16197427 and a 700R4 ?

[pmkls1]

There is also an XDF for this but the zip folder was corrupt, it is now fixed in the $0D info thread. And attactched.

I had tried to download that a while back when preparing for my PCM swap and couldn't because it was still corrupt. The advanced $OD TP5 V250 xdf has tables in it as well for TCC only control as well and that is the only xdf I have used up until this point. I downloaded the xdf you linked there just to take a peek and noticed that it actually has some separate TCC tables for low gears and high gear. That caught my attention because of what I had said earlier about it not being necessary to have separate tables and that there wasn't a pin location shown for the 4th gear switch input when swapping in a 427 PCM in place of a 746 or 747 ECM. Now I'm curious to go look at my car and see if I found where to plug in the 4th gear switch input or not. It has been long enough that I don't remember that part of the swap. And I haven't looked through all the schematics since the swap either as I haven't needed to. Since the xdf I have been using doesn't have separate tables, I wouldn't take notice of anything in the adx when logging that would indicate if the PCM detected it was in high gear or not. If I didn't find where to connect the 4th gear switch input then I am curious about where it goes. This is all really not very important as the PCM and tranny will function perfectly without the use of the 4th gear switch, but it piques my curiosities nonetheless.

[EagleMark]

I was just looking at the BJYL 700R4 bin... do you guys who are running this realize it's not a stock BJYL timing table? Actually a very well built table, but lots of advance over stock!

It's got more changed then just timing. FYI.

[JeepsAndGuns]

Yea I was curious last night and compared it to the stock bin. I too found the different timing table, it does appear to be a nice looking table. Knowing nothing about stock chevy engines and what timing they like, would it be a good table for a 100% stock 92 5.7 tbi engine running regular unledded?
Other items I noticed was ccp was turned off, I can understand that.
Cat over temp protection was turned ON. What is this and what all does it actually do? Is it needed on a stock 92 350 engine?
Naturally, the tcc only flag was checked.
PE spark was set to all zero, I'm guessing this was because of the changed timing table?
And then noticed the speed and rpm limits were raised.
There might be more, I cant remember, I dont have TP open right now and I am on my way to work.

[pmkls1]

Because I am running a vortec engine, I forgot about looking at the timing tables as vortes heads like a way different ignition curve than the old swirl port TBI heads. I had done the same thing with PE advance by simply adding the timing into the regular table and zeroing out the PE table. Cat over temp protection isn't necessary on a '92 truck or any vehicle with a decent tune for that matter. You asked what it does so be prepared for a long ramble again lol.

I'm not 100% sure exactly how it works as I have never had any issues that would cause the cats to overheat on my personal vehicles (because they don't have any, shhhhhhhh) or as a technician. I have seen cats that have been overheated, but it happened some time before I began repairing the vehicle. But, I believe that the PCM uses a certain algorithm to calculate if certain conditions would cause the cats to overheat. I know for sure that it will make adjustments to timing and fuel and emissions functions to allow the cats to cool down. The main reason for all of that crap is because catalytic converters are more efficient at higher temps. So the engineers will program the PCM to operate the engine and emissions equipment in a manner that will heat up the cats faster and keep them hot. Things like less timing, leaner mixtures, and AIR injection are what heat up cats. The issue is that under heavy load situations the catalytic converters can easily get too hot and literally melt down.

The reason it isn't necessary for "us" is because most of the things we do to tune an engine for better driveability and performance will actually cause the cats to run cooler. I too forget what all is different in that bin and will have to wait until later to take a good look at things like the spark tables again. In general, I remember that most of the changes made were all things I would do. I'll take a look later when I have a chance and let you know what I think about the spark tables and any other suggestions. I appologize for suggesting a bin that had that much changed, but I forgot that it had that many changes.

[RobertISaar]

not sure about 0D and similar, but with the 60V6 stuff, if cat overheat is detected(calculated), timing is advanced and AFR is richened considerably.

