CheezX

Does anyone have the lean cruise patch for 7747 TBI ECMs? I found some old posts referring to this file Hiway7747.zip on the diy-efi FTP but its not there (must have got cleaned out or something).

If anyone has this let me know!

Six_Shooter

iTrader: (2)

Take a look on moates.net fileman, that file name sounds familar.

CheezX

Couldn't find it there, looked in every folder.

CheezX

Well, I ended up making my own code changes. I deleted the open loop idle AFR stuff and put a highway fuel subroutine in there which uses open loop AFR if highway conditions are met. Going to try it out tomorrow.

If anyone has a copy of the old patch, let me know. I'd still be interested in comparing.

RBob

iTrader: (1)

Took me a while to find it. Includes the hi way lean cruise and the ESC done patch. The ESC done bypasses the forced knock test and enables PE & hiway SA. As it is a zip need to use Firefox to download. IE is broken.

RBob.

jwscab

Rbob, thanks for posting this, I have been looking for it!

69cutlass

It's saying that the zip file is corrupt when I download this, is there any chance someone could post it again or post a link to a good copy?

Cheers,
Chris.

RBob

iTrader: (1)

Nothing wrong with the zip file. I just downloaded it with Firefox 3.5.9 and unzipped it with no issues.

RBob.

69cutlass

Must be something in Windows 7 as it saying it corrupt. I unpacked it with winrar and it seems fine.

Q for you, is there a way to tell if the patch worked? It says it patched fine but I can't seem to see a difference in the original bin and the patched. Please bare with me I'm still learning the software, ie. TunerPro

Edit, just read you have to download with something other than IE Also, reapplied the patches and the checksum value are now different, I guess they installed correctly. Is there a way to view these changes?

RBob

iTrader: (1)

Should be able to see the changes via a Tuner Pro compare. Original BIN vs. the new patched BIN.

RBob.

ace_012

Since the hiway mode is for optimal cat performance would it be advised to/not apply this if I don't have a cat at all? I'd like to apply it for the esc patch but wasn't sure about the hiway mode. Thanks.

RBob

iTrader: (1)

The ESC done and hiway mode patches are separate. So either or both can be applied.

High Way mode is a lean cruise mode for increased fuel mileage. Doesn't matter if a cat is present or not (as long as it isn't napping under the hood ).

RBob.

ace_012

Oh alright gotcha thanks. Bah, I read the thing about the cat I think on full size chevy haha thanks, I try not to be mean to cats unless they run out in front of me...

EagleMark

Back from the past!

If I get this to install will TunerPro have the values shown by using a $42.xdf ?

There's also an option in TunerPro under File, Patch Bin, then From s-Record. Does this do something with the patch?

RBob

iTrader: (1)

I have no idea if the cal parameters have been added to the XDF file.

If the Tuner Pro Patch BIN feature patches via a S19 file then it will (should) work. The patch zip file has the source, listings and the S19 files included. Also included is an ECU file that can be used with TP, along with a DOS based patch utility program.

RBob.

Saar

s19_pat doesn't like 64 bit systems....

34blazer

*subscribing*

EagleMark

In that zipped folder was a bin. ASDUHW.bin. I used TPv5 compare option and found it was identical to my ASDU.bin except maximum AFR was 16.0 instead of 15.0.

If you can remeber that far back? Why was that included? It seems to be a ASDU but you added HW which In this case seems to be High Way! So it was a comparison bin? For other BCC of the 1227747 ECM?

I am very interested in this anceint technoligy to revive my use of a 1990 Chevy Suburban for high way trips. Of course I don't want to blow up, actually melt my pistons. You have obviously used and tested this what would a safe AFR be on a 1990 Chevy technoligy engine? I have read your disclaimers and acept full responsbility for my actions. Just asking you to share your experiance! The truck has a factory installed plate type oil cooler which I beleive is a key to using this option in piston cooling. Again obviously GM had intended to use this High Way mode and from what I have read was shelved do to goverment mandates on emmissions. So it is doable and I want to do it but want to take advantage of previous technolgy experiance first. Thanks RBob for all you do and have done for EFI. It has brought this ol gearhead much pleasure!

Saar

i've personally run 16.2:1 on a aluminum head 3.1 for quite some time...

just MAKE SURE that the rest of your tune is up to par.

RBob

iTrader: (1)

From what I've been told the pathing on the command line to a different folder doesn't work. All the files and program need to be in the same folder.

I should just recompile it as a Windows console program.

RBob.

RBob

iTrader: (1)

There is no BIN in the zip file. That must have come from elsewhere.

RBob.

EagleMark

Tune as in? The vehicle has always been maintained as far as tune up like plugs, cap rotor type stuff.

Chip tune so far is factory stock and looking at recorded data shows all to be spot on except BLM was a little low across the board. Yesterday I changed fuel filter and by seat of pants dyno had a noticeable improvement in WOT power. So I am expecting the data to show the same thing.

