S10 Vortec 5.7L build in hex

[Caleditor]

I am helping a guy out with a 2002 OS. People have to stop all of this segment swap crap.

[EagleMark]

Segment swap seems to work and get the job done. But I read your other thread and can see why things could be done better in hex because of tuning software limitations of OS, even though a tranny segment is same length, maybe just moved a couple line so POOF, that's it, tuning software is out!. I can use hex enough to do things like this but the biggest obstacle for all is not all hex is defined so it's get's hard for us that don't have exact definitions or enough knowledge to separate the code.

So please! Do go on! I'm not totally against a separate forum or sub forum for hex and code. If you put together enough articles we can surely either make one or at least a Hex sticky with links to all your articles. It may bring up enough intrest that people start asking specific questions as well? We've had a few long threads to learn and guys have shared a lot. Things can change when there's enough interest and information to consolidate. It's like to Ford forum, we have a Ford Moderator, it's still here and I'm not sure why as we've never gained enough interest there so other sites have that covered.

Cars are my thing! Was never even interested in computers till I found the internet was full of car info... 1998. Then cars have computers and still wasn't interested till I found I could change the way they run... 2004. It's all been a journey of more computer knowledge, ECM/PCM knowledge, then into the hex knowledge. My end goal, intrests and enjoyment is still cars! So the entire 15 year journey is just another tool for the end goal of cars!

There's got to be a good free software hex editor we could all use and become familiar with as well. TunerPro Hex editor is a big help when using in the program but very limited when it comes hex editing or combining files. NotePad++ has a hex editor plugin I've found useful but still probably not the tool we need?

Then some others are so complicated for us tuner, GearHead type and more in line for experianced programmers.

[RobertISaar]

i don't work in raw hex very often(except for writing/applying patches, which is all done in tunerpro), when i do, i found a program titled XVI32. has a neat function in it that allows for essentially macros to be performed. like chopping out the first 1KB of a file, click 4 or 5 times and you're done. useful for popping apart switched banks in the calibrations that use them as well.

[Buzz]

I am helping a guy out with a 2002 OS. People have to stop all of this segment swap crap.

Interesting post. A general statement, without preamble, explanation of viewpoint, or description of applicable issues.

Segment swaps are a just one tool in the overall toolbox of modifying a calibration to arrive at (or get a little closer to) the needs of the end user. Sometimes these are an effective end in themselves, other times they get you two steps closer and one step back - as the cliche goes.

Some examples ....

A popular segment swap for 1999 to 2002 Gen III 4L60 trucks is the transmission segments from a Camaro calibration - to facilitate keeping the TC locked on deceleration at 0% TPS. With a 2WD truck there is no perceivable downside to this technique. Problems may arise with 4WD trucks - as this process can have the unwanted side effect of disabling some of the 4WD components of the calibration. Not a problem to enable these again - as long is the user is aware of this.

If you have a Gen IV truck ECM calibration, and you wish to use a manual transmission, swapping the system segment from a manual transmission equipped Corvette calibration seems like a reasonable option - but this will only get you part of the way to your end goal. The engine won't rev beyond 4000 RPM as the requisite torque limits are not addressed. Also the speedometer won't work. A positive side benefit is that alternator will now activate immediately, rather than being delayed for two minutes. Again, it is not a problem to address these issues - as long as the user is aware of them.

Working directly in the raw calibration via manipulating the hexadecimal values is a course of action best left to very advanced users - and even then can still lead to catastrophe. If the hex parameter of interest represents a "state", like enabled / disabled, or option 1, 2, 3, etc. working in hex is more straight forward. If the hex parameter of interest represents a numeric value (like temperature) things may start to get confusing. Rarely are these represented in a direct linear fashion - most often these are subject to magnitudes (are multiplied by a factor), and may also feature the application of an offset value.

I only work in hex to develop the requisite parameters within the tuning software platform being used - I then make all changes to the calibration via the tuning software. This way I don't have to recall (and correctly apply) factors and offsets, and I don't need to remember which of these are for metric values and which are for imperial values. I only need to know / trust that I got it right when I originally mapped out the OS being used.

This works for me ... but may not suit everyone ... as we all conceptualize things in a uniquely individual way.

