Best BIN for runing 258/4.2 AMC/Jeep engine 5 speed manual

[doc65]

Thanks Dave & Mark,

I'm a pretty quick study, but not quite that quick, I've only been looking into the intricacies of this for like 2-3 days & hard parts acquisition for about a week & a half. The specifics of how TunerPro works are interesting but mostly make sense, now, it IS strange to me that the engineers would change as much as they did from ECU model to model even in the same production time frame, and ultimately doesn't make sense from a production point of view a single definition file with different entries being used or disabled makes a lot more sense, of course without comparing the XDF files I can't really say that they aren't more similar than dis-similar.

Dave, per our prior conversation I do still think that I'll be buying a chip from you once I get it running & to the point that I can capture logs, at least for the first one of these that I'm working on, but down the road for future mods (4.6L Stroker build in parts acquisition mode right now) & a second vehicle I want to get it sorted for myself.

Thanks again guys,

[1project2many]

The two Jeep / AMC I6 engines I've done have been 7747 equipped. I found a 454 calibration to be a much better starting point for these engines. The early TBI 454 was really a carbureted engine with an adapter and a throttle body on top and the base settings in those calibrations seem to lend themselves to getting the engine running acceptably in less time. I rarely use the 7747 4.3 calibrations as I've never liked the way GM tuned the throttle follower, especially on manual transmission versions. I've never figured out why but GM would keep the IAC valve open for a longer period of time after the throttle was closed, say during a shift or a deceleration. I've never liked it, though, and I've found it's usually easier to start with a V8 cal than try to work out all the changes in the V6 cal to make it behave.

Many people have commented on the number of different code masks for the same ecm, or even the number of different ecms. I've also thought it strange. There must have been a lot of parallel development work going on in GM land back then. Once upon a time General Motors / AC Delco was the world's largest producer of chips. It probably cost them less to build an ecm for a specific application than we imagine.

[doc65]

1project2many,

First, I love the handle, mine should probably be like "10"prjs2many. I will keep in mind the 454 cal. As I'm converting it to an EEPROM it shouldn't be too tough or expensive to try either/both the 454 & 4.3 cals, while tuning for driveabillity. You wouldn't by chance still have a copy of one of the 258 .bins that you adjusted from a 454 cal? Alternately other than the obvious "Number of Cylinders" parameter what did you need to change? I'm sure there were lots of small changes while tuning, but what were the main ones I guess is what I'm asking. I of course understand that EVERY individual engine is different, and can be individually tuned for best individual performance/driveability, but you would really think that from a 4.3 to a 4.2 would be closer, though the 4.2 gets it's displacement from a longer stroke & smaller bore than the 4.3.

[PJG1173]

I am courious too on why the 454. I may be helping a buddy do this to his 258 in the future.

[EagleMark]

Nice work Mark!

Here is a thread I did somewhere else http://coloradok5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=275801, it's almost a mouse click by mouse click tutorial for the TunerPro beginner.

dave w

Thanks!

If they are not a paid member CK5 they can not acess that forum. Need to cut and paste it here...

[EagleMark]

The 454 engine design, specifically head combustion chamber was closer to an old 258 Jeep/AMC motor so with some cylinder number change and a BPW change it is closer to begin with. Newer engines had different head design and flow character...

Automatic and manual trans bin files are very different. If you have a manual start with manual bin same for auto. The throttle follower on deceleration is to ease throttle plates from snapping back causing high emissions, side effect was easier shifting, getting that point where easier shifting is good and a little less pollutants is a good thing. But they obviously went to far with the 4.3L talked about above? Or that engine needed it to pass emissions? Or maybe it worked fine on that engine but does not translate well to conversions?

I know for a fact that GM had many divisions/departments working on ECM at that time period and communication between them was not that good. This was also infancy years of EFI. In the end one guy had to put together all the little projects and pass drivability and emissions tests. Look at $42 and some others that had 2 VE tables that add up to over 100? But in code it clearly states it will be truncated to 100%. It was missed because these cells were in PE area...
Actually scaled to 256 not 100% because there are only 256 parts available and computers count 0 as 1 so 255 is the high number, thanks to Robert Saar for this info.

