Hey guys i came across a 165 diagram tha shows all pin outs even the unsed i.e. C11 woo hoo! if any one wants it let me know
its far to big to post.

 

There has been a 165 pinout in the tech articles forever, and was really made public via Mike Davis on his site eons ago.

 

Will I need to get a different memcal?

 

No, because the knock sensor stuff remains the same.

I'm not sure if the Limp Home Mode works or not.

 

Good point about limp home. Can someone who has done this swap already disconnect a whole bunch of sensors and see what happens. I would like to know if my car would still run (no matter how poorly) if I loose an important sensor.

 

Been there done that

Runs like C**P but will run - hell anything that has a big cam etc will run bad in limp mode.

Actually if you just loose a sensor such as MAP,coolant then the ecu inputs default values determined by the program (which you can change) and doesnt use the netres as such. Its only when you have had a major failure that it uses the netres (like not having a eprom in the holder )

I am sure Grumpy will chime in anytime with the correct answer but there are I believe varying levels of limp mode depending on the severity of the problem

 

What map sensor do I need to use in order to do this conversion and where would it get installed. I have just about had it with the MAF system and this looks like it will work good.

Thanks,
Dan

 

TBI F-bodies
90-92 TPI F-bodies (maybe V6's?)
87-92 TBI astrovans + trucks

The sensor will have a vacuum port and a 3 prong socket on it. The plug that goes into the sensor looks like the one that goes into your TPS.

 

Did this conversion again today and dyno'd it - all running sweet although I didnt hook up to the aldl - direct to ecu pins

 

Tomcat,

Could you e-mail me the schematic also. I am considering doing this over the weekend.

Thanks,

 

i'd like some schematics for 165-730 "swap" thanks.

mystikkal_69@hotmail.com

no need to buy a sd harness woo hoo.

 

n/m

 

u r sofa king we tah did - you have mail :lala:

 

here is the 808 pinout diagrams

http://home.earthlink.net/~jxbxn/pinout808.zip

 

so you guys are telling me, if I move a couple wires, pull a few out of the ECM, and plug in a MAP sensor I can no longer have a MAF system?


...oh yeah and the chip obviously

 

I'd really like that diag. too; but that link didn't work! Help!

 

Try this

 

Tomcat, what about the knock sensor stuff? I thought I read that the 165 knock sensor would work. This weekend I was playing around and I got a knock sensor diag error. And I haven't noticed any knock ever, which makes me think that I need to be using a 730 type knock sensor + board...

 

If you are getting a error it may be due to two things.

The values in the chip not turned on properly - the bin I posted had the rpm where it testd for knock raised to 6000 to turn it off and code 43 turned off.

The memcal I believe needs to have a knock board mounted on it like the memcal in the "730" for it to work properly too.

Also check that the nkock wiring is connected correctly , I think it moves pins from the 165 - 808 (I havent got the diagrams handy at the moment )

 

hey tomcat i have a few ?'s i just did the 808 map convertion and all seems to be well but i have one small problem motor cuts out at 4 grand... i have no clue why it is doing that as for i am new to the programming game i was wondering if you had an updated 808 bin that might be a beter start than the one that was posted above...... any help will be very apriciated on and on winaldl the mph is completely wrong it says im doing 90 when im doing 55 how can i fix that or is that just a bug in winaldl like the coolent temp too when it gets hotter it says its getting cooler in the program anyways thanks in advance and thanks a ton

~Joe J

 

I think the winbin stuff is done in metric so 55mph is 90kph

Check your rev and speed limit settings for cuttout

 

Weird. It loads in winbin, but the editor screens have absolutely No values..

 

Send me a copy of the bin you have done and I will check the limits

 

This 165 conversion to 808 code sounds very good and straight forward. My question is, if I want to convert my 88 camaro to map (which seems to be the popular opinion) then what would be the advantages if any of converting to a 730 ECM as aposed to the 808 code conversion?

 

hey tomcat its the same 808 bin you have listed above i havent changed it one bit as i do not know what i should change and what would work better as for i am a newbie at this whole programming thing i use winbin with the ecu file that was posted on here too i under stand most of it but still dont know what i should and shouldnt change

 

I'm getting some stuuupid port errors with winbin.. I might just buy tunercat.

