from the spec sheet he had found for the -968's. I think they are also what's current on the Wiki. Pretty sure these are the 440 cc/min ones as well, so my injector constant is 0.7188, and I'm using 0.24ms for my TEMIN value.
The only thing I noticed is that the values that Piet had given were adjusted to a base fuel pressure of 43.5psi (44.95psi from the spec sheet), so "technically" I should adjust my values back down a bit for my base fuel pressure. I've gotten not pressure readings while driving, as I don't have enough length on my tester hose to be able to see it while driving. Seeing as the car isn't acting up, I'm not sure the pump/delivery is an issue. I do plan an upgrade when I get around to needing to replace it, however.

So, either I'm missing something, in the set-up, or there is something amiss with the fueling on the car. I'm getting no CEL's currently and can't seem to find anything that stands out as an issue.

Any thoughts?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi,

Good post with a lot of info and digging.  :)

Have you compared the NB voltage vs. WB lambda to see the true Lean/Rich - swithing point?  Might not be possible to compare them both within the WB Mod? (I got it but haven't tried it yet).

// Turboforslund

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Turboforslund said:

Hi,

Good post with a lot of info and digging.  :)

Have you compared the NB voltage vs. WB lambda to see the true Lean/Rich - swithing point?  Might not be possible to compare them both within the WB Mod? (I got it but haven't tried it yet).

// Turboforslund

Thanks for the reply!

I haven't been able to compare the "actual" NB voltage from the Spartan 2, as I'm not even using that output from the controller. It's bundled up in the harness currently. I know the WB voltage output INTO the ECU is correct, however.

Before I adjusted the ADX conversion factors for the WBO2, the switching point in TP was around 13.4 (Which was the ~1.57 offset from the target AFR). After I made the adjustments to the conversion factor, it still seems to be switching a touch lower than the target AFR. I need to try and get a better log to verify.  I do know that when I'm idling, or holding it to a specified engine speed (no load) the WB AFR oscillates around a certain value, but it's still under the Target AFR by about 1.0. The NB value switches in sync with the WB oscillation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, well I got a log file on the way into work today. 

The car just runs well, but things aren't matching up in TP. I can tell the mod is doing something, as the car is running more "crisp" than it did before the modulation mod. Less of a rich smell and it's much smoother and snappy.

The link below has the bin, xdf, adx, and the log file that are currently in use. I still need to sort out the conversion factor/units for my MAP sensor. I thought I had it correct, but I know I'm not boosting to 20psi on this tune, which is what the log is showing.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1GfAQakWoEcPYl0z09-1Zgx8cJAVWf-OD?usp=sharing

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just posting a interesting thing I found;

I have 850 AWD (stock bin is 305) and what I found is that with 608/609 bins the A/C stops functioning. No control voltage comes from the ECU to ECC unit when using either one of those bins. Everything else works fine, just the ac isn't functioning/the A/C clutch does not engage.

With the stock bin there is no such issue. Apparently between 850 and S/V70 the A/C control is slightly different.

Kind of a setback since the car has "little" mods (injectors, better intercooler, 15G, better exhaust and NA cams) and I can't get a full advantage over them atm because I want a functioning A/C aswell.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, razori said:

Just posting a interesting thing I found;

I have 850 AWD (stock bin is 305) and what I found is that with 608/609 bins the A/C stops functioning. No control voltage comes from the ECU to ECC unit when using either one of those bins. Everything else works fine, just the ac isn't functioning/the A/C clutch does not engage.

With the stock bin there is no such issue. Apparently between 850 and S/V70 the A/C control is slightly different.

Kind of a setback since the car has "little" mods (injectors, better intercooler, 15G, better exhaust and NA cams) and I can't get a full advantage over them atm because I want a functioning A/C aswell.

 

More notes to this.

Despite the fact that the car is M4.4 (0261204305) from the factory, it appears to be running on modified M4.4 bin in M4.3 loom.

And how I tested this?

I know for a fact that the A/C is functional with 0261204305 bin so I took an unaltered 608 bin and flashed it to the ECU. As suspected, no working A/C anymore. Then I applied the recommended A/C software mod to the standard 608 bin when converting from a known 4.3 car to 4.4. Aaaaaand we have functioning A/C again. That further backs up the theory that 0261204305 is just modified to run in a 4.3 loom.

Furthermore there appears to be some hardware differences between ECUs as well. I have the genuine, non-modified ECU 0261204305 which gives me no CEL whatsoever. But when flashing the stock 305 bin to my spare ECU labeled as 0 261 204 293, it gives a CEL on the IAT sensor.

More digging to do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, razori said:

Just posting a interesting thing I found;

I have 850 AWD (stock bin is 305) and what I found is that with 608/609 bins the A/C stops functioning. No control voltage comes from the ECU to ECC unit when using either one of those bins. Everything else works fine, just the ac isn't functioning/the A/C clutch does not engage.

