Mildly Tuning a Mostly Stock 1993 GMC Typhoon

**Rexxenexx** · 07-11-2023

New to all this bin tuning stuff. My intro is here if you want more details about the truck. Basically my objectives for the Typhoon is retain a stock bin but adjust what has been tweaked in GMs last MEMCAL tune (1620 BBZB), adjust the boost closer to 14.7PSI (it's spiking to 16.6PSI currently. It was well over 20PSI before some fixes), and reduce the knock retard. That's it. Not really looking for improved performance or skirt-skirting anything that would make the car fail Smog etc. The Ty is all stock H/C/I, Stock trans, Stock turbo/Wastegate, a newish DR152 Wastegate Solenoid, new (yesterday) soldered in pigtail for the Wastegate Solenoid, a disconnected for the time being Greddy Profec boost controller, PLX Wideband - Emulating Narrowband, a Ford Ranger/Aerostar airbox (PCV and driver-side vent hoses hooked up to it) Stock crossover tube was cracked as per SyTy usual, Sportsmachines vac hoses/lower intercooler/Adj FPR(Kirbin?), Aeromotive 11569 340 Stealth fuel pump, 16198263 "Reman By GM Corp." ECU, and a BBZB 1580 MEMCAL. Other than the high boost at WOT, the car is running and idling smooth. Even when hitting 16.6PSI today the engine didn't make a noise and felt smooth. I wouldn't have known how high it was if it wasn't for the Profec warning beeps. I still have the Profec hooked so I can switch between it and the OEM solenoid if I need to.

Here is where I'm at today literally:

AllTogether_NewPigtailOEMSolFullPull.jpg

I'm still learning bin stuff, but I finally have some hardware to play around with.

TyChipStuffEPROMsWriterCode59Starter.jpg

The UV EPROMs I just want to mess with for fun. The two Winbond EEPROMs are what I'll write to and use. I bought a $9 MEMCAL to test the writer and adapters. Worked flawlessly. Wrote a Code59 Starter bin to one of the EPROMS and verified it etc. Again, worked perfect. I haven't installed in the Typhoon yet just trying to learn this stuff at the moment. And I'm not gonna go Code59. You need a 3 Bar MAP, plus their website is gone gone.

OK, My first question is does this look right when stacking a stock Ty bin (16KB) for a 512Kb EEPROM in TunerPro?
BinStackQuestion.jpg

I must be doing something wrong. It says successful, but the resulting file is only 16KB. Also should I check End Justify or it doesn't matter because it's copying the whole 16KB to each block anyways?

**Rexxenexx** · 07-16-2023

I didn't know the images would be so compressed. Here's an external image of the TP5 graph. Hopefully it works:

In the TP Stacker I changed the Block to 64KB, it changed to a 64KB bin, then I set the block size back to 16KB and it worked. So I guess you have to start with a 64KB file first.

Can someone double check if the stacked bin is OK? I changed Desired Boost Pressure Base VS RPM and TPS to all 45% for everything above 44.53?
BBZB_93_Typhoon_45PercentWGDuty_STACKED.bin

**NomakeWan** · 07-16-2023

If the chip is 64k, and the BIN is 16k, then your stacker settings should be Bin Size 16k, Block Size 64k, Chip Size 64k. That's correct.

For example, when I stack an '85 Corvette BIN for a 16k chip, BIN Size is 4k, Block Size 16k, Chip Size 16k.

I don't know anything else about your stuff since I don't know your platform, but TunerPro's BIN Stacker, that much I know.

**Rexxenexx** · 07-20-2023

So zero-fill works with the 1227749 ECU or it doesn't matter, zero-fill/stacked? Like this?: BBZB_93_Typhoon_45PercentWGDuty_ZeroFill.bin

**NomakeWan** · 07-20-2023

Zero-fill always works perfectly as long as the code entry address is identical. For example if the ECM expects the calibration to start at address $2000, then as long as your code starts at $2000 then you can zero-fill the upper regions with impunity since the ECM will never talk to any address beyond the address region of the stock chip.

BIN Stacking is functionally identical to zero-filling, it just increases the chances that you'll have working code since you're duplicating the code rather than having only one working copy of the code and a bunch of zeroes.