Bringing TBI and Multi Port Fuel Injection to a New Level.     EFI Conversions and Tuning! Seattle to Portland! E-mail Tuning Consultant!
Page 1 of 22 12345611 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 323

Thread: Anyone worked with the 16196397 yet?

  1. #1
    Fuel Injected!
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Age
    29
    Posts
    271

    Anyone worked with the 16196397 yet?

    I have the XDF from Robert Isarr, but havent' gotten everything up on the bench working yet.

    I understand that TunerproRT can support it given that I have the XDF, but seems I need to buy WinFlash from Tunercats to be able to flash the ECU? Is this correct?

    The ECU currently has the stock tune for a 3.1L alloy head V6, I will be running it on a similar architecture 3.4L engine. I THINK I need to change the following:

    VATS-need to shut it off.
    Cylinder size-need to adjust for displacement
    EGR-Turning it off for now, will be re-enabling it when I can get it plumbed in properly.
    VE adjustments-Cam is a mild upgrade, heads are a considerable upgrade.
    Injector size-Stock is 17lb, but i have both 19lb and 22lb available, stock for the engine the heads/intake came from is 22lb

    I don't think much else really has to change right now. Later, I want to fit a supercharger, but until I am more familiar with the tuning of this system, I won't be doing any forced induction. Does the MAP sensor table in this ECU have the ability to be changed for the GM 2-Bar sensor?

  2. #2
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Camden, MI
    Age
    28
    Posts
    3,023
    VATS is easy enough to disable, just do a Ctrl + F in tunerpro, do a search for VATS and disable the ~3 items that come up.

    cylinder size is adjusted through the VE tables. for whatever reason, GM chose to combine the two items into 16-bit tables. it works, but the table can't be accurately displayed as a percentage. if you're running a 3400(from the sounds of it), select the whole table, do a multiply of 1.1 and that will take care of cylinder size difference.

    EGR is simple too, do a search, find the minimum coolant temp threshold and set it to maximum.

    adjusting for cam and heads in the VE and spark tables is going to be on your own. anticipate running more advance at lower speeds and less at higher speeds. the reverse is true for the VE tables(less/similar at low RPM, more at higher speeds).

    injector size and offsets are defined in the latest XDF, I'm not sure which one is in the thread here, but my dropbox has it.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/2azz7q7s4n...02015.zip?dl=0

    as for boost.... I've been planning on patching the code to allow up to a 3BAR sensor, but I haven't gotten around to it, work has been busy, to say the least.
    1995 Chevrolet Monte Carlo LS 3100 + 4T60E


  3. #3
    Fuel Injected!
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Age
    29
    Posts
    271
    I am familiar with the VE/Spark tuning bits, just not familiar with a lot of the terminology. Like the displacement not being a static; I'd not expect it to be a whole 16 bit table.

    Main reason for the EGR delete is because I need to work out the plumbing, not because I don't want it. How similar is the tuning between ECUs? For instance, could the spark and VE tables from a stock 3500 ECU be entered, probably one cell at a time? This assumes that both the MAP and RPM axis are in the same locations and set the same intervals.

    I'm running a 3.4L pushrod with 3500 heads/lower/upper and since the upper is just so nice and flat, I will be cutting the top off, cleaning the plenum area out, and fitting an M62 from a Nissan Frontier or Mercedes Kompressor-both cases are a better fit than the GM offerings. The blower will come later, no big deal because the top of the plenum just pops off. Easy to just pick up another top at the parts yard for 10$.

  4. #4
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Camden, MI
    Age
    28
    Posts
    3,023
    you really don't need to think about the displacement weirdness beyond the initial change to the VE tables.

    OBD2 calibrations have their spark tables stored as a cylinder airmass vs RPM table, which doesn't translate directly to MAP vs RPM. so, that route isn't as easy as it could be. you would need to have some idea of what airmass is being calculated throughout the entire RPM and MAP range, which could be done through a lot of datalogging a vehicle that has the engine you want data from. alternatively, assuming you have a calibration and can read out the VE table it contains, you could apply assumed corrections(like 70*F incoming air and 100kPa barometric pressure) and end up with what is essentially a table that displays airmass in a RPM vs MAP format, which you could then figure out where the spark advance tables translate to.... with a spreadsheet, it isn't too bad to calculate, but it does require a very dialed-in VE table to be accurate.

    seems like the M62 would be fairly restrictive for the 3500 top-end... 96+ supercharged 3800s use a M90 and their heads don't flow nearly as well as the 3500 heads do. they end up running really small pulleys and push the gen3 and gen5 M90s out of their peak efficiency islands pretty quickly, a 3500 top end with an even smaller blower seems like it would suffer even more unless you're planning on running a fairly low amount of boost.
    1995 Chevrolet Monte Carlo LS 3100 + 4T60E


  5. #5
    Fuel Injected!
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Age
    29
    Posts
    271
    Basically, the M62 is roughly equal to a T3-60 trim turbocharger. The M90 is roughly equal to a T04B S-trim turbocharger-but limited to about 12lbs of boost in both cases. Horses for courses. I don't need super-high HP in a truck, but I do like bulk low-RPM torque.