[Caleditor]

I was hoping to post a file and some details today, but I got "stuck"
I watched season 4 of breaking bad instead

It takes 2 PC's running to do the job correctly. I have twin monitors on one of them

If you do a trans swap a segment swap could be in order. It doesn't always work. I have a method of segment swapping that works 100% of the time. I hope to be able to post it

[mecanicman]

I was hoping to post a file and some details today, but I got "stuck"
I watched season 4 of breaking bad instead

It takes 2 PC's running to do the job correctly. I have twin monitors on one of them

If you do a trans swap a segment swap could be in order. It doesn't always work. I have a method of segment swapping that works 100% of the time. I hope to be able to post it

I look forwared to seeing this method. I have been struggling to figure this out on my own and have yet to complete a successfully segement swap.

[Caleditor]

I had a hard time getting this correct. I had a lot on my mind this last week. I screwed it up I bet 10 times, before I got it right.

I will try to explain all of the changes later

[lwrs10]

Hey...this looks familiar!

its Randy BTW

[Caleditor]

Randy lets get the true rear O2 delete fix posted when we get that figured out.

[04colyZQ8]

I was wondering if you guys could help me do a segment swap on a 02 411 P01 Camaro PCM 1271002. I need to switch the speedo output to serial class 2. To work with a 2004 Colorado. Ideally it would be a fuel segment, and speedo segment swap. From what I can tell 2003 S10, and express van, or 2004 trailblazers, also receive speedo via class 2. (they also have a separate speed signal sent to the PCM, but it seems to work without it on the 06 trailblazer/SSR to 04 Colorado swap I did). I don't know of a compatible P01 segment with OS ID the same as 1271002, or I could have Hp tuners do it for me, or the guy that owns the truck.

How do I save a Hp tuner file as a bin? Is there a good hex editor out there with a macro for helping me navigate my way around? I'm pretty clueless when it comes to hex

[04colyZQ8]

So looks like a speed density patch was performed using HP tuners, and it was witched from a 12212156 to a 1271002 when that happened, so I think a S10 12212156 speedo and fuel segment swap word kinda work

[Buzz]

I was wondering if you guys could help me do a segment swap on a 02 411 P01 Camaro PCM 1271002. I need to switch the speedo output to serial class 2. To work with a 2004 Colorado. Ideally it would be a fuel segment, and speedo segment swap. From what I can tell 2003 S10, and express van, or 2004 trailblazers, also receive speedo via class 2. (they also have a separate speed signal sent to the PCM, but it seems to work without it on the 06 trailblazer/SSR to 04 Colorado swap I did). I don't know of a compatible P01 segment with OS ID the same as 1271002, or I could have Hp tuners do it for me, or the guy that owns the truck.

How do I save a Hp tuner file as a bin? Is there a good hex editor out there with a macro for helping me navigate my way around? I'm pretty clueless when it comes to hex

OK, it is reality check time ... most people purchasing tuning software to make some small changes on their own vehicle, and a small portion of these people teach themselves how to adjust the VE and MAF tables based on WBO input.

In this case you are trying to help a friend, which is a noble endeavor, but you are in way over your head. Mucking about in the raw binary when you don't have a cue, is a recipe for a bricked controller.

I have made the following comment before, but it worth repeating ..... many of the problems encountered in a project are the result of little or no planning / research, and people getting excited and rushing head long into licensing a controller - when perhaps it is not the best controller for the job.

In this instance, not only did someone license a controller to an HPT cable, but they also upgraded to an HPT COS (doubling the credit cost) - before confirming basic functionality - like that the IPC (Instrument Panel Cluster) gages worked.

The 2004 Colorado IPC gages are fed via Serial Data. However, some of these gages receive Serial Data from the PCM, while others receive Serial Data from the BCM. This means that not only does the controller (PCM) being used have to be able to communicate with the IPC, but it also has to be able to communicate with the BCM.

Your belief that the S10 speedometer is fed via Serial Data is incorrect - it receives a 4K output from the PCM. Some schematics may denote "Serial Data" beside many of the gages, but upon closed scrutiny it will become evident that the speedometer and tachometer have a hard-wired (non-Serial Data) feed from the PCM.

Given the communications required by the 2004 Colorado IPC, your best bet may be to use a 2004 Express van calibration. The Express van IPC gages were fed via Serial Data, and being the same model year, you have a better chance of the communications protocols being compatible between the PCM, BCM, and IPC.

