• Hello Guest, welcome to the initial stages of our new platform!
    You can find some additional information about where we are in the process of migrating the board and setting up our new software here

    Thank you for being a part of our community!

Fuel/Spark tuning for LH 2.4/EZK with TunerPro!

beepee said:
I have changed between a 5xx ECU and a 9xx ECU several times and kept the same EZK, chip and all.

If someone wants to help me building a compatibility matrix specifying which BINs will work on which ECUs, I will add it to the OP. I made a table:

ecu_compat.PNG


Y - Runs - BIN is capable of running the car, even poorly. Tuning may be necessary.
P - Primes - BIN primes fuel pump at key-on, but cannot be made to start easily
X - Incompatible - BIN does not initialize, prime fuel pump, no signs of life, odd relay clicking or other weirdness.

Please report on which combinations you have tried; I will add the updated table to the OP.
Click to expand...

This is quite excellent - I will swap and adjust and report my findings - cheers!
 
Well, I ran the 935 software on my 951 and it would run, but basically the cold start wasn't happy(under 40 degrees F). I think it could be made to work and was fine when already warmed up.
 
klr142 said:
Well, I ran the 935 software on my 951 and it would run, but basically the cold start wasn't happy(under 40 degrees F). I think it could be made to work and was fine when already warmed up.
Click to expand...

Updated img. Thanks! Let's get a few more and I'll stick it in the OP. I don't want to right now because it's rather empty and might be discouraging :-(
 
lol, discouraging that you can't swap around 20 different 'versions' of the software on 20 different ecu's? ;)
 
linuxman51 said:
lol, discouraging that you can't swap around 20 different 'versions' of the software on 20 different ecu's? ;)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know, don't get me started. Everyone wants to work on their own BIN, on their own ECU, which is great, but it's a pain in the ass to update these XDFs. Which is why they are inconsistent. So...... yeah.
 
if my car wasn't dead in my work parking lot I'd do otherwise.

can I load the bin for a 208 ezk and burn this to a chip and install this in any chippable ezk?

gosh trying to find my stock ecu chip now oh why did I not label these things??
 
beepee said:
If someone wants to help me building a compatibility matrix specifying which BINs will work on which ECUs, I will add it to the OP. I made a table:

ecu_compat.PNG


Y - Runs - BIN is capable of running the car, even poorly. Tuning may be necessary.
P - Primes - BIN primes fuel pump at key-on, but cannot be made to start easily
X - Incompatible - BIN does not initialize, prime fuel pump, no signs of life, odd relay clicking or other weirdness.

Please report on which combinations you have tried; I will add the updated table to the OP.
Click to expand...


Any of this ECUs: 984,980,977,967,962,954,939,937,935
will work with these binarys: 967,962,954,939,937,935

They are all interchangeable without adjustments, just give them a few miles to adapt properly. I've tested most of this combinations years ago.
 
Last edited:
stoni said:
Any of this ECUs: 984,980,977,967,962,954,939,937,935
will work with these binarys: 967,962,954,939,937,935

They are all interchangeable without adjustments, just give them a few miles to adapt properly. I've tested most of this combinations years ago.
Click to expand...

Huge Info, thanks!

Updated chart.
 
beepee said:
It means lots in the future. Probably most important for folks would be datalogging.

Less important for everyone, more important for me would be the ability to poke around in RAM and see how things are working.

Of course, I think my cheap USB to KKL cable has sh!t the bed. I DID have it working though, was getting output from ipdown's debug code (really, just a consistent '!' character), but as I was going to make changes to the code and have it output a RAM value, it stopped working....

If you have multiple USB devices in a car, attached to different things, the potential ground loop scenarios become numerous. Nothing like plugging in something only to have your car stall out AND your laptop power off :freak: Fortunately everything seems fine... but ugh.

The upside is that I am pretty close to having a LH2.4 diag button/LED doohicky installed in my glovebox.

But !@#!@# I was so excited to dump some RAM. :grrr:

Just ordered another cheap KKL cable... hopefully it's just the cable.
Click to expand...

Cool, nice to hear you have got it to work :cool:
You can try this simpler code, you just send RAM address and receive it's content back:

JBC RI, RECEIVE
SJMP EXIT
RECEIVE:
MOV R1, SBUF
CLR RI
MOV A, @R1
MOV SBUF, A
WAIT_TI:
JNB TI, WAIT_TI
CLR TI
WAIT_RI:
JNB RI, WAIT_RI
MOV A, SBUF
CLR RI
EXIT:


It is basically the same as LH own builtin diag code, except it have an additional read to discard the echo. I used this very code to read all the RAM live. I can send you a win32 program to read and visualize the RAM, you just have to adjust the proper COM port for yourself and to recompile it (old Visual C++ 6). Or, if it's easier for you just tell me what COM number has your KKL and I will precompile it for you..
 
ipdown said:
Cool, nice to hear you have got it to work :cool:
You can try this simpler code, you just send RAM address and receive it's content back:

JBC RI, RECEIVE
SJMP EXIT
RECEIVE:
MOV R1, SBUF
CLR RI
MOV A, @R1
MOV SBUF, A
WAIT_TI:
JNB TI, WAIT_TI
CLR TI
WAIT_RI:
JNB RI, WAIT_RI
MOV A, SBUF
CLR RI
EXIT:


It is basically the same as LH own builtin diag code, except it have an additional read to discard the echo. I used this very code to read all the RAM live. I can send you a win32 program to read and visualize the RAM, you just have to adjust the proper COM port for yourself and to recompile it (old Visual C++ 6). Or, if it's easier for you just tell me what COM number has your KKL and I will precompile it for you..
Click to expand...

Yes please :bouncy:, I have VC6 so I'll recomplie for the COM port I need (it's on my laptop and changes constantly, ugh)...
 
beepee said:
Yeah, I know, don't get me started. Everyone wants to work on their own BIN, on their own ECU, which is great, but it's a pain in the ass to update these XDFs. Which is why they are inconsistent. So...... yeah.
Click to expand...

If the people in this thread can afford an ostrich, they can afford to go to the junkyard and get version XXX ecu.

One standardized ECU = win.
 
yeah, that makes the most sense. that's what basically happened in the evo world, there were about 5 different versions of firmware for the evo8 ecu, and tephra consolidated it to one common rom that would work on all of them.
 
well the junkyard here charges more than just going to car another used car. :grrr: (thus I now own 3)

My stock 16vna 928 ecu started but really didn't like something (37lbs injectors maybe?) would barely idle running full rich. Ugh parking computer swap is no fun - oh and now its all covered in snow - super.
 
leave it floating around in the floorboard until you get it sorted out, makes for really fast ecu swaps.
 
oh yes panel is removed ecu just there - I've not had the cover under the steering wheel on for some time either.

so if one were to pick a new 9xx ECU which one?
 
development should focus on the latest most compatible software version, so I would say... 967 yea?
 
linuxman51 said:
yeah, that makes the most sense. that's what basically happened in the evo world, there were about 5 different versions of firmware for the evo8 ecu, and tephra consolidated it to one common rom that would work on all of them.
Click to expand...

My current dilemma is that the 937 is the most tested (chips), the 950 is the most hacked (asm source!) and the 987 is what some folks seem to think is 'better'.... so at this point i'm just kinda :e-shrug:

I've got the 950 bin running on my car, it runs well, there are still a few quirks... but with the hacking that has been going on I am confident that the 950 bin will probably work for everyone soon.

At this point, I am unofficially abandoning everything but the 937 and the 950 bin. IMHO, If you really want to hack with LH, you won't mind getting your feet wet copying some tables over to a different bin. If someone can PROVE that there is something just plan better about another version (I'm looking at the 987 folks) then maybe I will reconsider. TLOA made more power with a 937 bin then lots of us will ever make, so I think that software is moot.

And MrBill's point about the cost of an Ostrich vs. a boneyard ECU stands as well!
 
linuxman51 said:
development should focus on the latest most compatible software version, so I would say... 967 yea?
Click to expand...

Heading out to the car this afternoon to fil in some of the blanks, at least for the 967. I am fairly certain that when the matrix is mostly done it will be overwhelmingly 'Y'....
 
MrBill said:
If the people in this thread can afford an ostrich, they can afford to go to the junkyard and get version XXX ecu.

One standardized ECU = win.
Click to expand...

It's not that complicated!

I can assure you that if you use the 'right' bin its not a problem at all.

I'm using a 967 bin for testing and i have a 937, 962, 977 and 984 ECU, this 967 bin acts in every ECU in the same way. Why i use just the 967 bin? Because it's the last bin without the immobilizer software in it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top