2003 first allocation stock rom?
May 22, 2006, 10:48 AM
#16
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Jack,
I got my cable and have pulled my rom but have not signed up for a free file hosting thing.
Like your's I never got any reflashes (at least that I am aware of) and never had any problems with the p0300 code. I will try to get mine posted this week. Unless Jack wants to host mine as well?
I'm fairly sure mine is also a 1st allocation, but I will take a look at the numbers tonight.
Main reason I started this thread is because:
1. one of the maps posted on openecu was not stock, both low and high fuel maps were the same and had been leaned out in the upper rpm range.
2. The rom info shows 2004 model year.
I have since seen that my rom is identifed as a 2004 model year as well, even thought the car was manufactured in late 2002
I got my cable and have pulled my rom but have not signed up for a free file hosting thing.
Like your's I never got any reflashes (at least that I am aware of) and never had any problems with the p0300 code. I will try to get mine posted this week. Unless Jack wants to host mine as well?
I'm fairly sure mine is also a 1st allocation, but I will take a look at the numbers tonight.
Main reason I started this thread is because:
1. one of the maps posted on openecu was not stock, both low and high fuel maps were the same and had been leaned out in the upper rpm range.
2. The rom info shows 2004 model year.
I have since seen that my rom is identifed as a 2004 model year as well, even thought the car was manufactured in late 2002
May 22, 2006, 11:05 AM
#17
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jack's ROM
Year: 2004
Internal ID: 94170008
My P0300 fixed ROM
Jack's ROM
Year: 2003
Internal ID: 94170014
So I guess "Year" info is just a tag the dealer changed as they see fit. You see my ROM's internal ID is newer, but the year says "2003" instead.
I found that Jack's High Octane fuel and ignition maps are both much more conservative than mine. They are only a little more aggressive than my "UTEC map".
My ROM file fixed the P0300 problem that I had as soon as I had it flashed by the dealer. I've just loaded Jack's map into my car and I will see if it will throw a P0300 code on me.
Year: 2004
Internal ID: 94170008
My P0300 fixed ROM
Jack's ROM
Year: 2003
Internal ID: 94170014
So I guess "Year" info is just a tag the dealer changed as they see fit. You see my ROM's internal ID is newer, but the year says "2003" instead.
I found that Jack's High Octane fuel and ignition maps are both much more conservative than mine. They are only a little more aggressive than my "UTEC map".
My ROM file fixed the P0300 problem that I had as soon as I had it flashed by the dealer. I've just loaded Jack's map into my car and I will see if it will throw a P0300 code on me.
Last edited by BJai02; May 22, 2006 at 11:09 AM.
May 22, 2006, 02:23 PM
#18
The year info is actually part of the XML definitions we were provided.. the only information from ECU is the Internal ID and some other internal information.. If you notice your rom is the same number except 14, mine is 08, which means yours is several builds newer..
May 23, 2006, 05:07 AM
#19
Evolved Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just looked at my rom image, i have the same revision as Jack:
CaseID: MN132874
InternalID: 94170008
You can pull it from here:
MN132874-94170008.zip
CaseID: MN132874
InternalID: 94170008
You can pull it from here:
MN132874-94170008.zip
Last edited by Mad_SB; May 23, 2006 at 05:22 AM.
May 23, 2006, 08:19 AM
#20
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santa Cruz
Posts: 2,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MalibuJack
Ohh, and for what its worth, you guys should dissect that rom pretty closely, the rom in my car never threw a P0300 code, never had any major issues, and always ran a bit stronger than other cars.. Its likely due to the engine in my car, but it can't hurt to closely compare it to other ROMs (I have been doing it on occasion, but Its easy for me to miss things with the free time I don't have.. 
)
)I have to say that there are clear differences between your ROM and what was loaded into my original ROM (modified with the p0300 fix)
Where I used to have 1.3-1.4 bar of boost, I now have over 1.5 bar boost
Unfortuenetly, I am restricted to 91 octane **** gas, so I am also getting fuel cut
I have already modifed my Xede to lower the boost some to try and get the boost levels lower. FWIW, my XEDE using a base 91 octane map gave a pretty decent tune with my old ROM. now I definately need some tuning, the changes in the ROM image is that big.
