As part of some work to help Oracle1 get SD up and running on his Evo 9.5, I have completed a byte-by-byte comparison between the 88570008 ROM ('05 JDM Evo 9) and the 80920002 ('07 JDM Evo 9.5) ROM, and with the exception of the immobilizer algorithm and a few tables (e.g. speed limit, rev limit, AFR, ...), the ROMs are identical. I have yet to look at other JDM/UK Evo 9 ROMs, but since the 88570008 is an early version and the 80920002 is the final version, there are definitely no features in the later JDM/UK Evo 9 ROMs that make them any more desirable than the 88570008, and thus the 88570008 can readily serve as a univeral JDM/UK Evo 9 ROM offering full engine control functionality to all the JDM/UK Evo 9s.

However, there may be one potential drawback to using the 88570008 for some people. I have found that the immobilizer algorithm in the 80920002 ROM is sufficiently different from the immobilizer alogorithm in the 88570008 that the only solution allowing an Evo 9.5 to run the 88570008 ROM is to disable the immobilizer. This situation may be true for other late model JDM/UK Evo 9s.

 

hmmm, never even considered switching to 8092, 8857 works fine for all my needs.

there are a couple tables i would like though:

1. Tephra's V7
2. Direct Boost

other than that i think all JDM IXs should run this map.

whats the major drawback of disabling the immobilizer?

 

I'm recommending the 88570008 as the universal JDM/UK Evo 9 ROM, not the 8092. tephra is the man for v7. I can do the direct boost, just not sure when I'll have time. The drawback of disabling the immobilizer is that its easier for someone to steal your car.

 

cool, valet mode solves the car stealing bit

 

+1 for 8857

 

If I think more....I would say that 8928 will be much better for this comparing with 8857.
Anyway 89280002 ROM is working with the 8857 2 byte addresses.
I know that there is a difference at immobilizer code and 8857 will not work on a GT ecu.

JB made some checks also about those two roms.
Here is a byte comparison for 88570008 to 89280002:

No. Address Original Version Change
1 F44 88 89 1 (0.70%)
2 F45 57 28 -2F (-54.00%)
3 F46 88 89 1 (0.70%)
4 F47 57 28 -2F (-54.00%)
5 F48 88 89 1 (0.70%)
6 F49 57 28 -2F (-54.00%)
7 F4A 88 89 1 (0.70%)
8 F4B 57 28 -2F (-54.00%)
9 F4C 88 89 1 (0.70%)
10 F4D 57 28 -2F (-54.00%)
11 F4E 88 89 1 (0.70%)
12 F4F 57 28 -2F (-54.00%)
13 F50 88 89 1 (0.70%)
14 F51 57 28 -2F (-54.00%)
15 F52 88 89 1 (0.70%)
16 F53 57 28 -2F (-54.00%)
17 F55 8 2 -6 (-75.00%)
18 F6D 1 76 75 (999.00%)
19 F71 1 76 75 (999.00%)
20 F75 1 76 75 (999.00%)
21 F79 1 76 75 (999.00%)
22 F7D 1 76 75 (999.00%)
23 F81 1 76 75 (999.00%)
24 F85 1 76 75 (999.00%)
25 F89 1 76 75 (999.00%)
26 FFB 66 73 D (12.70%)
27 FFD 66 73 D (12.70%)
28 FFF 66 73 D (12.70%)
29 1001 66 73 D (12.70%)
30 1003 66 73 D (12.70%)
31 1005 66 73 D (12.70%)
32 1007 66 73 D (12.70%)
33 1009 66 73 D (12.70%)
34 38C9 64 76 12 (18.00%)
35 38CA 40 46 6 (9.30%)
36 38CB 30 3C C (25.00%)
37 38CC 44 54 10 (23.50%)
38 390B 64 76 12 (18.00%)
39 390C 40 46 6 (9.30%)
40 390D 30 3C C (25.00%)
41 390E 44 54 10 (23.50%)
42 3937 64 76 12 (18.00%)
43 3938 40 46 6 (9.30%)
44 3939 30 3C C (25.00%)
45 393A 44 54 10 (23.50%)
46 394D D8 E0 8 (3.70%)
47 394E D8 E0 8 (3.70%)
48 394F DB E3 8 (3.60%)
49 3950 DA E2 8 (3.60%)
50 3979 D8 E0 8 (3.70%)
51 397A D8 E0 8 (3.70%)
52 397B DB E3 8 (3.60%)
53 397C DA E2 8 (3.60%)
54 398F D8 E0 8 (3.70%)
55 3990 D8 E0 8 (3.70%)
56 3991 DB E3 8 (3.60%)
57 3992 DA E2 8 (3.60%)
58 3FFCE 3E 15 -29 (-66.10%)
59 3FFFD 38 39 1 (1.70%)
60 3FFFE 35 32 -3 (-5.60%)
61 3FFFF 37 38 1 (1.80%)

1-17 are the ECU ID (8857 to 8928).
18-25 MUT EC report 0x76 instead of 1
26-33 are a logic mask related to the immobiliser (ECU images don't seem to be compatible)
34-5 are wastegate and boost differences.
58 is the immobiliser code.
59-61 ASCII text related to the ECU ID ("JM8857" to "JM8928")

 

Just curious, any particular reason the 88580013/14 rom is unsuitable?
Its well defined and Tephra supported.

 

hey long time bro.

i previously used 8858 on my car with no problems, but i wanted SD! JDM IXs have all the hardware from factory so it was only a flash and some tuning.

in addition the stat rev limiter never worked with 8858.

 

GT ECU doesn't like 88570008 rom id.
GT and GSR ECU harware is the same and a GT car can start with a tephra 88570008 version but with some trouble codes.
Immo is the only big differences between those two roms.

 

What trouble codes?

 

Everything between the two ECUs is the same except address FFA/B.
FFA as hex16, FFB as hex8.
GSR ECU did not start a GT and GSR rom in GT ECU won't start a GT car.
When I did start the car I get some trouble codes because the tephra map that I flash it was scrambled.
I don`t remember the codes but the car start but run like crap.
At the base....the roms are pretty same.

 

That's not too helpful in understanding the problem. Suggest that you first try running a stock 88570008 with the immobilizer disabled. If there are no CELs, then you can move onto a properly setup tephra ROM.

 

mrfred for me it was a little difficult to make this rom working on my ECU because I had a EDM car without a MAP,IAT or dual solenoid installed.
Now after I have changed my manifold with a JDM one with MAP and IAT installed I can run 88570008 map without any trouble codes.
If I flash my EDM rom I`ve got P1400 trouble code.
I can switch to tephra V7 when it will be done for this rom because 8858 V7 give me the same p1400 code.

 

Interesting info Daniel, I too am experiancing difficulties in getting the 89280002 to run on SD, or even start for that matter, I also tried an 8857 SD to run on my IX GT but still didnt want to run or prime the fuel pump. I have a new SD 8857 from Rolly to try (with immobilser disabled) so will see how I go ????

 

Tell me how it goes for you...
I have that map also but did not tested yet..