[dave w]

Here's a screen shot of an aggressive timing table, 5.7 liter using TBI swirl port heads / L31 Vortec roller camshaft / stock compression ratio / ported TBI intake to accept 7.4 Throttle Body / shorty headers / 3" single exhaust / 3" catalytic converter / Cop Car Injectors / 87 octane E10.

dave w

[pmkls1]

not sure about 0D and similar, but with the 60V6 stuff, if cat overheat is detected(calculated), timing is advanced and AFR is richened considerably.

I believe that is generally the way cat overheat protection works on just about any of the GM stuff out there. There is only so much you can do with programming to cool down the cats on a running vehicle. Just taking a peek at some of the tables it appears that is about the extent of it. Like I said, I'm not that familiar with the cat overheat protection stuff in PCM's, but it appears to operate using about the same principle that an EBTCM does to avoid overheating the brakes. The rotor temps are calculated by a complex algorithm programmed into the EBTCM. If rotor overheating is detected (calculated) then the ABS and TCS functions are limited until they have been given enough time to cool (calculated). That's why I don't feel it is necessary to utilize the cat overheat protection on a well tuned vehicle. Because more than likely the possibility of overheating the cat(s) is going to be reduced due to the tendency of most people to add a little timing and fatten up the fuel delivery.

As far as the differences between the stock BJYL bin and the BJYL 350 700r4 they were only the differences earlier. The spark tables are pretty aggressive and I'm not sure how well those would work with a completely stock L05 running regular grade gas. There's a good possibility that they would work ok, but they seem to be pretty close to the limit of what you could get away with. I might recommend sticking with the stock ignition tables and maybe gradually adding some timing since you say the guy isn't a gearhead like all of us. If it weren't for the fact that he doesn't seem to be that interested in making more power then I'd say try those tables and back off the timing as needed. But since you're not trying to make this thing into a big project I recommend comparing the stock BJYL spark tables to his stock tables and see how close they are. Since the BJYL bin should still be for an L05, the spark tables should be fairly close. What I was really getting at when I suggested starting with the BJYL 350 700r4 bin was that you could use all of the TCC parameters as a good starting point.

I'd say the easiest thing to do would be to start with the stock BJYL bin and copy over the TCC tables and any other changes you think your friend may want from the other bin. That will be fast, easy, and get you up and going without ending up going crosseyed from an information overload. All of the bins you need for comparison can be found in the 427 PCM thread in the ECM part # info section here on the site.

[EagleMark]

Before anyone goes and grabs these timing tables. Don't! They may not be right for your mask. Even if they are right for your mask there could be differant Spark Bias. Neither of them is for a heavy vehicle and forget it towing. BJYL and the spark table dave w posted are 2 differant heads. There's more, just don't.

Learn how to build your own spark table in your bin and mask from stock bin.

[JeepsAndGuns]

I'd say the easiest thing to do would be to start with the stock BJYL bin and copy over the TCC tables and any other changes you think your friend may want from the other bin. That will be fast, easy, and get you up and going without ending up going crosseyed from an information overload. All of the bins you need for comparison can be found in the 427 PCM thread in the ECM part # info section here on the site.

Thats the thing, I compared it to a stock BJYL bin (that I personally read from a memcal) and all the tcc parameters are the same. Only differences are the above mentioned ones. ccp turned off, cat over temp turned on, tcc only checked, timing tables, pe spark zeroed, and rpm/speed raised.

The guy is not a gearhead, but he wanted more power. He said ever since he has had that truck, it has never been as powerfull as he thought it should be. I did some logging a tweeking of a stock 7747 bin and timing table and it made a world of difference in his truck. I may pull up the timing table I built for that bin and compare it to the table in the 700r4 bin and and a stock 0D table and go from there.