As for knock, well, I have some good logs that demonstrate that I have one of those "knock prone EVOs". Anyhow, my calibrated butt-O-meter kinda informs me that the knock is still there, but not as bad as before. I really want to grab some logs to find out, but I am jammed at work and don't have the time at the momment. But it really feels like the ECU/Xede-smart is not pulling as much timing when it detects that phantom knock.
I will try to confirm this with some actual logs later...
overall I am very please with the openEcu efforts. Everyone involved in that project deserves a
May 23, 2006, 02:01 PM
#22
Originally Posted by chrisw
Jack, I loaded your ROM image into my ECU.
I have to say that there are clear differences between your ROM and what was loaded into my original ROM (modified with the p0300 fix)
Where I used to have 1.3-1.4 bar of boost, I now have over 1.5 bar boost
Unfortuenetly, I am restricted to 91 octane **** gas, so I am also getting fuel cut
I have already modifed my Xede to lower the boost some to try and get the boost levels lower. FWIW, my XEDE using a base 91 octane map gave a pretty decent tune with my old ROM. now I definately need some tuning, the changes in the ROM image is that big.
As for knock, well, I have some good logs that demonstrate that I have one of those "knock prone EVOs". Anyhow, my calibrated butt-O-meter kinda informs me that the knock is still there, but not as bad as before. I really want to grab some logs to find out, but I am jammed at work and don't have the time at the momment. But it really feels like the ECU/Xede-smart is not pulling as much timing when it detects that phantom knock.
I will try to confirm this with some actual logs later...
overall I am very please with the openEcu efforts. Everyone involved in that project deserves a
I have to say that there are clear differences between your ROM and what was loaded into my original ROM (modified with the p0300 fix)
Where I used to have 1.3-1.4 bar of boost, I now have over 1.5 bar boost
Unfortuenetly, I am restricted to 91 octane **** gas, so I am also getting fuel cut
I have already modifed my Xede to lower the boost some to try and get the boost levels lower. FWIW, my XEDE using a base 91 octane map gave a pretty decent tune with my old ROM. now I definately need some tuning, the changes in the ROM image is that big.
As for knock, well, I have some good logs that demonstrate that I have one of those "knock prone EVOs". Anyhow, my calibrated butt-O-meter kinda informs me that the knock is still there, but not as bad as before. I really want to grab some logs to find out, but I am jammed at work and don't have the time at the momment. But it really feels like the ECU/Xede-smart is not pulling as much timing when it detects that phantom knock.
I will try to confirm this with some actual logs later...
overall I am very please with the openEcu efforts. Everyone involved in that project deserves a
You should compare the numbers in the different boost control maps and tables.. Might give us a bit more information on how those boost settings affect the way the car runs.. I'd like to convert my stock solenoid back to a GM solenoid if I can figure out the tables a little better..
May 23, 2006, 03:41 PM
#23
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santa Cruz
Posts: 2,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MalibuJack
You should compare the numbers in the different boost control maps and tables.. Might give us a bit more information on how those boost settings affect the way the car runs.. I'd like to convert my stock solenoid back to a GM solenoid if I can figure out the tables a little better..
I am happy with the results, I turned down the boost with the XEDE and all is good now with a rock solid 1.3bar until I hit the rev limiter.
It will be interesting to see what the differences are when the p0300 rom is decoded.
speaking of boost control tables, anyone know how to enable the factory anti-lag?
May 23, 2006, 03:44 PM
#24
Originally Posted by chrisw
compare to what? unfortunetly the ROM I had loaded in the ECU had the p0300 fix installed and so far no one has provided any definitions to read it correctly.
I am happy with the results, I turned down the boost with the XEDE and all is good now with a rock solid 1.3bar until I hit the rev limiter.
