1994 LT1 tuning Issue

[Caleditor]

I need a hand with a 1994 LT1. This is the first OBD1 LT1 that I have ever touched. I wish N0dih was down here to tune this one. The guy contacted me over a year ago.

This is the story (1994 Camaro 6spd). The guy had heads and a cam installed a year ago or more. It has long tubes on it also, but I am not sure if they were already on the car. When I got (12/31/13) it the car was a dog. I drove it 2 days to get a feel for it and that I parked it until the weekend. I threw a tune in it the Friday night before leaving the shop that should have been close. It was based off of the 97 LT4 tune. The car ran great that night. Cold start in the morning acted like it was loaded up with fuel and then lean when tip in. The SES had been on since he dropped it off, but I just figured it was for the skip shift. The MAP sensor was unplugged. I plugged in the MAP sensor and monitored the data. I found that the right O2 was lean. I checked the AIR check valves and found the right side was leaking and had even melted the hose. I removed the AIR system and capped the ports. Test drove and it broke the tires loose into 3rd. Now the timing wasn't fixed (locked usually at 10 deg) it ran great. It had the same cold start issue. I also noticed it took about 5 minutes of driving to go into closed loop. The car was parked again all week until I had time to get my wide band installed. I installed a set of poly engine mounts and the wide-band. It rained all weekend so I was unable to tune it. The car sat all week again and got to it Yesterday

Yesterday I installed a set of used O2 sensors. The car gets into closed loop within 2 minutes. Now it is pulling a ton of fuel.

I put the car in Speed Density Mode. Still a pulling fuel -- The max amount
Next I disable Closed Loop by the temp setting and set the Open Loop AFR Table to 14.7
PARTIALLY PINCHED OFF THE UPPER RADIATOR HOSE TO MAINTAIN 185 TO 200. ONLY LOGGED WHEN ABOVE 185
Next I data log it with the wide band. I pull about 25% off of the low end VE table
Then I pull about another 25% off. I cut that table by about 40% and it was still rich. Both the wide band and the narrow band O2's still show rich. I tuned the first couple of rows on the extended VE table and pulled about the same amount.

I have a tune they I am very close to that is labeled Comp Cam.

I test drove the car and had to pull over and put it back to the LT4 VE settings. The wide band shows 11's and the narrows are 800 to 900mv

I tested it in closed loop one more time and changed the min BLM to 90. The data logs reflex the change. The BLM just max out

Comp Cams LT1 Extreme
LT1 3315/3316 HR112.0
INT: Adv Dur - 281, Dur @ .050: 230
EXH: Adv Dur - 287, Dur @ .050: 236
Valve Lift: INT .510, EXH .520
Lobe Sep: 112.0

In the shop in Neutral This was the tune after the first 25%. Then I pulled another 25% and test drove. You can see it was rich.


