Interesting viewpoint from WORKS on ecuflash and evoscan's capabilities here:

http://www.norcalevo.net/index.php?o...&topic=14025.0

Thoughts?

 

I've had a few conversations with some of the Works folks and have always been impressed with their friendliness and advice, but in that thread, it seems to me that either they don't understand that Evoscan uses the MUT-II protocol, or they are just trying to scare people away from it.

However, I'll say in their defense that people need to pay careful attention to knocksum values. While its clear to anyone who has used Evoscan and ECUFlash that the ECU pulls timing when the knock sum goes up, I think there are other things besides engine knock that can cause the knocksum to increase, especially on modified cars.

On a side note, does anyone know what differences there are between the MUT-II and MUT-III protocols? I would guess that they read the same data from the ECU but perhaps with a different language?

 

All I can say is if given the choice between a dynoflash and a works flash, I would tend towards big Al. At least he has learned off his experience with Evoscan.

Works? I don't know. I have my own issues with them.

 

What a load of horse****. The ROM image is only 512kb. There isn't room for "600+" maps.

That's the gayest thing since Richard Simmons. Last time I checked EVERYONE in the USA - including WORKS - who is modifying the Mitsu ECU code is doing so in violation of the DMCA, which has been around a lot longer than since 2006. The question is - Does anyone care and how enforceable is it? It sounds to me like this guy just got done watching an episode of Law and Order: Little Boytoucher Unit and wanted to play lawyer.

 

whew... that was some good entertainment.

 

I'll stick with Al...he knows his evos

 

Its pretty bad when you lose your buisness to Al, I think that is an all time low. LOL

 

that's like losing your babysitting business to michael jackson

 

I can see that works is going to lose a lot of business for being a bit ignorant. I would really stay away from their rhetoric...Edit: and definitely stay away from a works flash…

 

OMG YOU WIN HAHAHAHA GAME OVER GG HAHAHHAHAA

 

I have just completely lost respect for Works.. That has to be one of the most ignorant posts I've ever read..

Yes, there are quite a few maps in the stock Roms, but not 600, I have found about 120 data segments, and a quite a few individual parameters.. I suppose in total every hard-coded value in the Rom can be considered a table, if that was the case then Its possible there are 600 of them.. Are all of them of value? Not really.. Do the open-source guys know what all of them are.. Hell no.. Does works, I'm sure they don't..

The MUT protocol is a standard logging protocol.. The only real difference between the MUT-II and MUT-III tool is one is a handheld and the other is laptop based, the diagnostic protocol itself is not different.. The MUT-III tool just has more features to access the other devices that are capable of adjustment or diagnostics,.

And Evoscan is MOST CERTAINLY the same protocol used by the MUT diagnostic tool.. It was engineered from reading the diagnostic stream FROM one of those tools..

FWIW, The MUT-III is just a refurbished IBM T20 laptop, with a diagnostic MUT/OBD-II Cable module.. Its really nothing special, what is of value is the software, and documentation that comes on the laptop.. But its certainly not doing anything all that unique..

I'd bet money their so-called maps aren't anything more than the same changes anyone with ECUFlash can make, maybe a few additional undocumented maps.. I seriously doubt they have every one of those maps documented if there even are 600..

And if they are, and they are documented.. Then PROVE IT.. Don't just toss it out there but prove to me that you have all of this documented.. prove to EVERYONE that what your doing is any more unique than anyone else.

Are Works products good.. Well yeah, I've always felt that they had good products, but more pricey than I felt was worthwhile..


I didn't see the reverse engineering/copyright thing in that thread, but if they dropped the IP-Bomb, they have to really check themselves first.. Unless the roms they offer are 100% a creation of their own, they are technically breaking the law too..


I really doubt anyone doing reflashes is using tools that are all that different than what we already have available..

 

As far as I know, the diagnostic "RequestID" portions of the MUT protocol are the same ones everything uses.. Its the standard tool used by all mitsubishis..
If there are differences, I would suspect they are outside of the realm of data logging..

I do think that they are confusing Evoscan with an OBD-II logger though.. though its possible that the MUT-III diagnostic tool has a hook to the shared memory, nobody has found evidence of that..

As for the data being innacurate.. Well, you get 1 byte to represent a value that can range from 0-9000rpm, or 0-1608hz, etc..

Is there another protocol called MUT-III stuffed into the ECU? Well, there's enough of us looking at it, that if it is, it will be found.. But I doubt its anything more than a superset of the existing MUT protocol.

 

I saw I was quoted in the other thread.. I guess I'll be making some new friends this week..

I realize my post was a bit harsh, and I know that reverse engineering isnt the hardest thing in the world to do.. But if they really did understand the ECU inside and out, then they really cannot say that this protocol isnt MUT..

If I could find a MUT tool to buy at an affordable price, I'd jump all over it.. But Its not really designed to do tuning, just reprogramming the ECU, diagnostic data, Immobilizer codes, etc..

http://www.mitsubi****echinfo.com/epacarb/MI05-808.pdf

$5000 for that......

 

Hey Jack, sorry to place you somewhere you might not want to be, but it angers me to see someone in a position of power (namely Works) spread misinformation about two tools I love ECUFlash and EVOScan.

 

oh jan.... he deleted what i said earlier in defense of jack.....