It will be interesting to see what the differences are when the p0300 rom is decoded.
speaking of boost control tables, anyone know how to enable the factory anti-lag?
I am happy with the results, I turned down the boost with the XEDE and all is good now with a rock solid 1.3bar until I hit the rev limiter.
It will be interesting to see what the differences are when the p0300 rom is decoded.
speaking of boost control tables, anyone know how to enable the factory anti-lag?
May 23, 2006, 06:12 PM
#25
Evolved Member
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: CT
Posts: 885
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no solenoid. It is not functional.
Read here:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...light=anti-lag
Read here:
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...light=anti-lag
May 23, 2006, 06:27 PM
#26
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santa Cruz
Posts: 2,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by vboy425
the anti is on already, it's set to start @ 2500rpm and cutout at 4531rpm
I have not done any serious diagnostics (yet) on this stumble, it is most likely related to the XEDE and the ECU switching from open to closed loop, but maybe.... (we can always hope)
May 26, 2006, 08:55 AM
#28
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santa Cruz
Posts: 2,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by chrisw
yeah I saw that. It makes me wonder if this is the cause of the stumbling I get. It seems to happen the most in this RPM range.
I have not done any serious diagnostics (yet) on this stumble, it is most likely related to the XEDE and the ECU switching from open to closed loop, but maybe.... (we can always hope)
I have not done any serious diagnostics (yet) on this stumble, it is most likely related to the XEDE and the ECU switching from open to closed loop, but maybe.... (we can always hope)
My gas millage is the same as before, except I have been using the AC more.
As the ECU "learns" and adapts to this new ROM, the stumbling has diminished.
Question for MalibuJack, Colby, or others who know. I am assuming that when the ECU "learns" these new parameters are stored somewhere, possibly in flash memory (as opposed to ROM memory). when you re-flash the ECU, are those "learned" parameters erased?
My butt-O-Meter says no, the overall drivability of the EVO has improved the more it "learns" with this new ROM image.
Any Ideas or comments on this?
May 26, 2006, 10:36 AM
#29
Originally Posted by chrisw
So after driving a few days on this new ROM, I have a couple of observations.
My gas millage is the same as before, except I have been using the AC more.
As the ECU "learns" and adapts to this new ROM, the stumbling has diminished.
Question for MalibuJack, Colby, or others who know. I am assuming that when the ECU "learns" these new parameters are stored somewhere, possibly in flash memory (as opposed to ROM memory). when you re-flash the ECU, are those "learned" parameters erased?
My butt-O-Meter says no, the overall drivability of the EVO has improved the more it "learns" with this new ROM image.
Any Ideas or comments on this?
My gas millage is the same as before, except I have been using the AC more.
As the ECU "learns" and adapts to this new ROM, the stumbling has diminished.
Question for MalibuJack, Colby, or others who know. I am assuming that when the ECU "learns" these new parameters are stored somewhere, possibly in flash memory (as opposed to ROM memory). when you re-flash the ECU, are those "learned" parameters erased?
My butt-O-Meter says no, the overall drivability of the EVO has improved the more it "learns" with this new ROM image.
Any Ideas or comments on this?
chris, the car never really stop learning. it's always learning. The only thing it really learn is the close loop, which crusing/idleling using the front o2 to compensate/adjustment.
May 26, 2006, 04:03 PM
#30
There are quite a few "Trims" that learn from your driving habits and gas quality.. The three offhand are the knock value, Long Term Fuel Trim, and Short term fuel trims.. I'm sure there are also stored values for the a/c and other functions that smooth out over time..
The issue isn't so much altering these values, but finding where the baseline values are set, so you can find the "trims" and set them as close as possible to those values so when the ECU IS reset, it has less learning to do and the car will always run consistently..
The issue isn't so much altering these values, but finding where the baseline values are set, so you can find the "trims" and set them as close as possible to those values so when the ECU IS reset, it has less learning to do and the car will always run consistently..