This would mean changing to a 1Mb PCM (Blue / Green connectors) and modifying the wiring harness accordingly.

This is merely a suggestion of a potentially closer starting point. The early Colorados used a P12 controller if memory serves, the late models used the E67 which made conversions much easier.

I have never done an LSx conversion with an early Colorado - so all of the above should considered as merely where I would begin from if I were undertaking this project - much trial and error would follow.

The simplest course of action would be to purchase the appropriate PCM from someone who specializes in Colorado LSx conversions - like Current Performance Wiring, or another similar supplier.

Attached is a PDF comparing 2002 S10, 2004 Colorado, and 2004 Express IPC gage functioning - hopefully it is of some assistance.

[Caleditor]

I am not sure if you did not get my email from earlier this week, but this is a simple switch to turn on. Class II Serial Data Speedo is the 2002 code.
Class_2_VEH_SPEED_DEFAULT_ENABLED --> BOOLEAN aka Switch --> Enable setting vehicle speed to a valid class 2 wheel speed

[Buzz]

... is a simple switch to turn on. Class II Serial Data Speedo is the 2002 code.
Class_2_VEH_SPEED_DEFAULT_ENABLED --> BOOLEAN aka Switch --> Enable setting vehicle speed to a valid class 2 wheel speed ...

The description sounds a lot like the switch that enables the wheel (ABS sensor) speed being sent from the EBCM to the PCM as a backup VSS input - similar to that used by the 2004 Express in the PDF I posted above.

If this is indeed one and the same, it will not change the output type from the PCM to the IPC gages.

[04colyZQ8]

OK, it is reality check time ... most people purchasing tuning software to make some small changes on their own vehicle, and a small portion of these people teach themselves how to adjust the VE and MAF tables based on WBO input.

In this case you are trying to help a friend, which is a noble endeavor, but you are in way over your head. Mucking about in the raw binary when you don't have a cue, is a recipe for a bricked controller.

I have made the following comment before, but it worth repeating ..... many of the problems encountered in a project are the result of little or no planning / research, and people getting excited and rushing head long into licensing a controller - when perhaps it is not the best controller for the job.

In this instance, not only did someone license a controller to an HPT cable, but they also upgraded to an HPT COS (doubling the credit cost) - before confirming basic functionality - like that the IPC (Instrument Panel Cluster) gages worked.

The 2004 Colorado IPC gages are fed via Serial Data. However, some of these gages receive Serial Data from the PCM, while others receive Serial Data from the BCM. This means that not only does the controller (PCM) being used have to be able to communicate with the IPC, but it also has to be able to communicate with the BCM.

Your belief that the S10 speedometer is fed via Serial Data is incorrect - it receives a 4K output from the PCM. Some schematics may denote "Serial Data" beside many of the gages, but upon closed scrutiny it will become evident that the speedometer and tachometer have a hard-wired (non-Serial Data) feed from the PCM.

Given the communications required by the 2004 Colorado IPC, your best bet may be to use a 2004 Express van calibration. The Express van IPC gages were fed via Serial Data, and being the same model year, you have a better chance of the communications protocols being compatible between the PCM, BCM, and IPC.

This would mean changing to a 1Mb PCM (Blue / Green connectors) and modifying the wiring harness accordingly.

This is merely a suggestion of a potentially closer starting point. The early Colorados used a P12 controller if memory serves, the late models used the E67 which made conversions much easier.

I have never done an LSx conversion with an early Colorado - so all of the above should considered as merely where I would begin from if I were undertaking this project - much trial and error would follow.

The simplest course of action would be to purchase the appropriate PCM from someone who specializes in Colorado LSx conversions - like Current Performance Wiring, or another similar supplier.

Attached is a PDF comparing 2002 S10, 2004 Colorado, and 2004 Express IPC gage functioning - hopefully it is of some assistance.

Wow.... Wanna come over to 355 nation, so can step all over you like you just did to me? I'm going to hold my tongue figuratively speaking.. I'm new here and don't want to over step my bounds!

Reality check time??? Such kind words thanks for those!

