93 S10 Reading Jet Chips

[donf]

I have a friend that has a 1993 S10 4.3 he wants to do some work on. He already has a Jet stage 2 chip #29312-S. I know I told him he wasted his money. Just for kicks I was going to read it, but it's not going so hot. I am guessing its an $E6 mask. ECM number is 16168625 BCFZ. The jet chip is #29312-S and uses a read only 27C512. I did not change any addressing from my 27SF512 chips as I can't find any information for the 27C512 either way. I read the chip but its numbers are not correct when viewed in Tuner Pro using the latest $E6 XDF. Any ideas? I read a $0D Jet chip easy when working on my G30 van a few years ago, but this time getting usable information is giving me fits. Notch direction is correct. I am using a Burn2 with Moates Read Utility in TunerPro.

As a test I read a stock $0D chip from my van just to make sure I haven't forgotten something about the process. All went well. Maybe the 4.3 Jet Chip was just corrupted. Not a big deal either way.

[In-Tech]

Using your favorite hex editor, scroll down to line 4000, 4006,7 contains the checksum calculated from 4008-FFFF. 4008 is the program id(or whatever you want to call it).

0D program id at address 4008
00004000 1FD1 0000 0000 A49D 0D01 E10C 93A4 0008 ................

31 program id at address 4008
00004000 2517 0000 0000 7E41 3101 9104 B782 0310 %.....~A1.......

[donf]

Thanks for the tip, the line 4000 from the Jet chips says

0e06 5c56 020e 000e 0478 300e 5e4e 025e

For a sanity check I looked at the $0D bin I pulled today and there was not even 4000 lines. 366 is its last line in Sublime text editor. To double check this I opened up another $OD bin I downloaded here BYJN and it was 366 lines. The owner had taken the jet chip out for some reason and is currently running the stock one. I will pull the info from it tomorrow and see if it makes more sense. Its entirely possible from looking at the data that the chip is corrupted. Not sure though.

[In-Tech]

Hiya,
The file for a 27512 chip should be 64k in size. It doesn't sound like it is being read correctly. Are you using a burn2?

[In-Tech]

Here is a standalone version of burn2. You will have to rename it Burn2.rar as it is not really a .zip file and this website won't let us upload .rar files.

Read the chip using 27c512.

[donf]

Thanks, yes all the files are 64K. I did read the Jet chip using the 27c512 settings in moates software. Not really sure what is going on. Since it's the Jet chip and not the original that is not reading correctly, I will wait and see what the original prom reads like tomorrow.

64k.jpg

[c5wagner]

upload the bin.

[donf]

Thanks for the feedback. I think posting modified bins here publicly is a no go. I saw a moderator post that, I did not know and have been guilty of the same. In this case it may not matter as its not functional. I really am not worried about it, its more curious about why its not reading correct rather than a need. As long as his original chip reads fine this morning we have a good starting point.

Here are the settings I used to read the chip. I think these are correct for a 64k bin on 27c512. Even after reading the chip again this morning the basics are not even remotely correct. The whole spark table shows -1.4 degrees timing with a few variations. The owner of the truck did stop using the jet chip on his own and put the factory one back in.

Moates-Settings.jpg

[donf]

The factory prom reads perfect. So the Jet chip must be corrupted. I ask the owner if he disconnected the battery before removing the chip. He did not know, so I suspect some type of spike corrupted the chip. Thanks again for the help.

[In-Tech]

Good news. Oh, just fyi, the factory chip isn't a read-only. It's just that the moates burn2 can't program it so he calls it read-only.
-Carl

[donf]

The updated chip is working better. One more problem on the $E6 adx it says

For data logging "Knock Retard" instead of "Battery Voltage". The bin must be change at L51FE to support this.

Crud, that explains why the constant, unwavering 24 degrees of knock retard when logging. ALDLDroid must have used the same file as its showing the same. Lots of "borrowing" between these software programs.
This is mentioned several times before, but the reponses all seem to be saying just ignore it. If I actually wanted to make the knock retard useful how do I find L51FE? It does say

To data log “Knock Retard” instead of “Battery Voltage”; change the value at L51FE to $020F (Knock Retard). Stock value is $00A1 (Battery Voltage).

Found it, it's the last scalar in E6V5 xdf.

[In-Tech]

Hiya, I try to collect stock .bin files when I can. Would you mind posting the stock .bin and the broadcast code if you have it?

[donf]

Sure 1993 S10 4.3 4l60e BCFZ

[In-Tech]

Thanks, didn't have that one. There's the scan id at 4000,1 Scan id = 1651 = 0673h
-Carl

[donf]

The tune was pretty successful. We did a few logs on the street over the last few weekends to get the trucks street manners dialed in with the wideband. Its not a very wild build, just a rebuild 4.3 with a comp cam 260 @ 108lc and some shorty headers. The customer was particular, the biggest complaint was the very slight rough idle. When I explained that aftermarket cams usually do that, he wanted the idle speed raised to smooth it out. Lots of little stuff like that. Once it was all fixed up we put it on the dyno. Customers reading forums can be a hard thing. He read somewhere that 35 degrees was the ideal advance for max hp on the 4.3. We already had a smoothed and raised spark table but it was conservative, but I made a deal with him that we would do WOT runs and slowly raise the advance from that side of the spark table until power started to flatten or drop. It actually gained a lot, much more than I was expecting but we still never hit 35. Ha ha 27 from a starting point of 22 was where we ended up. The runs shown were changes to the main spark table only. The runs time wise, are from top to bottom. The first two runs were unchanged for a baseline. The second run HP drop was because I did not let the truck cool back down. From then on I watched the temp closely to make sure the data would not be skewed. This dyno does read lower than some. I cant control the calibration on others machines. Mine, I know is accurate. Its not so much the number but the difference you need to look at. We did not do a pull with the stock programming as that would be awful. The second to last run was over advanced so we went back to the previous settings. Notice the torque peak number is the same on both runs.

LAWRENCE.jpg

LAWRENCE3.jpg