RPM
'MAP'
WIDEBAND





965
67
11.48


949
66
11.32


967
67
11.2


928
68
11.4


955
66
10.96


903
69
11.16





982
68
11.32


988
67
11.28


959
68
10.96


973
66
11.4


996
67
10.96


992
66
11.08


973
67
10.88


980
67
11.12


983
67
11


998
68
11.12






1539
49
10.48


1678
44
10.6


1715
41
11.44


1732
40
11.88


1712
40
11.8


1706
40
11.68


1709
40
11.64


1697
40
11.84


1689
39
11.8


1698
40
11.88


1707
40
11.68


1705
39
11.68


1688
41
11.8


1705
40
11.88


1686
40
11.8


1715
39
11.88






1308
50
12.36


1280
50
12.2


1281
50
12.4


1273
50
12.32


1272
50
12.32


1263
50
12.4


1285
50
12.52


1290
49
12.52


1282
50
12.76


1266
50
12.52


1295
50
12.4


1303
50
12.44


1281
50
12.6


1289
49
12.52


1298
49
12.52


1283
49
12.52


1292
49
12.52


1278
49
12.52


1281
49
12.6


1272
49
12.56


1257
49
12.6


1268
49
12.6


1277
49
12.72


1259
49
12.72


1278
50
12.72






1826
39
11.68


1898
38
11.4


1908
37
11.8


1905
36
12.32


1913
36
12.6


1894
37
12.72


1903
37
12.72


1891
37
12.8


1903
37
12.72


1906
36
12.8


1892
36
12.92


1915
36
13


1894
36
12.92


1882
36
13


1859
37
12.92


1845
37
13


1829
37
13.16


1797
37
13.32

[Caleditor]

The 1994 LT1 file is the original file I read out
The 1994 LT1 MOD is the file I was using. I am not sure what combo it has
The OL SD is the file was running in it at one point. I think it is the one with 25% and then another 25%.
The CL SD is one that I used to just check to make sure the wide-band was still OK

the other 3 are just reference file I pulled. The Cower Cam VE table were very close to one of the OL SD tunes I had. I was surprised at that

The file I read out was corrupt I removed these files

[dave w]

I think the LT1 computer is smart enough to maintain Closed Loop idle. I think I would start with adjusting the parameters pictured below to get CL idle working.

dave w

[EagleMark]

With that cam I would not even try and run CL... tune from the WB in S/D first then do the MAF. Leave it OL.

Big issue with moving O2 sensor in long tube is the $EE mask has never had INT delay vs airflow to change location of O2 sensor.

We were testing an OL idle only setting in another thread (smaller cam) by adjust the WOT to enter PE, seems the settings even at idle RPM = under 1200 can do this.

Grab a copy of the latest mask/XDF that steveo has been working on as it has some more needed parameters we needed. It's in this post, aloso other stuff for LT1 in that thread.
http://www.gearhead-efi.com/Fuel-Injection/showthread.php?335-16188051-and-16181333-PCM-Information-EE-EEB&p=3131&viewfull=1#post3131

[Caleditor]

I had it in SD and removed the oil fill cap. No change, so the oil is not contaminated
to the point of causing my issue.
The opti-spark is new and it has some type of new system. I am not sure what that means.

TPS was 0 to 4% in my logs from idle to 2000 at a stop.

I have not checked the fuel pressure yet. I have a digital gauge with a min/max record option. Kent Moore tool

I guess I will do that on Monday

I guess I was thinking about it too hard. It should be Air Flow vs fuel Flow. The injectors are OE. I will check the fuel pressure next.

I am using the Tech II for the Data-logger and it does not give me the Target or Commanded AFR.
How can I scan for target AFR. If I knew for sure the PCM is commanding 14.7 then I would feel better about chopping the VE table

[dave w]

I would not hesitate removing 0.5 AFR ~ 1.0 AFR from an entire table to see how much change, if any, the leaner AFR setting has.

dave w

[Caleditor]

Looking at this file something does not look right. If you compare the wide-band and the narrows they do not look like they are the same AFR.

I will go out and log it again today


attached is the first SD tune log

[EagleMark]

Stock LT1 injectors let alone pump without a hotwire kit are not going to keep up when you hit WOT and high RPM, your going to go lean!

There's is no Commanded AFR in OBDI datastream, or not one yet found? Best you can do is assume the * Open Loop AFR Target is correct. Again with that cam I'd run OL, adjust the * Open Loop AFR Target table but for the low RPM and Idle I doubt the car will ever be happy at Stoich even though the stock Corvette table is 14.3 AFR in that area. Lower would be better. Actually a flat table at 14.1 would be better with a little richer at idle or whatever makes it happy. Along with more timing at idle then stock.