I know alot about Colorad, and canyons, platform 355. I have swaped a v8 into my truck and made the cruise switch, ignition switch, and fuel guage work, I also discovered a way to Make the battery light go out without, destroying the led light. I have helped many members with wirring and tuning questions, on our forum. I am well aware of current performance, I emailed them about 4 years ago, asked about a v8 harness, and found out, a bunch of problems, that the did not have solutions for. I decided to build my own harness, and came up with a mechanical solution to all the problems cp had. It's not perfect, and I'd prefer a software solution rather then a hardware solution, that's why I came here to learn.

I'm well aware that the cluster on the Colorado uses both the bcm, and PCM, to run gm LAN or class 2 data signals to the cluster. I have built a stand alone test bench with a moded PCM power supply, that had just the bcm and cluster hooked together, with that, an ignition switch, you can power up the cluster, zero the needles, and do a led light check. The PCM is required to run the fuel gauge, tach, temp, and speedo, via class 2,c2 pin 15, gm circuit 1807, p12 PCM, and c2 pin 15 1046 or 1036, e40 pcm. With the bench harness hooked up, and bat, ign, data either PCM p12, e40 will run the gauges ounce you wake them up via signal frequency driver, connected to the crank sensor, fuel guage, and temp, work with a pot resister for simulation. I have not been able to simulate the v.s.s accurately, on the bench yet, and gave up on that project for the time being one issue is a constant reduced power message on the Dic, when the throttle body, and pedal senors not hooked up.

Reason for the test was to see if the stock PCM could be left to run the gauges, while the motor could be full mechanical, and or carborated, the above info helped a few members run carved motors, and still have the gauges function. All of that was just for fun, not charging for any of the guys I helped out.

I know what it takes to make a v8 swap, and using a e40, e67, will work, but is alot more work for people, I think you would see alot more swaps if we didn't have to run ls2 throttle body's, knock sensors, etc

I told my friend that the camaro PCM would not work, and said your speedo will not work, but now I'm curious if it can be made to work.

[Buzz]

One of the shortcomings of communicating in writing (that means Forum posts) is that the message is devoid of vocal tone, facial expression, and general body language. These are mechanisms that people use to augment the message conveyed by words during an oral conversation.

Are you familiar with the cliché "biting the hand that feeds you" ? That is what you have just done. Anyone objectively looking at my posting would have thought, "Wow that was nice of Buzz to go through 3 GM Service Manuals and place the information into a PDF file for that person to use".

Someone with more maturity or confidence, if they were uncertain of the intent of a phrase, could have asked a clarifying question - like "Buzz, what do you mean by a reality check ?".

Every project should begin with a reality check ... let me give you an example from my experience, which shouldn't cause your fragile ego any issues. A number of years back I had a fellow walk through the door who wanted an aircraft retrofitted with two LSx engines. He presented as a gentleman, and had an unlimited budget - I liked him immediately ! Now came the reality check component of the decision making process: was I a certified AME - No. Did I employ anyone who was a certified AME - No. I quick call to my insurance broker was the death knell to this hypothetical project. I turned the project down, and so did many other people this gentleman approached.

The aircraft did get built - by someone who clearly lacked the requisite skill sets. It was subsequently redone by another person - who as fate would have it, called me for support - my answer was the same as previous. After 3 builders (and I imagine a small fortune) the aircraft is capable of flight, but does not perform well.

Anyway, that is what a reality check is ....

I contribute to this Forum and select others as a means of giving back to the automotive industry, which has been very good to me over the years. I have yet to ask a question, but have answered thousands of them. My intent is always altruistic, and rarely oppositional nor provocative - the form your posting took.

Thank you for the invite to the 355 Nation website, but it doesn't hold any interest for me, one man's garbage is another man's treasure, as the saying goes.

[EagleMark]

Wow.... Wanna come over to 355 nation, so can step all over you like you just did to me? I'm going to hold my tongue figuratively speaking.. I'm new here and don't want to over step my bounds!

Reality check time??? Such kind words thanks for those!Over reaction! :rolleye: As a new comer here and one of your first posts you need to calm down and understand we don't do negative comments, insults, antagistic or anything else that is other then positive. Sometimes it may be blunt but you don't need to keep your guard up or be thick skinned here! We are a flame free zone! :thumbsup:


One of the shortcomings of communicating in writing (that means Forum posts) is that the message is devoid of vocal tone, facial expression, and general body language. These are mechanisms that people use to augment the message conveyed by words during an oral conversation.Very well said and explains the lack of understanding how your post was considered offensive...