[doc65]

Mark,

Just a side note, but I was able to read through MOST of that post that Dave referenced even as a complete NON member there, what I couldn't do was open some of the files that you & he posted. I tried registering then found that I still couldn't without paying. Which I'm not against in a few cases, but I have visited way too many sites during the research phase of this conversion to be able to pay every site for the bits of information I may glean from their content.

[dave w]

Mark,

Just a side note, but I was able to read through MOST of that post that Dave referenced even as a complete NON member there, what I couldn't do was open some of the files that you & he posted. I tried registering then found that I still couldn't without paying. Which I'm not against in a few cases, but I have visited way too many sites during the research phase of this conversion to be able to pay every site for the bits of information I may glean from their content.

At the time I posted the TunerPro tutorial, the files were placed in "Program Files". With TunerPro V5, the files are now placed in "My Documents".

dave w

[doc65]

Dave,

I understand that portion of where TunerPro puts it's files(the ACTUAL path changes even more with Win7, but you can still get to them that way do to sim-links in place), and that's no issue(I do network support for a living) I was referencing a few links that you & Mark had included in your postings to that thread that refer to files that were hosted somewhere on the CK5 site that is inaccessible except to paid members not just registered members.

[EagleMark]

Then I don't think your missing much, it was a tutorial on how to install TunerPro and get going. If the install is not an issue then all you need to do is learn file names, get correct files for your ECM, have a cable to record data and then start to learn to tune. You won't find it hard with your knowledge and support given here.

fasteddi started from scratch and has since changed his mask ID and added a turbo and is tuning that sucessfully in a month or so, while still having a job, family and replacing a head gasket! He has a 14 page thread going here about his entire process.

[dave w]

Try this link: ftp://ftp.diy-efi.org/pub/gmecm/bin_lib/

dave w

[1project2many]

but you would really think that from a 4.3 to a 4.2 would be closer, though the 4.2 gets it's displacement from a longer stroke & smaller bore than the 4.3.

Well, I have done this before. :) There are a lot of differences between the engines. 4.3 had swirl port heads for turbulence, small plenum aluminum intake with coolant heating under nearly the entire manifold to reduce puddling, and more efficient combustion chambers. Remember that the 4.3 had to pass emissions in automobiles while the 7.4 only had to make it through one ton truck tests, less stringent that 1986 passenger car standards. Look at the main timing map in the 7.4 cals and you'll see curves much closer to old distributor based curves. The difference between max and min timing is far less than the 4.3 cals exhibit. The change in timing due to temperature is greater on the cold end, typical for older chambers with poor burn characteristics. And some of the cals won't go into closed loop until engine temp is nearly 190 to ensure the O2 readings are accurate. If you have a hex editor or if Tunerpro has a way to compare .bin files, you should look at how different the 4.3 cal is from the 454 and even the smallblock 350. I mean, if the 4.2 should be close to the 4.3, the 5.7 should be exactly the same considering it has the same bore and stroke.

I have a couple of cals I'll upload from a Jeep engine. One is from a well known EFI conversion company, the other is mine. The engine was not stock so VE and timing might not be completely appropriate but I'll freely donate it.


Mark, the throttle follower is simply an adjustment to IAC position. The throttle plates still snap closed, but IAC hangs open for a while afterward. You couldn't shift quickly with the truck trannies as the rpm was too high during this period and the synchros wouldn'tallow it.

[doc65]

that link works, but I was thinking that it was a couple spreadsheets(Excel) files that you were useing to adjust fuel tables as i remember it taht I was trying to get to & CK5 wouldn't let me. Thanks again

[doc65]

1project2many,

Thanks, I'll take whatever I can get to start at this point, I do find that doing the comparisons is a handy tool. Heck even a stock non-tuned 4.3 has to run better than the Carter BBD "Computer" controlled carb that's currently on this one. I know when I went to a Motorcraft 2150 on the other Eagle it got much better idle, power etc. just looking to do better yet.

[RobertISaar]

ugh, CCCs are the devil. at least updating to TBI is relatively easy on a carb/CCC application. personally, i'm a MPFI(and not necessarily SFI) guy, but i know that for a lot of applications, that's just simply not feasible for most people.