[steveo]

the PE mode @ idle trick (just go 0% tps for PE below 1200 rpm, and make sure min. map is in range) is working well for me, i'm just playing with it right now. you can zero the PE fuel trims out and work from there.

this is pretty cool, since you can leverage it to specify a band (within reason) where closed loop will live, below and above it, it will be open loop.

the integrator delays that roberisarr found (that are in my XDF now) do the trick to fix the blm splits and a lot of the corrupted data, giving it a bit more realistic trims, but it doesn't get around the fact that higher overlap cams seem to want closer to 14.0 at idle, and the closest you can get in closed loop with a NB seems to be more like 14.5.

go maf open loop and just play with your wideband, its so stupid easy to tune compared to open loop with SD, imo. maybe once you nail that, you can try turning closed loop back on with that hacky open loop idle trick, and just crank the integrator delays through the roof and slow down CORRCL, to see if it starts behaving again. i doubt it will.

[EagleMark]

I was playing with your updated TP XDF for $EE and have to say... :thumbsup:

and

:jfj:

Not only things we have needed a long time, but the re-organization and descriptions is sweet!

This also applies to RobertISaar for his disassembly contributions! This is going to be a major ground breaking change to LT1 tuning!

[Caleditor]

Maybe I have been doing it wrong. When I start out I disable the MAF, Lock it in Open Loop, Remove all modifiers to the fuel and lock the open Loop to an EQ of 1. I run this on a engine that is up to temp. After I dial in the VE I then move to the MAF. After I am done I then dial in the PE. After that I do closed loop. Some times I will do Closed loop before PE. My closed loop tuning is usually very minor


On the 512kb PCM's (0411) that have issues with big cams and long tube I have found that the 1 meg PCM and the 2004 O2 sensors fix the surging issue. It is like night and day. The 1 meg is soooooooo much faster and can keep up much better.


I have a data-log to pull out of the Tech II. If I am at a steady speed in Open Loop with no adders and PE locked out, I should be able to dial in the VE tables. The problem I have is that I am chopping the crap out of them.

I was doing the VE table and my error factor was .76x to .80x. I said screw this and took 25% off of the table. I ran the car again and I had better throttle control, but it was still way off.
The 3 & 4 data-logs ran between 10.48 to the mid to high 11's
After the 25% removed mainly in the mid 12's, but I had an area of mid 11's. My correction factor was .735 to .842

Thats just too much removing from the stock table. I have to have something wrong.

[steveo]

I was playing with your updated TP XDF for $EE and have to say... :thumbsup:

and

:jfj:

Not only things we have needed a long time, but the re-organization and descriptions is sweet!

This also applies to RobertISaar for his disassembly contributions! This is going to be a major ground breaking change to LT1 tuning!

cheers man its fun to work with

I drive one of these cars daily and I love helping people with them

next up is an lt1 tuning guide to match the xdf

[steveo]

thing is though, some of my comments/descriptons are incomplete or based on logical assumptions, I'm hoping someone eventually calls me on it and says "oh that's wrong". I just did my best based on what I've learned

[Caleditor]

I checked the fuel pressure. The engine was cold, so it did not have much vacuum

@ idle I had 41 psi. I am thinking is was 9" or less
@ 2000 I had 36 psi. The engine was smooth, so it should have been around 18". This is whatI had on previous data-logs

Since this calibration has 1 injector setting for flow rate I can see how this could be compounding my issue. Later calibrations have a table for Flow Rate Vs KPA

KOEO was 41psi, but I did not check it after I ran the car. I thought it might be on the low side, so I headed in to check the spec.

I will go ahead and proceed with my tuning method.

[RobertISaar]

with the OBD1 LT1s, there was never a need from the factory for the IFR vs kPa table because of the vacuum-referenced regulator. if that were to disappear or be modified so that the delta pressure from the fuel side to the air side of the injectors were to change, then problems will certainly pop up that are dependant on manifold pressure. a returnless(or any constant pressure) system that shoots into a vacuum is the same, they need IFR vs kPa or some other code trick to account for the injector flowrate change due to delta-pressure changing the flowrate of the injector. if you dig really far in, this will effect voltage offset and dead-time offsets as well.