[pmkls1]

Yeah, I had another derrrr moment there as I missed the obvious there. I ran the compare function in TP and derrrrr the TCC parameters were the same because I verified all of the differences were mentioned. Personally, I would turn the CCP on and the cat over temp off. Removing the speed limiter is fine, but I would set the rev limiter to about 5k rpm's as a stock L05 TBI engine is gonna run out of steam long before that point anyways. I don't have the rev limit set much higher on my car just because it isn't making any power up there. It's kind of pointless to rev them any higher than the peak power point anyway on a regular street vehicle. If the guy would like more power then I would try to emulate the timing table that you already established in the old ECM. As far as using the PE spark tables goes, I personally prefer to just add the spark into the main table and zero out the PE table just to keep things simple. But, for the most part a stock bin like the BJYL should be a good starting point since there are not very many differences mechanically between the two trucks. The main differences were the ECM/PCM's and the transmissions, and the transmissions are nearly the same other than the electronic controls.

[JeepsAndGuns]

Yea I reset the speed and rpm limiters back to stock. He would never come close to them anyways...lol

[JeepsAndGuns]

Failure!
Well, not completely. We finally jumped in today and gave it a try. I brought everything to work with me today to give it a try. I hooked it up with my adapter harness and engine starts and runs good. He says its noticeably smoother running. We also found out yesterday that a parts store must have given him the wrong knock sensor a few years ago because its a 3.9k ohm sensor like used on the 7427 trucks and not the 100k ohm sensor like is supposed to be on there. Odd thing, is it has never popped up any check engine lights for knock sensor or circuit over the past years. Odd, as I would think having the wrong knock sensor would trigger a trouble code? So we just had to unplug the stock est and install the jumper wire I made, since it already has the later KS.
But anyways, no tcc lockup. We tried the 700r4 bin with no luck. So I tried a stock bjyl bin, and made the approaite changes and tried it, no luck there either. We ran out of time to play more.
So I have come home tonight and have copied all the tcc parameters from pmkls1's bin he posted up and we will try that tomorrow. If no luck there, anyone have any other suggestions?

[EagleMark]

Verify MPH to be accurate in data log. VSS pulse is differant on 7747 ECM (2kPPM) to 7427 PCM (40kPPM) as is VSSB/DRAC. If MPH qualifiers are not met then no TCC.

Paremeter RPM/VSS ratio.

[pmkls1]

I didn't have any issues with getting the speed to be correct in the PCM after my swap. You said that you used your harness adapters to install the 427, do the adapters run the orange wire from pin C16 on the 747 to pin E13 on the 427 ? And did you alter the TCC brake switch wiring any ? If you simply switched over the wires like in the conversion thread the TCC brake input on the 427 gets ignition voltage and the TCC will funcion. I know that I recommended performing some rewiring to the system just because I preferred to wire the vehicle like the original 427 schematic. But, if you just used the adapter harness that you built then I would double check that there is ignition voltage on pin E13 at the 427 PCM. If all is well there then I would double check that the TCC solenoid power circuit still has power although it is unlikely that it would be due to a blown fuse as the TCC circuit runs off of the ecm ign fuse. Other than that, there is another flag that should NOT be checked. It is under the 4L60E transmission parameters in the flag section labeled "output speed not from DRAC". That box needs to stay unchecked. The stock BJYL bin and mine don't have them checked anyway, but it is something else to look at. I did not alter the RPM/VSS ratio parameter at all and the speed shown in the PCM matches my speedo exactly. Also, which pin on the 427 did you wire the TCC signal to ? One would think that it should go to pin E10 as that is the 4L60E TCC control pin but it actually needs to go to pin E11 which is the PWM TCC control. I never checked into why and just wired it as the schematics said to, but I know that it works that way so I left it alone. Hopefully you will find your issue somewhere in there without having to look elsewhere.

[JeepsAndGuns]

I can verify that the speed was reading correctly. And yes, I do have the box checked for "output speed not from drac" I checked that because on my conversion, I did not get speedo to display in the adx untill I did so. I will uncheck it today and see if it still displays correct speed. Also, yes, I have the tc wire on pin E10, witch was labeled as tcc. I didnt hook it to the pwm tcc wire as I figured it wouldnt work on there since this thing doesnt have a pwm tcc. I will swap the wires after trying the output seppd flag.
You said I should be applying power to pin E13, brake signal? Wouldnt applying power to that signal that the brakes are on? I did not alter the factory wiring on the truck any.