 

This sounds interesting but I have two questions. Has the knock sensor stuff been resolved (does it work with the esc and a 165 memcal, or does it need the speed density memcal and stuff jumpered under the hood?). Also at the beginning it was said you burn it on a 16k chip, why not a 128k chip like the 165 already uses? thanks, also something was mentioned about distributer reference angle, why would that need to be changed?

 

The 165 uses a 16k image..

Still having winbin problems.

Not sure about esc and knock, hopefully that can be answered. Kinda abig deal!


-- Joe

 

16k bytes image * 8 (8 bits in a byte)= 128k bit eprom

Hows everyone who has done this conversion getting on? Is it a winner or is it best to get a MAP (7730) ECU and do all the extra wiring?

What are the specs of the MAP sensor is it a 0 to 5 volt 0 to 2 bar unit? Dont get many Chevys in scrap yards in the UK so I'll have to look for other makes.


It would be nice to hear from Grumpy or Glenn if they think that those of us who have minimal knowledge of prom burning/tunning should attempt this conversion. I'm worried about limp home mode, knock sensing and any other unforseen bugs/problems.
I'm still impressed with what has been acheived.

Simon

 

Hi,

> 16k bytes image * 8 (8 bits in a byte)= 128k bit eprom


Absolutely correct, but he was referencing it at the same unit (bits or bytes) so I'm not sure if either of us helped his confusion.

WinBin just doesn't want to work for me. I think I'll be ordering tunercat this weekedn, then i'll be doing my own research..

I'll be using a supercharged application so perhaps I add something good.

-- Joe

 

I think I'll let wait until a few more of you have done this conversion to see what problems you have before I convert.
We could do with a list of pros and cons of using this method compared to swopping for the later type ecu.

Just to confirm.. Using the bin supplied my Tomcat a 165 ecu effectively becomes an 808 ecu? As such 808 .ecu definition files and tunning methods are required? When the SES is used to flash fault codes do these correspond to 165 definitions?
Did GM cars that ran 808 code use the same ecu as 165 just with a different memcal?

When using wiring diagrams to check connections to the ecu we now need to use 808 diagrams?

I'll have to do some searches /research, I know.

Thanks

Simon

P.s that scan software that someone recommended earlier looks very good

 

I did the conversion the other weekend and for the few days I have driven the car the difference is astounding. My rough idle is now a nice smooth 800RPM's and the overall driving is vastly improved. Unfortunately I broke a vavle spring so I can't give much more info until I fix that.

I too am very interested in the knock sensor info. From my limited time running with the 808 code I don't think it is using the knock sensor input, but I will have to verify that once the car is back together and I put the scan tool on it.

I think that I will eventually swap to the 730 since it has a lot more support on this forum and many people have used it with mild to wild engine combo's.

 

I havn't gotten a chance to play with that bin yet. Prolly in the next few weeks.. AM suposed to race this weekend but, cars running kinda weird, and its kinda rainy so prolly won't happen..

-- Joe

 

Tomcat, or anyone, know the math for BPC. I must be doing it wrong, cause I've been shooting in the dark trying to get it right. Stabbing at it, I am running .888 now.

383cid, 30#injectors

 

WOW must be huge injectors , normally for a 350 its 0.1330 , now to go to 383 multiply by 383 and divide by 350.

To go from 26lb to 30lb multiply by 26 and divide by 30 to get the correct bpc
so if you kept it at 0.1330 it would be fractionally to rich as it works out to 0.1260 for a 383 with 30lb injectors (assuming the 350 has 26lb injectors - note sure on what they are actually rated at)

 

Thanks Tomcat
Using the 26 vs 30, I came up with the same thing that you did. L98s use 22# and LT1s 24# injectors. Using the same formula, 22 vs 30, I came up with 0.1067. I will say these Accels flow extremely well! I did the conversion in about 20 minutes and used your pontiac 305 file - system was sooooo lean that the headers turned cherry red!
Looks like the SD is going to work out well. I was going to 730, but I thought to give this one a try 1st. The 5D is limited in what I need to modify and I am having to use WinBin to make other mods (idle, idle fuel table & time to, etc). A few other questions, what did you do to the 5D.tdf, as far as mods go? How far have you hacked it? Another thing, the Spark Ref Angle, is this the same as Initial Spark Advance? Thanks for the help. If you want, when I finish up, I will send you a copy of this ASBXMod-383.bin if you want to play with it. Also, adjusting the output to the trip computer, Can the Ref pulses be adjusted for mph instead of Kph?
Johnny

 

For the people wondering about the knock sensor.