[roughneck427]

Heres the tune that was in my car back in 2006 it was a 95 LT1 6 speed 355 ported heads with a GM847 cam that cam is somewhat close I did have 36LB injectors in it so if you try it you will need to rescale it and cyl volume changed for the 355.The car put down 391 rwhp on a dynojet through mac mid tubes.

[steveo]

you have to wonder how much that has to do with the difficulties in nailing closed loop idle on this platform. the system starts kicking the crap out of each other pretty fast.

you have a cam with a bunch of surge, so you have fluttery MAP, your FPR fluctuates pressure, but the random waveform of afr alterations that produces doesn't really correspond to anything useful. then, every tiny change in afr that corrcl and int are making, the fpr is making its own jitter and confusing the hell out of it.

perhaps that's why when i was doing some just for fun 'how low can i go' idle testing, it would idle around 400rpm no problemo if i put a restrictor in the vac line to slow down the fluctuations, but without the restrictor it would almost die. i'm a bit different, though, my cam makes fairly high idle but unstable idle vacuum. unfortunately i couldn't leave it like that, it noticeably affected throttle response. instead of a blip of throttle instantly maxing out the FPR, it would lean out for a split second.

[Caleditor]

you have to wonder how much that has to do with the difficulties in nailing closed loop idle on this platform. the system starts kicking the crap out of each other pretty fast.

you have a cam with a bunch of surge, so you have fluttery MAP, your FPR fluctuates pressure, but the random waveform of afr alterations that produces doesn't really correspond to anything useful. then, every tiny change in afr that corrcl and int are making, the fpr is making its own jitter and confusing the hell out of it.

perhaps that's why when i was doing some just for fun 'how low can i go' idle testing, it would idle around 400rpm no problemo if i put a restrictor in the vac line to slow down the fluctuations, but without the restrictor it would almost die. i'm a bit different, though, my cam makes fairly high idle but unstable idle vacuum. unfortunately i couldn't leave it like that, it noticeably affected throttle response. instead of a blip of throttle instantly maxing out the FPR, it would lean out for a split second.

I am just trying to tune the VE tables in Open Loop. It just seemed like I was pulling way too much from the VE table. I had a correction factor of 20 to 30%, so I chopped it by 25% (The AFR was in the high 10's to mid 11's). Then I logged it and had a correction of .7 to .835 (AFR of 11.1 to 12.8). I another 25% and it was still rich
The cuts were across the board and figured I would go back and add if I needed to
I stopped

[EagleMark]

I checked the fuel pressure. The engine was cold, so it did not have much vacuum

@ idle I had 41 psi. I am thinking is was 9" or less
@ 2000 I had 36 psi. The engine was smooth, so it should have been around 18". This is whatI had on previous data-logs

Since this calibration has 1 injector setting for flow rate I can see how this could be compounding my issue. Later calibrations have a table for Flow Rate Vs KPA

KOEO was 41psi, but I did not check it after I ran the car. I thought it might be on the low side, so I headed in to check the spec.

I will go ahead and proceed with my tuning method.Well the pressure will be higher with engine running do to altenator charging, higher voltage in system to pump = higher pressure.

Found this from a reliable source:

Put the pressure gauge on it, start it up and let it idle. Remove the vacuum compensation line from the fuel pressure regulator (cover the end of the line so there's no vacuum leak). Fuel pressure without the vacuum line should be 43.5psi. Factory specs are 41-47psi.

Reconnect the vacuum line, and the fuel pressure should drop in proportion to intake manifold vacuum. With a stock cam, a drop of 6-8psi from the "no vacuum" pressure is normal. With the HOT cam it might only drop 5psi. So, 35psi at idle, with the vacuum line on may be almost "normal".

Tape the gauge to the window, and take it out on the road. Run it up to max load/RPM. The fuel pressure should stay at 40psi or higher. Anything less and the pump is weak.

And when your all done and do the WOT high RPM with that cam I still say your going to go lean with stock injectors, pump and wiring to fuel pump.