The 3.1L engine is apples and oranges for a comparing to a 5.7L TBI engine IMO, I do appreciate your sharing of knowledge! Since factory tune shows 15.0 to 1 and RBobs ASDUHW shows 16.0 to 1 and you are saying 16.2 to 1 AFR as safe. I am planning on 16.0 to 1 AFR for me to start and go from there to see what data shows and how my knowledge is improved as to how to check!

RBob

iTrader: (1)

Windows console version of s19_pat program. Forgot that I had actually ported this over to Windows sometime last year.

Note that there is a trailing underscore '_' on the file name for the Windows version:

S19_Pat_

And the command line is the same as the DOS version.

RBob.

EagleMark

D'oh!

That is strange as I had just made a new folder for that zip file patch to open in...

Anyone have more information on setting up a chip for lean high way cruise mode?

Saar

looks to function so far in Vista 64...

and Mark, by the rest of the tune being up to par, i'm refering to no odd lean spots or detonation or anything like that, since it can be amplified by running leaner and in open loop.

EagleMark

Thanks Mr Saar, I have thought of that, would not be good to put this on top of a lean spot would it. Luckily this first attempt is on a stock engine.

EagleMark

Hey Rbob, I got the new s19_Pat_ application file to work using all the other files from the original zip on Windows 7 but had compatibility set to Windows XP.

But how would you know if the bin file was changed properly? Is there a certain part of the hex to look at? I used an ASDU bin to start.

I have an XDF with the Highway Cruise Scalers in it.But the original file already has them set, same as the file I ran through the s19 patch. So I'm not sure how to do a compare?

RBob

iTrader: (1)

Use the difference tool in TP. Compare the newly patched BIN against the original. Can use the .LST file to see that the changes match the patch.

RBob.

EagleMark

Doh!

I've heard people talk about Difference but thought they were refering to Compare...

Thank you! Works well!

EagleMark

RBob, Thanks for sharing this information and still helping us with ancient technology!

I re-zipped all the files with the new Windows Console application file so it is in one package. Added a Read Me First.txt file. To explain the changes. Changed the instructions so they now have the "_" added to the command line prompt. Also added a $42 XDF which includes the Highway Cruise Parameters.

So it should be good to go in one package!

Thanks again!

305sbc

iTrader: (3)

That was a very nice thing for you to do Eaglemark.

I'm sure I'm missing something here, but how is this patch added to your calibration exactly?
I ask because the algorithm portion of the code is not on the EPROM, but on one of the permanent chips in my 747.

I don't mean to ask a stupid question, so sorry if I just wasn't paying attention.

EagleMark

Well I just put all the pieces together in a usable package for todays computers, RBob did all the work for us over the years.

My understanding is the 7747 is capable but GM had to turn it off in chip because of emissions requirements. There is an F body that had it enabled but I have not been able to find that bin, I would like to see the exact settings GM used at that time if anyone knows what bin that is?

This patch RBob wrote turns it on and makes some adjustments to bin so it is ready to work. Hex adjustments beyond my comprehension. I have verified it recording data and after parameters are met it goes open loop to AFR set in the bin.

I did a write up on how to install the patch in your bin at:
http://www.gearhead-efi.com/Fuel-Inj...on-1227747-ECM
Didn't think the thirdgen crowd would be interested... since it's not an ECM used in these cars.

If you check out this link I have $42 XDF and ADX for TunerPro set up for it as well.
http://www.gearhead-efi.com/Fuel-Inj...CM-Information!

HTH!

RBob

iTrader: (1)

The area that gets patched is on the EPROM. The EPROM contains the calibration but also some of the code. It's been a while since I did it but IIRC, I hijacked the area of code that delays the on-set of PE. And used that area to add in the lean cruise code along with the ESC Done code.

RBob.

Cdeez

Okay I have had a version of "HIWAY747" with the ESC_DONE and lean cruise patches for a while... I don't remember exactly when I downloaded it but it is apparently an older version than this new windows console version of the patches???? Is this correct RBob???

I have Windows 7, and when I tried to use the 'older' version of the hiway747 patch, it seems to only rarely work when I execute the command in the prompt.

I replaced the original S19_Pat for the one you just posted that contains the trailing underscore. I placed this back in the original Hiway747 directory, and was able to apply both patches.

Although it seems as if I remember the confirmation in the command prompt being longer in what I'm calling the 'older' version??

What is going on here? Is the first version I had in fact considerably older and does it only sometimes decide to work on Win7?

Using the difference tool in Tunerpro, I come up with a total of 55 bytes difference when comparing BEFORE and AFTER Rbob's forced knock and lean cruise patches.

EDIT: I now see see this-->

EagleMark

55 byte difference is exactly correct...

I'm not sure about mixing and matching but I have a zip folder above where all files are done and work in windows 7 and an exact how to article...

Cdeez

Thankyou for confirming that EagleMark... It seems as if I did get the patches to apply yet again using the dreaded Win7 this time.

My older machine that I used in the beginning was win98 I believe and I never seemed to have issues with RBob's patches until I switched to Win7...

All is well that ends well..