    The truck only needs to turn 5000RPM, ever. It's not a race car, but I do use it to haul engine parts/drag cars/general abuse so low-end torque is nice to have. I may use an M90 just because I have 6 on the shelf, but I only have one M62 and it's the long-case version that won't package well. Also, it's got a T-5 transmission in it, and they're only good for about 300ft-lbs before they shatter.

    The reason the 3800SC guys are running then out of their efficiency is that they're getting power greedy. The eatons on those engines aren't designed to run at 6000 engine RPM, they were designed to give bulk torque and the sensation of speed and power at 3000RPM, which is where they're still efficient. Significant case reconfiguration is needed to get serious performance out of the GM blowers. The Ford, Jaguar, and Mercedes blowers are a lot better in this regard.

    By changing the shape of the case, I was able to go from 600CFM inlet flow, to just over 800CFM, before hitting the limit of the compressor on this M90. Raised inlet 2.4", opened from 65mm to 88mm.









    Also made it fit much better in the engine bay. Shortened the nose up to M62-length too, to fit the accessory drive.

    That said, if I knew I had the usage of the 2-bar MAP sensor, I'd just chuck a small turbo on it and call it a day. Might hunt down some Syclone badges or something, that'd be pretty awesome.
    Last edited by Xnke; 06-26-2015 at 10:33 AM.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Camden, MI
    Age
    28
    Posts
    3,023
    that's certainly different.

    I've patched in 2/3 BAR support for a different mask/PCM, but I just haven't done it yet for the P66 V6 PCM. I think you're only the 3rd or 4th person to ask about it, so it hasn't been a huge priority, but maybe after this weekend, I can see if I can set aside some time to get on it.
    1995 Chevrolet Monte Carlo LS 3100 + 4T60E


  7. #7
    Fuel Injected!
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Age
    29
    Posts
    271
    it's been so long since I dabbled in assembly and hex for the 'HC11 I am not sure I could get it back now. Thanks for taking a look at it-I will be ready to fit the engine into the bay in about a month. If boosted support is available by then then I'll just make the headers into a set of turbo headers, it's way easier to do that now than later.

  8. #8
    Fuel Injected!
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Age
    29
    Posts
    271
    Definitely gonna go with the M90 blower now. I got to borrow a Frontier M62 and it's just too long to get it on the plenum cover; so I'll be taking the bandsaw to an M90 case soon.

  9. #9
    Fuel Injected!
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Age
    29
    Posts
    271
    Any news on 2bar support for this PCM? I have gotten the super chopped down and ready to fit to the intake.

  10. #10
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Camden, MI
    Age
    28
    Posts
    3,023
    messing around with it now. the oddball 16-bit VE table actually has an advantage here to where I can basically just tack on another table into the positive manifold pressure range without needing to write an airflow multiplier table.
    1995 Chevrolet Monte Carlo LS 3100 + 4T60E


  11. #11
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Camden, MI
    Age
    28
    Posts
    3,023
    good progress done sporadically throughout the day. noticed that I'm going to end up changing the main spark table as well.... luckily, it is already 17x17 and the MAP scaling is already sufficient(20-100 in 5kPa increments), but spark is 400-4800, 200 RPM increments from 400-2400 and 400 RPM increments above that. I'm going to add in a patch that changes the RPM scaling from 0-6400 in the same space, i'll just have the tables listed next to each other in the XDF with some notes in both to indicate which one should be used. currently making a spreadsheet to allow easily changing from the existing table to the new table scaling(just copy/paste instead of interpolating and extrapolating from existing values).

    as-is, I have the code setup for the boost VE and spark tables ready to go from 100-300kPa in 12.5kPa increments, though I'm considering allowing it to go 100-200 in 6.25kPa increments for anyone who wants to use either a 2 or 3 BAR sensor, but doesn't plan on exceeding 200kPa.

    also considering changing the existing Main VE table as well.... RPM scaling is fine here(0-6400 in 400RPM incs), but MAP is 15-50kPa in 5kPa increments, then 50-100 in 10kPa increments.... table would have to be relocated though, i'll need to see what kind of space I have to work with after the other stuff is finished.
    1995 Chevrolet Monte Carlo LS 3100 + 4T60E


  12. #12
    Fuel Injected!
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Age
    29
    Posts
    271
    That's awesome. Honestly, 10kpA increments from 50-100 is fine. I use similar scales a lot in the Megasquirt world-unless you're running a cam that really doesn't make much vacuum then all your fine tuning is usually under 65kpA or so. Above that, 10 or even 15kpa per increment is perfectly usable, as long as the tables are being interpolated.

    I sat down and took a look at re-learning what I'd need to know the other day-would have been january before I felt ready to tackle something like this!

    The spark table sounds...odd. But, there really isn't much need to add or remove timing advance past 3000ish RPM in most engines, so I can see why it was done that way.