[Caleditor]

Well the pressure will be higher with engine running do to altenator charging, higher voltage in system to pump = higher pressure.

Found this from a reliable source:


And when your all done and do the WOT high RPM with that cam I still say your going to go lean with stock injectors, pump and wiring to fuel pump.

That may be the case, but I am not that far into the tune. If I was lean I would be happy, then I would look at it differently.
So far on this log I have a cell that is 40% tooooooo rich. This long hand math is for the birds.

The voltage will not change the pressure in the rail. The regulator dumps pressure

[lionelhutz]

The idle fuel pressure at 41psi seems too high. Even if the vacuum numbers you listed are correct it should have been around 38psi or 39psi.

Having to cut that much fuel just doesn't make sense.

Are you sure the injectors are 24lb/hr units and not something else? Have you put a wideband on each bank? Checked the plugs? Done anything to confirm all cylinders are running about equal for AFR? Checked that all cylinders are firing? Checked that all cylinders have compression?

[Caleditor]

The idle fuel pressure at 41psi seems too high. Even if the vacuum numbers you listed are correct it should have been around 38psi or 39psi.

Having to cut that much fuel just doesn't make sense.

Are you sure the injectors are 24lb/hr units and not something else? Have you put a wideband on each bank? Checked the plugs? Done anything to confirm all cylinders are running about equal for AFR? Checked that all cylinders are firing? Checked that all cylinders have compression?

Stock Injectors.

Heintz Racing did the work.


if I have to pull the plugs the car won't get tuned. I will cut my loss and give it back.


I work at a dealership from 7 to 5. I have been a driveability tech most of my life. I started out doing it and with fuel injection I needed to do other types of repairs

[Caleditor]

Sorry if I have been short with some comments, but I have been doing the VE table in long hand for the last 2 hours.

[EagleMark]

Very rarely do I get a built motor, transplant or even bolt on mod tune on a daily driver and not find some kind of maintenance, mechanical/wiring issue... very rarely! My diagnostic skills have increased ten fold when my tuning skills were up to par. I still learn each and every car and each and every day here helping others.

[lionelhutz]

Heintz Racing did the work.

Seems to me if they did a good job you wouldn't be trying to get it running right.

Were you told they are stock injectors or did you pull an injector and check the part number? If I've learned anything troubleshooting it's don't take anyone else's word for what they've already checked and confirmed is OK.

[EagleMark]

if I have to pull the plugs the car won't get tuned. I will cut my loss and give it back.
Quick and easy test but not all inclusive... gives you direction if there is a spark issue.

Use an infrared heat gun on each header tube when warmed up and cleared out and see if all cylinders are close to each other. If not, well there's an issue going out the exhaust and skewing the WB or NB readings.

[dave w]

I'm often challenged with injector flow settings. Rated injector flow rate / actual injector flow rate / programmed injector flow rate in the .bin are not always the same value.:mad1:

I think I would change the injector flow rating, for a rich running engine I would change the injector flow programmed in the .bin to a larger flow rate to lean the engine.

The attached .zip file is an excel spreadsheet I did for $EE VE tuning using TunerPro RT.

dave w

[Caleditor]

I checked the numbers on the injectors

I would not say that it runs that bad at all. It has a poor idle, but I expect that

I am attempting to correct the calibration as I would on any other tune.

I have a step by step process and I am simply stuck on the VE table. Even if stoich is 14.1 and I am doing the math at 14.7 then I should be lean and I can not get it lean in the majority of the cells. I had it lean in 2 cells last night

[Caleditor]

I'm often challenged with injector flow settings. Rated injector flow rate / actual injector flow rate / programmed injector flow rate in the .bin are not always the same value.:mad1:

I think I would change the injector flow rating, for a rich running engine I would change the injector flow programmed in the .bin to a larger flow rate to lean the engine.

