need Evo 9 owner to test rear O2 *heater* sim patch
use either #59 or #267 to remove rear 02 heater CEL.
use #117 or watch this if you want safely pass the inspections.
use #117 or watch this if you want safely pass the inspections.
Thanks logic, you have just opened my eyes 
Thinking it over again, I believe we do not even have to patch any rom for heater CEL we just need a definition like one below.
96940011
mrfred, can you add them to the EcuFlash release?
Thinking it over again, I believe we do not even have to patch any rom for heater CEL we just need a definition like one below.
96940011
Code:
<table name="Heater CEL" category="Rear O2" address="2E6AC" type="2D" level="2" scaling="blobbits"> <table name="Bit values" type="Static Y Axis" flipy="true" elements="8"> <data>N/A</data> <data>N/A</data> <data>N/A</data> <data>N/A</data> <data>Rear O2 Heater CEL Enable</data> <data>N/A</data> <data>N/A</data> <data>N/A</data> </table> </table>
Just select the value, and press the "[" key. It's a little interface bug with EcuFlash, you can't actually edit bit values directly, you have to increment ("]") or decrement ("[") them instead.
Now how come when I apply both yours and acamus patch one doesn't effect the other? Is yours setting the test to pass and his just disabling the test all together?
Erm. You should only do one of the two. 
Mine disables the code in a rather crude way, while his makes it a simple toggle in EcuFlash; basically, if you apply mine, his toggle won't ever let you turn it back on again. I'd argue that his approach is much more reasonable.
I should probably just delete my entries at this point, in lieu of a post giving XML definitions for all ROMs like acamus did above for 96940011 and 88590015.
Mine disables the code in a rather crude way, while his makes it a simple toggle in EcuFlash; basically, if you apply mine, his toggle won't ever let you turn it back on again. I'd argue that his approach is much more reasonable.
I should probably just delete my entries at this point, in lieu of a post giving XML definitions for all ROMs like acamus did above for 96940011 and 88590015.
Erm. You should only do one of the two.
Mine disables the code in a rather crude way, while his makes it a simple toggle in EcuFlash; basically, if you apply mine, his toggle won't ever let you turn it back on again. I'd argue that his approach is much more reasonable.
I should probably just delete my entries at this point, in lieu of a post giving XML definitions for all ROMs like acamus did above for 96940011 and 88590015.
Mine disables the code in a rather crude way, while his makes it a simple toggle in EcuFlash; basically, if you apply mine, his toggle won't ever let you turn it back on again. I'd argue that his approach is much more reasonable.
I should probably just delete my entries at this point, in lieu of a post giving XML definitions for all ROMs like acamus did above for 96940011 and 88590015.
------
When using Acamus/logic's newer patch to just disable the check, does it continue to heat the O2 sensor if plugged in or does it skip the routine that activates the heater also?
Thanks!
Last edited by fostytou; Jul 22, 2009 at 12:04 PM.
Erm. You should only do one of the two.
Mine disables the code in a rather crude way, while his makes it a simple toggle in EcuFlash; basically, if you apply mine, his toggle won't ever let you turn it back on again. I'd argue that his approach is much more reasonable.
I should probably just delete my entries at this point, in lieu of a post giving XML definitions for all ROMs like acamus did above for 96940011 and 88590015.
Mine disables the code in a rather crude way, while his makes it a simple toggle in EcuFlash; basically, if you apply mine, his toggle won't ever let you turn it back on again. I'd argue that his approach is much more reasonable.
I should probably just delete my entries at this point, in lieu of a post giving XML definitions for all ROMs like acamus did above for 96940011 and 88590015.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 730
Likes: 3
From: Lattitude 48.38°, Longitude 17.58°, Altitude 146m = Slovakia, for common dude
Rear O2 has been removed, LC-1 installed in it's place. Applied the heater patch along with the rear 02 sim patch and went out for a brief drive. So far, no CE light. No periphery bits have been disabled and no resistors have been installed.
Tomorrow I'll be on the road for 6 hours so that'll be more than plenty of time for the ECU to run the checks.
After that, it's off to autozone to test and see what all the stock EVO8 readiness checks are before applying the force pass/readiness patch.
Thank you Logic, acamus, and Recompile!
Tomorrow I'll be on the road for 6 hours so that'll be more than plenty of time for the ECU to run the checks.
After that, it's off to autozone to test and see what all the stock EVO8 readiness checks are before applying the force pass/readiness patch.
Thank you Logic, acamus, and Recompile!
Last edited by Monochrome; Jul 23, 2009 at 07:01 PM.
Evolving Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
From: NorCal
use either #59 or #267 to remove rear 02 heater CEL.
use #117 or watch this if you want safely pass the inspections.
use #117 or watch this if you want safely pass the inspections.
Can someone explain the specific differences between Mr Fred's Heater sim (post #59) and the Acamus Heater mod (post #267)? Does Mr Fred's patch actually simulate the heater and Acamus' mod just disables the CEL? Thanks in advance.
Evolved Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 730
Likes: 3
From: Lattitude 48.38°, Longitude 17.58°, Altitude 146m = Slovakia, for common dude
The difference is that mrfreds patch is calling function that stores the CEL in case of rear O2 heater with the non-error values. Mine, skips storing of this value (error / non-error)