Once we are all back on same understanding on how this site operates... we have bumped into this very rarly but on occasion people get confused with a discussion and an argument and it get's out of hand. We can alwasy have a discussion that can turn into an argument, but it has to be done in a professional adult manner, don't agree? Fine, back it up and let's see facts or clear up the mis-understanding. But the argument can not become personal attacks of any fashion. Just clear up the misunderstanding. Remember there's no flamming, insulting etc... ever in this forum! Always take things in a positive way so we don't have to explain our facail expressions, tone of voice, attitude etc...

Hope that clears things up! :rockon:

[34blazer]

I like the "come over to 355 nation" taunt. LMAO

[roughneck427]

Soon we will have to have a feelings support sub forum. Truth is truth and theres a thing of unwillingness and unawareness once your made aware of truth you have a decision to be willing to learn or be an unwilling know it all.

[04colyZQ8]

Over reaction! :rolleye: As a new comer here and one of your first posts you need to calm down and understand we don't do negative comments, insults, antagistic or anything else that is other then positive. Sometimes it may be blunt but you don't need to keep your guard up or be thick skinned here! We are a flame free zone! :thumbsup:

Very well said and explains the lack of understanding how your post was considered offensive...

Once we are all back on same understanding on how this site operates... we have bumped into this very rarly but on occasion people get confused with a discussion and an argument and it get's out of hand. We can alwasy have a discussion that can turn into an argument, but it has to be done in a professional adult manner, don't agree? Fine, back it up and let's see facts or clear up the mis-understanding. But the argument can not become personal attacks of any fashion. Just clear up the misunderstanding. Remember there's no flamming, insulting etc... ever in this forum! Always take things in a positive way so we don't have to explain our facail expressions, tone of voice, attitude etc...

Hope that clears things up! :rockon:

Flame free really? What was buzz trying to do to me? There are much nicer ways to tell someone they will never figure it out, and your way over your head! That may be true, I even said I didn't know the first thing about hex, maybe that's why I came here to learn about it, it and if it was ever something I'd be able to do.

[04colyZQ8]

One of the shortcomings of communicating in writing (that means Forum posts) is that the message is devoid of vocal tone, facial expression, and general body language. These are mechanisms that people use to augment the message conveyed by words during an oral conversation.

Are you familiar with the cliché "biting the hand that feeds you" ? That is what you have just done. Anyone objectively looking at my posting would have thought, "Wow that was nice of Buzz to go through 3 GM Service Manuals and place the information into a PDF file for that person to use".

Someone with more maturity or confidence, if they were uncertain of the intent of a phrase, could have asked a clarifying question - like "Buzz, what do you mean by a reality check ?".

Every project should begin with a reality check ... let me give you an example from my experience, which shouldn't cause your fragile ego any issues. A number of years back I had a fellow walk through the door who wanted an aircraft retrofitted with two LSx engines. He presented as a gentleman, and had an unlimited budget - I liked him immediately ! Now came the reality check component of the decision making process: was I a certified AME - No. Did I employ anyone who was a certified AME - No. I quick call to my insurance broker was the death knell to this hypothetical project. I turned the project down, and so did many other people this gentleman approached.

The aircraft did get built - by someone who clearly lacked the requisite skill sets. It was subsequently redone by another person - who as fate would have it, called me for support - my answer was the same as previous. After 3 builders (and I imagine a small fortune) the aircraft is capable of flight, but does not perform well.

Anyway, that is what a reality check is ....

I contribute to this Forum and select others as a means of giving back to the automotive industry, which has been very good to me over the years. I have yet to ask a question, but have answered thousands of them. My intent is always altruistic, and rarely oppositional nor provocative - the form your posting took.

Thank you for the invite to the 355 Nation website, but it doesn't hold any interest for me, one man's garbage is another man's treasure, as the saying goes.


"I have made the following comment before, but it worth repeating ..... many of the problems encountered in a project are the result of little or no planning / research, and people getting excited and rushing head long into licensing a controller - when perhaps it is not the best controller for the job.