    Whatever you come up with-I am 100% certain it will be perfectly usable. Making this PCM boost-capable opens up a huge window for the Camaro/Firebird folks who want to turbo their car, but don't want to do a complete OBD1 wiring swap. (also Beretta, as the manual trans PCM I have is from a 3100 powered beretta!)

  13. #13
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Camden, MI
    Age
    28
    Posts
    3,023
    with nAst1, I have the fuel and spark tables run up to 8400 RPM.... currently in 200RPM increments from 2000-up(and 100 RPM from 400-2000), but I've had a few comments on it being excessive to the point of people not wanting to deal with that many cells, even if it has the potential for a better calibration. so, the future for it holds the same 400-2000 table, but going to 400RPM increments up to 8400.

    I've never seen/heard of a VE or main spark table that wasn't interpolated.... that would be an extremely odd choice by the code engineer to do so. very few tables in GM code aren't interpolated and those that are tend to make sense or are at least non-critical.

    in the stock calibration, spark still changes an appreciable amount even right up to the 4800 limit, and some use a RPM-derived sliding offset above that even, so I just want to put it all in one table. if you have significant fueling/spark changes above 6400.... well, code can always be revised.

    I apparently need to get together with someone who is capable of fabricating turbo manifolds/SC intakes and drive systems but doesn't want to deal with the electrical side of things.... I can make an adapter harness in my sleep(or change the harness for a more permanent solution), but metal fab is outside my range of comfort unless a CNC mill is involved.



    as for code progress, it's nearly finished. the E-side is completely taken care of, which has the bulk of the work necessary, now I just need to finish up a little bit on the T-side since I have to pass MAP information(both an emulated 1BAR signal for T-side usage and the raw 2/3BAR signal for the end-user) over SPI since there isn't enough space on the T-side for more emulation code. speaking of space, after all has been added on the E-side, I have two sections of free space, one is about 900 continuous bytes, the other is about 2800 continuous bytes.... a 17x17 VE table would take up 578(and free up its previous 442 byte area), so I have plenty of room to do that.

    the only quirk I'm coming up with so far is that the barometric update function may require disabling/severe limiting(since baro updates happen with high throttle/low vacuum, when the blower does its magic).



    I should have something posted tonight, I know someone on 60V6 was also looking for it, so it will end up there as well. MAF support was also requested, though I may wait to make sure this is working out for everybody first before adding in a separate patch for that.
    1995 Chevrolet Monte Carlo LS 3100 + 4T60E


  14. #14
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Camden, MI
    Age
    28
    Posts
    3,023
    as near as I can tell, 5 bytes can be passed over SPI from E to T(where the main communications from PCM to laptop occur, though E can be communicated with using a wildly different ADX) without having to remove anything or otherwise cripple some function for any of the applications this PCM is used on. 4 of the bytes are continuous(currently used to transfer the E-side calibration part number to the T-side), 1 is on its own. I'm going to use one of the 2-byte blocks for this patch, leaving a 16-bit value and an 8-bit value able to be transferred in the future. the 16-bit value will likely be used for the MAF patch, while I have no plans for the 8-bit value.

    finally on the home stretch of this patch, i'll run it through the disassembler to make sure nothing funny pops up and i'll call it a beta release. as such, I wouldn't recommend using it in a vehicle that has to make it to X location at Y time until any other quirks that might exist are discovered and fixed.
    1995 Chevrolet Monte Carlo LS 3100 + 4T60E


  15. #15
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Camden, MI
    Age
    28
    Posts
    3,023
    what kind of plans do you have for a boost control/bypass valve or something of the sort? I'm trying to work out a way to allow baro updates, but there is no way I can fathom that would work without the PCM having direct control of the boost control solenoid and whenever the throttle is open enough for the bypass valve to close on its own, temporarily(or by default) keep/force the bypass valve open to get a baro read, then close it to allow boost to boost to build, rather than get sent back through to in front of the rotors. no idea how quickly the valves react though...

    well, I can fathom another method, but it would require cracking open the PCM and reconfiguring the T-side channel 3 A/D circuit so that it could read a permanent, atmosphere exposed 1BAR MAP sensor. it isn't as fun as it sounds. or instead of reconfiguring channel 3, use channels 2 or 5, since as far as I can tell, they're unused. not much space in the T-side PROM though, so one would need to plan very far ahead to not write themselves into a wall.



    in any case, here is what I've come up with. a small readme is included, which more or less reiterates the some stuff I've mentioned along the way, as well as some new info.

    I highly recommend the rev3 v1.01 patch as well... it's mostly bugfixes to factory code, but it also adds a more defined method of controlling the highway fuel/lean cruise function, should it be desired.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/5jfa0iqz6s...Boost.zip?dl=0

    after I pull this out of beta, it can end up in the thread for this PCM.
    1995 Chevrolet Monte Carlo LS 3100 + 4T60E


Similar Threads

  1. 16172693 16184164 16184737 16196397 PCM Information P66 V6
    By RobertISaar in forum GM ECM - Bins - TunerPro Definition Files - Wiring Diagrams - Tuner Info!
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-18-2014, 07:49 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •