Mustang and Ford Performance Forums banner

1 - 20 of 41 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I'm posting this here because I was given approval by Eric Brooks.

Two of the three threads that started it all:

http://www.f150online.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=120980

http://www.f150online.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=121448

Here's one of my posts in a closed thread.

This MADNESS must stop NOW before it does irreparable harm to someone and/or their vehicle!

I'm hoping this post will allow more "real" experts, such as Mike Wesley, Patrick Stadjel, Brian Herron, etc., to step in and state the obvious, without them getting degraded as being some greedy, worried, money driven company. If any of you mentioned, or any "etc." would be so kind to do so, it would be beneficial to do such for obvious reasons. And hopefully the forums here will allow the "experts" to post without banning them for not being a supporting vendor (F150Online.com needs to remember that most of these individuals mentioned are actually the manufacturers of tuning equipment and software of the Supporting Vendors here).

Kevin, and any "Team Re-Flash" cronies, do NOT post in this thread if you have nothing else to do but attack, and give false, untruthful information based on perceptions, or from rumored fallacies given to you from what a so called "insider", or BOP, states.

Doug, I ask that you PLEASE remove any BS from this post as it occurs, if you're able. If factual, truthful, backed up and brought to the table info. can't be given, it doesn't need to be on here.
Edit: I took out the references to the book, as it wasn't allowing the real reasoning that this post was made. Please read the above two links instead.
 

·
Snake Charmer
Joined
·
2,830 Posts
No offense but that book is the biggest waste of $$$ I have seen. Sure it gives some specs on communication protocols, some basic logistical layout of how the PCM operates but aside from that it tells you virtually nothing of paramaters or any real details of any worth to anyone. The book is anything but "indepth" if you ask me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 · (Edited)
Regardless, for the masses it will cover what they need to know. Look, let's forget the whole book thing when it comes ultimately to the flash versus chip debate (I took out the references to it). I just posted that as it led up from all the other threads/posts.

The main thing here is that Team BOP Re-Flash swears that a flash will allow the unthinkable. Tuning is tuning, whether it's done with a flash or a chip; they both do the SAME thing ultimately.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Since I've seen my name (and company name) brought up in these threads.. figure time to say something.
What I think is being confused here is what exactly a chip does and what exactly a re-FLASH does.
We have been doing chips since 1989 and re-FLASH since about 1998 (allthough we haven't released re-FLASH capability yet).
A rev limiter changed in a chip is at the exact same address as it would be in a re-FLASH. A Chip is not 'fooling' anything like someone mentioned. A chip is just a differnt method to present the data to the CPU vs re-writing the internal FLASH memory.
There are control signlas on the 'chip connector' that tell the PCM to 'go here' or 'go here' to get your data depending on the state of the signals. If you load a chip with a stock program, re-FLASH a PCM with a stock program.. instruction for instruction, data byte for data byte they will be 100% identical. Only difference is WHERE the data is coming from (offboard vs onboard).
What Mark is offerering is a re-FLASH containing a new calibration. I don't think it's a new strategy (but possible). It's the calibration that determines how a particular strategy will run.
Ford (and thier other calibration houses) can and do make mistakes in the calibrations. 99 Cobra is one example (and no.. I had nothing to do with the fix.. if I did, it would be worth more than 5HP they got).
Forgetting to turn on the knock sensors in the Gen 2 Lightnings was another mistake (maybe on purpose) a Ford calibration house made (among others).
When Ford or thier calibration subs develop a calibration.. they have to be ultra conservative since they have no idea where the vehicle will end up, what fuel will be used, etc. That leave alot of room for aftermarket 'calibrators' to go in and make changes.
We all have access to the same data in the PCM's (chip'ed or FLASH'ed.. doesn't matter). It's what you do with the data that can make the difference. As long as the strategy is the same, each calibrator(tuner) has the same basic thigns to work with. There is nothing added, or removed.. only changed data. Well.. you can patch the code I guess... but I haven't seen anyone do that yet. You can assemble 4 calibrators(tuners) and they will all do thigns differently to get the same end result.
I have my way, you have your way, he has his way.

As for the "this vs that" debate.. buy what you feel comfortable with. Either way you should be happy with your purchase.

Mike Wesley - AutoLogic
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Mike,

I have an autologic chip and have experienced what I am lead to believe anyway,
is Radio Interference with my 2 way flip chip....

It came with approximately 6" of lead which was pulled through the dash to a location near the driver right knee...

The Company I bought the chip from informed me that yes RF was a problem and recommmened cutting the lead back and jumping the wires so only one program was accessed....

Is this the only fix....

Please comment.

Thanks....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Only additions .....

Radar detector....Bell

Amp under the seat and aftermarket speakers....in factory holes along with a Thunderform behind the seat with 2 10" subs...MTX amp....
Forgot the 1" tweeters and cross overs mounted in the upper front door panels...
Mike,
The lead is 6 feet ...not 6 inches

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Twisted, have you thought of trying it with the wire and switch in the glove box? I don't buy the RF scenario.
 

·
Snake Charmer
Joined
·
2,830 Posts
Mike Wesley said:
A rev limiter changed in a chip is at the exact same address as it would be in a re-FLASH. A Chip is not 'fooling' anything like someone mentioned. A chip is just a differnt method to present the data to the CPU vs re-writing the internal FLASH memory.
There are control signlas on the 'chip connector' that tell the PCM to 'go here' or 'go here' to get your data depending on the state of the signals. If you load a chip with a stock program, re-FLASH a PCM with a stock program.. instruction for instruction, data byte for data byte they will be 100% identical. Only difference is WHERE the data is coming from (offboard vs onboard).
This is exactly what I had thought to be correct myself, but there is so much misinformation on the subject I wasnt going to argue it.

Gen2 Lightning, I would give the book a 5 out of 10, it had some decent basic info in it but that was it, it certainly wasnt worth $50 but thats just my opinion. I would consider it "light" reading in an area as complex as tuning.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,888 Posts
Mike,

Thanks for the interesting and informative post. So basically, ROM is ROM whether it's an internal chip that is being flashed or an external chip that is added.

What about the single vs. 4-bank architecture? Is there really any benefit to modifying functions in those 3d and 4th banks?

Anyway, thanks for the time!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Hammer you hit the nail on the head. The only difference is the calibration data. From seeing the enthusiasm some people have for what Mark is doing, sounds like it may be a good calibration. I really don't know as I haven't seen it.

Remember, calibration data isn't always fuel tables and spark tables, rev limiters and such. There is data in there that tells the control program what to do with the data. There may be something that tells the EEC "only use this table when this inputs is between HERE and HERE". You can go in and widen/narrow the here-here data and make the thing work quite differently.


1 bank vs 4 bank.
We currently only tell the EEC to access our chips when the EEC is working in the 'calibration' bank. This bank normally only holds calibration data which is 100% legal to modify and distribute (I.E. sell).
The other 3 banks can potentially have calibration data in them but are mainly program code banks. Technically it's not legal to distribute (I.E. sell) copies of Ford's program. Sort of like going to computer store, buying Windows 2000 CD, a CD writer and a box of blanks. Then going home and making copies to sell on Ebay.
Will MS go after you? Maybe, maybe not. Will Ford go after the others doing 4 bank chips? Maybe, maybe not. Since I've been in the hot seat before, I don't want to take the chance. The fines have a maximum of $10,000 per chip sold... scary stuff.

Anyway.. sometimes there is 'good' stuff located in the other banks. There is usually a way around everything.

About the book that Ivan Kotzig wrote. Ivan gave me a copy of it and I think it is a very very good book for it's intended purpose.
I think alot of people thought it was going to be "How to make chips(re-FLASH boxes) and start your own chip (re-FLASH) biz" and were disappointed when they found out it wasn't.
What is contained in the book is very well written and gives a good understanding of what is involved in what some of us do.
 

·
Snake Charmer
Joined
·
2,830 Posts
Mike Wesley said:
About the book that Ivan Kotzig wrote. Ivan gave me a copy of it and I think it is a very very good book for it's intended purpose.
I think alot of people thought it was going to be "How to make chips(re-FLASH boxes) and start your own chip (re-FLASH) biz" and were disappointed when they found out it wasn't.
What is contained in the book is very well written and gives a good understanding of what is involved in what some of us do.
I would say thats a very accurate inturpretation. When someone puts out a book called "tuning secrets" I actually expected some nuts and bolts type talk. More details on parameters and more indepth tuning talk but that is not what I got. It covers details such as the interface, memory interleaving, bus width and jargin associated with the ODBII system in general but actually doesnt really get into tunning at all which I guess is why I was so dissapointed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
Mike, I have a few questions for you and I'll pose them in different ways so there is no missunderstanding, hopefully.

Other things being equal, is a chip able to adapt, at WOT, to varying weather conditions or additional amounts of airflow (for instance from running more boost) and still reach the same A/F ratio as was measured in the original tune with the chip - with no additional tuning of the chip taking place?

Or to put the question another way, can you add additional boost to a motor that is tuned a certain way with a chip and still reach the same A/F ratio without retuning the chip - assuming that weather and other factors remain the same?

If a motor is being run in 90 degree weather with a certain tune from a chip, and then run in 50 degree weather with the exact same setup - is the A/F ratio going to be the same? i.e., is the chip able to adapt to the conditions or different airflow requirements at WOT automatically?

Thanks.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
Jim,
To answer your questions,
yes, yes and yes.. BUT...
It depends on how it was initially calibrated.
As an example, the 90-50 degree weather question..
If you tuned the truck on a 90 deg day and only changed things associated with how it wants to run on that day, and do not make changes to the colder (or even hotter) temps. There is the possibility that A/F can change on a temp change.
Let's use some fictitious data. Imagine there is a table full of multipliers on A/F ratio. X axis of this table is RPM, Y axis is outside air temp. It's 90 deg outside and your tuning A/F ratio by changing the data in the table for the 90 deg row and seeing results like you want. Let's say you needed to fatten it up by 30% to get a nice A/F ratio. Ok, truck is making good power, A/F is safe.. ship it.
I'd say your not done tuning at this point. If you had to fatten it up 30% on a hot day.. think about what is goign to happen on a cold day. Going to be lean. Now if you go back and tune the colder (and hotter) temps.. the A/F shoudl remain constant (or damn close to it) no matter what the air temp is.

Hopefully that answers your question.. if not.. please let me know
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
Mike Wesley said:
Jim,
To answer your questions,
yes, yes and yes.. BUT...
It depends on how it was initially calibrated.
As an example, the 90-50 degree weather question..
If you tuned the truck on a 90 deg day and only changed things associated with how it wants to run on that day, and do not make changes to the colder (or even hotter) temps. There is the possibility that A/F can change on a temp change.
Let's use some fictitious data. Imagine there is a table full of multipliers on A/F ratio. X axis of this table is RPM, Y axis is outside air temp. It's 90 deg outside and your tuning A/F ratio by changing the data in the table for the 90 deg row and seeing results like you want. Let's say you needed to fatten it up by 30% to get a nice A/F ratio. Ok, truck is making good power, A/F is safe.. ship it.
I'd say your not done tuning at this point. If you had to fatten it up 30% on a hot day.. think about what is goign to happen on a cold day. Going to be lean. Now if you go back and tune the colder (and hotter) temps.. the A/F shoudl remain constant (or damn close to it) no matter what the air temp is.

Hopefully that answers your question.. if not.. please let me know
Mike, how does the chip automatically adjust to the increased air density of cooler temps and/or increased airflow and still hit the same A/F ratio at WOT - without requiring a retune?

Which sensors are involved?

Thanks.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
207 Posts
jmimac351 said:
Mike, how does the chip automatically adjust to the increased air density of cooler temps and/or increased airflow and still hit the same A/F ratio at WOT - without requiring a retune?

Which sensors are involved?

Thanks.

Jim
Not mike, but the MAF sensor and the IAT sensors help the computer out with changes to air density, flow, etc...Thats the whole reason why street cars now run on Mass Air versus old speed density style...A MAF can accomodate changes in air mush easier than a speed density setup can IMHO...I'm sure Mike will elaborate more on this

Jeff
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
BlackCobra99Va said:
Not mike, but the MAF sensor and the IAT sensors help the computer out with changes to air density, flow, etc...Thats the whole reason why street cars now run on Mass Air versus old speed density style...A MAF can accomodate changes in air mush easier than a speed density setup can IMHO...I'm sure Mike will elaborate more on this

Jeff
Jeff, my understanding is that it does do that at part throttle, but not WOT. Hence the reason for my question to Mike.

Mike, can you clarify wether a chip can automatically adjust to the increased air density of cooler temps and/or increased airflow and still hit the same A/F ratio at WOT - without requiring a retune?

Thanks.

Jim
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
jmimac351 said:
Jeff, my understanding is that it does do that at part throttle, but not WOT. Hence the reason for my question to Mike.

Mike, can you clarify wether a chip can automatically adjust to the increased air density of cooler temps and/or increased airflow and still hit the same A/F ratio at WOT - without requiring a retune?

Thanks.

Jim
The part throttle/WOT difference is usually a closed loop/open loop control one. The only sensor a car has to measure to final combustion quality is the O2 sensor. Hence, that is known as closed loop operation, when the car is reading the O2 and correcting to 14.7 AF, also known as stoichiometric ratio. It provides the lowest emissions and best mileage, but it's only good for about up to 60-70% throttle. Beyond that and it becomes too lean for the cylinder pressures. Thus the computer will go open loop at throttles above 70% and run only monitoring the MAF, IAT, and vacuum along with TPS and RPM and select data points off tables based on these inputs. However these are not feedback sensors like the O2. They only give measurements of input conditions not output. The computer always uses MAF,IAT and vacuum regardless of part throttle closed loop or WOT open loop. It's only the O2 that goes in and out of the equation. Now there is still rampant debate over the 96 impala SS PCM as to whether it stays closed loop through WOT. It is possible, but I believe O2 sensors are too innaccurate at non-14.7 AF to make this feasible and safe. Stick a wide band O2 in there and hell yeah tune closed loop from stop to top. That's the ultimate solution.

So in final, the external flash chips for the Cobra simply reroute the CPU to read its cal tables instead of the internal tables, and yes, that is exactly as effective as modifying the internal tables in the PCM. Now as stated above, if someone has the source code for the control program, then a whole new ballgame has opened up.
 
1 - 20 of 41 Posts
Top