With the stock bin there is no such issue. Apparently between 850 and S/V70 the A/C control is slightly different.

Kind of a setback since the car has "little" mods (injectors, better intercooler, 15G, better exhaust and NA cams) and I can't get a full advantage over them atm because I want a functioning A/C aswell.

 

You ran into what I did when we tried doing the M4.4 swap on our '97 850 GLT (US-spec) which is the same LPT spec as the '97 AWD cars. They're "M4.4", but not quite. The -936 ECU had some internal differences from the rest of the M4.4 units and the code as also different for the AC controls. Instead of changing the code to work with the 850 EEC, evidently Volvo did hardware changes inside the M4.4 ECU to do the same thing. Maybe they should've talked to Piet first. :)

I tried all of the things, but nothing would result in working AC with a 98MY M4.4 ECU, and the 97MY ECUs would not accept the 607/608. I probably could've used an M4.3 ECU and tuned on that, but that kind of defeats the exercise here. I actually didn't have any luck in our car using a standard 98MY M4.4 ECU with the software mod. The AC compressor would engage for 1 second, and then cut off and never restart. I was not able to flash a 607/608 bin to the -936 ECU and have the car start, nor did flashing the -936 bin to an 98MY M4.4 ECU work.

Anyway, I have a -607 bin that Piet modified (Our car is an auto) that has AC controls that *should* work in your car. It is just a base -607, as available on the M4.4 Wiki, so you'll have to make changes for the LPT. If you want to shoot me a message or an email, I can pass that along to you. Turboforslund was able to pull a bin from the -936 ECU and the Piet looked into the AC issue and solved it.

 

We've been running that code in the car for almost 3 years now with no problems. We original did an RN LPT engine swap in it back in '18, and ran into the no AC issue at that time (Had swapped out injectors and turbo too, so wanted to be able to tune). Had to run it on the stock ECU/injectors and the 16T for almost a year so we had working AC in the car. Once we had the modified bin, we've been able to fiddle with the tune AND have working AC.

EDIT-

I reread a bit in your second post and it sounds like our issue might be a US-spec problem, as you can get working AC on your car with an AC-modded 608 bin. That did NOT work for us. The -936 ECUs were different internally. Your IAT CEL issue is the fact that there isn't one on your '97 engine (at least not on US-Spec 97 LPT ones). I just disabled the diagnostic for it and now no CEL. 
Seeing as you can get working AC on a software-modded -608 bin, you can probably just use that as your starting point for tuning and copy/change settings and maps. 

Edited by Chuck W
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/18/2022 at 10:24 AM, Chuck W said:

OK, well I got a log file on the way into work today. 

The car just runs well, but things aren't matching up in TP. I can tell the mod is doing something, as the car is running more "crisp" than it did before the modulation mod. Less of a rich smell and it's much smoother and snappy.

The link below has the bin, xdf, adx, and the log file that are currently in use. I still need to sort out the conversion factor/units for my MAP sensor. I thought I had it correct, but I know I'm not boosting to 20psi on this tune, which is what the log is showing.

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1GfAQakWoEcPYl0z09-1Zgx8cJAVWf-OD?usp=sharing

Anyone have any input on this?
I'm mainly trying to see if I have the WBO2 Modulation mod set-up correctly in the tune. It still shows it's running rich in TP, but the car runs great. Just did another 14-hour round-trip (and then some) in the car with no hiccups or issues. The idle is smooth, boosts fine, etc. Hopefully later I can post a "TL:DR" version with some screen shots to make things a bit easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chuck W said:

EDIT-


I reread a bit in your second post and it sounds like our issue might be a US-spec problem, as you can get working AC on your car with an AC-modded 608 bin. That did NOT work for us. The -936 ECUs were different internally. Your IAT CEL issue is the fact that there isn't one on your '97 engine (at least not on US-Spec 97 LPT ones). I just disabled the diagnostic for it and now no CEL. 
Seeing as you can get working AC on a software-modded -608 bin, you can probably just use that as your starting point for tuning and copy/change settings and maps. 

I went and tried this. I modified a stock 608 bin to look like a stock 609 bin + A/C mod and apparently my 305 and a regular 609 bin doesn't have that much in common. Something made the car pull alot of timing and limiting boost to ~4psi, but yet no CEL indicating over 15 degrees of retard due to knocking.

I could have logged it but I guess who changed the wrong 608 bin (no logging enabled) :a-farmboy: and just for the sake of experimental science I flashed a bone stock 609 bin to the ECU (ran without A/C) and the car bevahed exactly the same as with the modded 608.

None of this behaviour stated above is present with the 305 bin.

If @Turboforslund can finish the xdf for 305 I'd be more than happy to test it out :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share