I think what we need to do is remove the ESC module (whereever that is, I'm searching the archives right now) and insert a ~4.0K resistor (common value is 3.9K, just try and get one on the higher end of that value) in parallel with the knock sensor to bring the resistance down to the 3.9K expected by the ECM.

See Mike Davis' site: http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~davis/z28..._730/165KS.txt

I'm going to try this soon, I'll let you guys know.

 

That link is for converting to the 730 ECM.

And if you convert to a 730 ECM you still have to buy a new knock sensor, the 3.9k resistor is used to bypass the knock sensor.

The 165 ECM uses a 100,000 ohms knock sensor, the 730 ECM uses a 3900 ohm knock sensor, and there is no way to lower resistance on the 165 knock sensor. So you can not use the 165 knock sensor with the 730 ECM or any application that requires a 3.9 k knock sensor.

If the 808 code requires a 3.9k ohm knock sensor you will have to buy one. You can’t lower the 165 100k ohm knock sensor to 3.9k ohm.

 

Kirchoff's Law (or maybe it's ohms law..) for parallel resistors:

1/100K + 1/X = 1/3.9K

Where X = the resistance we want to use, 4058 ohms. 3.9K is the closest common value, and you can probably find one that is about 4050 ohms since the tolerance is 5%... the guys at the electronics store may not appreciate you going through their packages though.

I have no idea if that will actually give the ECM the correct signal, but that will bring the KS resistance down to the correct value. Although it seems like that it should produce some kind of signal... has anyone measured the KS to see what it does when it detects knock?

 

Oh so you mean, tie a 3.9k resistor from the knock sensor wire to ground to lower the resistance. That would alter the signal that the ECM receives as you said. It probably would not be enough of a difference to matter. You could see how much of a difference there is if you have an oscilloscope.

 

If you do that with the knock sensor, how does everything function? On the 165 the spark control stuff is on the ESC, on the 730 it is on the memcal. Do you run a 730 memcal? I don't understand how the spark control would work if you removed and put nothing in it's place. Or are you saying run the resistor in addition to the ESC that is already in place? that would make sense.

 

If you do that with the knock sensor, how does everything function? On the 165 the spark control stuff is on the ESC, on the 730 it is on the memcal. Do you run a 730 memcal? I don't understand how the spark control would work if you removed and put nothing in it's place. Or are you saying run the resistor in addition to the ESC that is already in place? that would make sense.

 

Does the Diacom work the same with this mod?

Chuck

 

I have a similar question, Has anyone been able to get high speed (8192 baud) scanning data out of the 165 running 808 code?? I have both Diacom and Moates setups.
Thanks

 

No you would need to patch the code to get 8192bauld out of the $5D code.
Try winaldl - works great :-):lala:

 

Does anyone have the answer to whether or not the Spark Reference Angle, refers to the initial advance or to some other value.

Can you or do you use the 730 memcal with the 165?
I have the method to bypass the ESC, it's one jumper from signal in to signal out. I'll get the pins if anyone wants them.

BTW, I've gotten the ASBX.bin file to work with a stout 383, it is still a little rich in spots, but, it makes a lot of power, idles at 850 - in or out of gear (2800 stall). TomCat is right, the 305 file will work, but it's very lean in a big motor.

 

 

 

Eric can you send me that bin file. I got mine to run on the 305 file,but it runs like crap.
Thanks
Chuck
cmactrin@ccm.net
www.tccracing.com

 

Back to the knock sensor topic. Did Holdens running 808 code have a seperate knock module like we have with our 165 ecu's or did the signal from the knock sensor go direct to the ecu unmodified?
I'd suspect the former. I cant believe GM would go to the expense of building that knock module if a direct feed would do.
Is anyone able to get info on holden knock sensors ie any Aussies got a Haynes(workshop) manual with a wiring diagram?

Simon

Winaldl is great for scanning! forget diacom etc