The attached .zip file is an excel spreadsheet I did for $EE VE tuning using TunerPro RT.

dave w

I will try this after I do the Open Loop VE tune.

[Caleditor]

I am just trying to tune the VE tables in Open Loop. It just seemed like I was pulling way too much from the VE table. I had a correction factor of 20 to 30%, so I chopped it by 25% (The AFR was in the high 10's to mid 11's). Then I logged it and had a correction of .7 to .835 (AFR of 11.1 to 12.8). I another 25% and it was still rich
The cuts were across the board and figured I would go back and add if I needed to
I stopped

I chopped the VE table up last night and fired it up. It cranked, fired, stalled several times. I got it running but it was tooooooo rich and eventually stalled. I went in and looked over my changes. I am pulling fuel not adding, so it is a little confusing. I smoothed the VE table slightly and removed some of my correction.

I flashed it the morning and it never even started.
I flashed in the Mod tune and it would not start. I could not get it to fire off in clear flood mode. I pulled 1 plug and found it slightly wet.

I got a ride to work.


This car is not that nice. First it's OBD1, Second the owner was not a car guy. The car has a unsprung puck clutch. The trans is about to grenade. The rear end whines. The exhaust was banging on the floor. I replaced the engine mounts to correct the exhaust issue. The O2's were weak. Installed 2 used O2's from an upgrade I did. The heater did not work when I got the car. It had an air pocket in the heater core. The electric water pump has a drop of coolant on it. The drivers window is inop at times. The drivers door lock is inop most of the time by remote or key. The tires are on the wear bars. The engine oil pressure drops very low at times. It will be Ok one test drive and the next time it will be close to 0 at idle. Cold start it might be over 1/2 way and the next morning it might be 1/8 off 0.

The car runs good. It does not misfire. It has a mild surge at times in gear at cruise at lower RPM's. Long tubes with the old style O2's cause this.

The car runs smooth, but I have not been able to OLSD tune it

I will load TunerPro back on the dealerships laptop and look for something that is effecting my fuel in OPEN LOOP

[Caleditor]

Thanks everyone for your patience with me.

What is EE-B? and how do I determine that I have it.
B is Version B correct?

I switched to EE-B and my VE table is not what I expected to see.

[dave w]

EE-B was for the LT1 Chevy Caprice and Buick Roadmaster models.

dave w

[EagleMark]

It's been awhile since I've seen an $EEB and did some testing and found an $EE file flashes in just fine so I no longer use $EEB.

It came in early production 94 LT1 vehicles mostly the Roadmaster but some have reported in other F body cars.

The easy way to tell is open the bin with $EE definition and look at the Injector Flow constant and $EE will be 24.8xx Lb/hr. If it is IIRC 717.xx lb/hr you have an $EEB mask. There are other differences and I think VE table is one. So check you first original file for Injector Flow rate.

Like I said the $EE bin file flashes fine to $EEB PCM are the same. If you have an $EEB find a similar vehicle description $EE and start there and full flash. If it's a transplant engine does not matter much. All the work done to masks have been done to $EE so if you want some of the improvements made over the years which have been many lately, then use $EE. The updated TunerPro RT XDF has many things not included in TunerCat definition.

[Caleditor]

Thanks
I have an EE file. I looked at it in hex.

[EagleMark]

$EEB in hex still says EE... Look at injector flow constant.

[lionelhutz]

I didn't see anything that looked off when I opened the first file you posted as EE. Opening and EE file with an EEB definition screws up the cylinder volume and injector flow rate and I believe the start of the MAF table will come out as some high value before it starts to look right. I have no idea what an EEB file looks like when you open it with an EE definition since I haven't run across an EEB application yet.

Still, someone might have "tuned" the EEB stuff back to the "correct" values using an EE definition so it really would be a good idea to start with a good known EE file.

[EagleMark]

Still, someone might have "tuned" the EEB stuff back to the "correct" values using an EE definition so it really would be a good idea to start with a good known EE file.This is a good point! You may have read the PCM with an all ready corrupted $EEB to $EE file, this would really impair your tuning abilities!