In this instance, not only did someone license a controller to an HPT cable, but they also upgraded to an HPT COS (doubling the credit cost) - before confirming basic functionality - like that the IPC (Instrument Panel Cluster) gages worked."

Comments like those are complete garbage, how is this going to help anyone at this point? Don't you think he realizes that already? I said very similar words to him, but while he was in the planning process and hadn't bought anything yet, I told him he should use a P59, with a trailblazer or express can tune, but he didn't listen. But he didn't tell me I was wrong either, he just wanted use what PCM, his tuner was familiar with tuning, and figured he'd work out the speedo later on.

I was replying to this last night on my phone on a ferry and lost cell coverage half way through my post, and clicked post in hopes that it would be lost, unfortunately have my post did get lost, the other half went up without me reading it!

[04colyZQ8]

Yes your pdf. file was helpful, and your second post was also helpful, to tell you the truth I didn't look at them, until now. I missed them on the small screen on my phone. I was just replying to the first post. In which it seemed like you were trying to either get rid of me off the forum, or make me feel like I didn't know anything!

The truth is I don't when it comes to advanced tuning, hex editing, compiling and binary code etc..

But I am very mechanically inclined! And I would never approach someone on a forum saying they needed to know what a ratchet was used for, if they said they had no clue how to work on a car, in the same way you initially did. Yeah I'd tell them not do touch the car until they did more research, but I'd kindly tell them were they could find that info, and to by a quality manual for the car. I wouldn't say reality check time, you better stay away from the car you could mess with a safety component and injure yourself, or blow your car up!

Buz, I hope we just got off on the wrong foot, and your right it is hard to see expressions

Lets get back on topic, and if we have any further issues, lets leave it to PMs? I guess I took what you wrote the wrong way, and I hope we can see eye to eye

[EagleMark]

Buz, I hope we just got off on the wrong foot, and your right it is hard to see expressions

Lets get back on topic, and if we have any further issues, lets leave it to PMs? I guess I took what you wrote the wrong way, and I hope we can see eye to eye :jfj:

[04colyZQ8]

Buz, Thanks the PDF, is very informative!

I know the 2005-2006 Trailblazer or 2006 SSR also works, with the Colorado, yet it has a dedicated engine speed signal 121, and vehicle speed 1827, wired to the cluster, but I just left those out, both those circuits don't go any where, yet the gauges work. It would be helpful to see a similar chart like the one you posted on the express and Colorado, but for the Trailblazer.


"Wow that was nice of Buzz to go through 3 GM Service Manuals and place the information into a PDF file for that person to use".

And Yes it was nice Buzz! I doubt you will do it again?

The only info I was going off before was schematics for the instrument clusters of each vehicle, and they would say "logic ïn a square box" then class 2 for the various gauges. So if they said class 2 I assumed there was a chance it might work, compared to the Camaro which only says class 2 for the oil pressure, gas gauge, temp and voltmeter.

The Colorado doesn't have a voltmeter, or oil pressure gauge, just fuel, tach, temp, and speedo

[04colyZQ8]

I wonder if we just got lucky when using the trailblazer E40 PCM, that there is a bug that maybe allows the default signal from the Colorado EBCM to pass through, for speed, just a thought. It does seem plausible that perhaps the express van PCM might work, I know the express cluster works using the trailblazer E40 PCM, the only thing I didn't test though was the speedo. If it works that way, it probably will be backwards compatible as well, just not sure about the speedo.

[04colyZQ8]

6298

Ok so, I was wrong, I did hook up the 1827 vehicle speed, and it went to the EBCM, on the rado, perhaps that's how my speedo is working? Maybe my buddies truck doesn't have the speed signal from the Camaro PCM hooked up to the EBCM, and if he does maybe the Camaro just doesn't have the write proto calls set up, for it.

On the Colorado years 2004-2007? there is not a rear wheel speed sensor for the ABS, just front wheels speed sensors, the rear gets the speed from the tailshaft via, the V.S.S, so maybe that's how the EBCM receives the rear wheel sensor is via circuit 1827?

[04colyZQ8]

6299

Perhaps we should try wiring in the speed signal 817, into the Colorado 1827 to the EBCM, if it isn't already. I would assume this is the standard 4000 pulse per mile signal on the Camaro? wonder what the Colorado is supposed to see from that circuit?