I like to start a vehicle with the cal it came with from factory and always ask if it has ever been flashed. If so I start with a new stock updated cal from GM. If they say no I still do a compare with known good cal to see how many things may have been messed with before they got vehicle and are un-aware of.

[Caleditor]

6359

Thanks Mark

I will try to start over. I even have a spare PCM if I need to swap it

1275 byte differences

0 under tunable parameters

[EagleMark]

Thanks goes to lionelhutz, it was he who brought up a subject we should have covered!

1275 bytes in undefined areas is huge! Sounds like you do have a corrupt bin you started with? Hope so!

[Caleditor]

Thanks goes to lionelhutz, it was he who brought up a subject we should have covered!

1275 bytes in undefined areas is huge! Sounds like you do have a corrupt bin you started with? Hope so!



I loaded up everything to flash the PCM and clean the plugs. It's snowing here, so I left a few minutes early. As I was clocking out a guy called me about a tune. He said I might even know the car. It's a Yellow Northstar Fiero. Of corse he was calling my Wisconsin phone number. The guy is just 10 miles from me and yes it's my old car.
Anyway I forgot the Tech II.

Well it will be another day

I will post up the file that I install from TIS, if TIS will program it

[lionelhutz]

I hope that's what it ends up being. At this point, I'd have to believe it's either something mechanically wrong or the bin is screwed up. I have a stock 94 Firebird EE bin I pulled a 6-speed car if you want it.

[EagleMark]

He does, we were talking on phone earlier and we did not have one in the $EE section. So if you attach it here I'll put it there too!

[EagleMark]

I also just did some comparing of your 1994 F-body Mod.bin and 1994 LT1 Readout.bin and they are no way the same or was corrupted somehow? Also compared the 1994 F-body Mod.bin and it was also corrupted to any LT1 file I used.

So you do have an issue. Not sure what program your using to make changes but half of them were off by a line or 2 in hex...

[lionelhutz]

I don't have them here, but I have also ones listed as being from 94 and 95 Firebirds, Impala's and Vette's. I think you've got all the ones from the DIY-EFI repository in the '8051 PCM thread and the ones I have don't match those file names so I have no idea where I got them from. I doubt I'd have renamed them so I likely just downloaded them with the names like I have them. I'll look at them again and maybe they're worth posting here too.

I'll get the 94 Bird one I pulled from the car myself posted tomorrow for you.

[dave w]

I read this 94 Firebird .bin file.

dave w

[EagleMark]

Seems we have a bunch of B body stuff from when I had my RoadMaster Wagon. But real short on B body Firebird and Camaro.

So post them up and I'll load them to $EE info thread!

[roughneck427]

Seems we have a bunch of B body stuff from when I had my RoadMaster Wagon. But real short on B body Firebird and Camaro.

So post them up and I'll load them to $EE info thread!


I have several F and B body files ill upload in morning.I had mentioned the same thing to AJ a couple days ago about the ee eeb thing i learned the hard way a couple years back i flashed an ee pcm with the eeb def open in tunercats and it ran all screwed up and i had found this on tunercats website.

[EagleMark]

Wish I would have read that before I tryed flashing an $EE bin to a $EEB PCM for the first time? I was worried about a brick, but it was just fine! Never have re-used an $EEB mask since.

But in his first post he has a Read bin and a Mod bin. The Read is fine, the Mod... not so good, it's all corrupt. I have no $EEB to compare so don't know what happened, I'm surprised it ran at all, but there's no way it's going to tune!

[Caleditor]

This is the Original file that I read out of the vehicle and the 2nd file is a fresh file from GM.

The car has some type of issue and I will not be finishing the tune any time soon

The fuel pressure tested good and it held pressure.

The car ran pretty good on the Fresh GM calibration. It was surprisingly how well it ran.