I have been looking at the TCC tables in TunerCat as I need to change the values to get the trans lock/unlock closer to what they are in an '87 Monte SS (or for 3.73 gears rather than 3.23).

The tables I need to change in the ABWN (this is what I need to use!) are:

TCC Lock %TPS vs Speed (in 4th)
TCC UnLock %TPS vs Speed (in 4th)
TCC Lock %TPS vs Speed (not in 4th)
TCC UnLock %TPS vs Speed (not in 4th)

What I am looking for is if someone has the values for these tables from a stock '87 Monte SS ECM bin (non-EFI, carburated setup)?

The setup I have is an '88 IROC 305 TPI motor (ABWN), '87 Monte SS 200R4 w/3.73 rear, and Howell Engine Development harness in an '87 el Camino SS.

Runs very nice but because the '88 IROC ECM/bin (ACFZ) is setup for TCC values with 3.23 gear ratio and I have 3.73, the lock/unlock is whacky to say the least.

I was thinking that if I could see/set the values from the '87 Monte SS into the ABWN bin, that should make the vehicle TCC lock/unlock the same.

Let me know if you can help.

Bruce

 

BTW, I checked this websites bin library and did not see what I need there.

The '87 Monte SS uses ECM 1228079, bin ACFZ.

I would unsolder the chip and try to read it but does anyone know if this is $32 or $32b? That's the only one I bought from TC.

Bruce

 

IIRC the '8079 is a CCC ECM. Could pull the chip, should be in a socket, and read it. But you would have to dig out the TCC info.

It would be easier/better to just change the TCC lock/unlock points to suit your driving.

The '8746/'7747/'8063 section of Chapter 5 has a write up on how the TCC logic works.

There is also a section on the CCC ECMs. There may be additional information there on the Monte calibration.

RBob.

 

RBob,

Yes, I could change the ABWN, but I could go round and round for quite a while until I get it correct. Getting the settings from the '87 Monte SS bin would be so helpful and I know they work correctly!

I did read the '8746/'7747/'8063 section of Chapter 5 in detail and even read the write up by Robert Rauscher.

I am just not sure about the values to be set in these four tables, and as I said, if someone out there has the ACFZ bin, that would be a great help.

Does anyone know if the ACFZ is $32 or $32b? If so, I could take the chip off the MEMCAL I have and read it, but hesitate to do that until I verify that I can read the chip as I hate to ruin a good MEMCAL unnecessarily.

Bruce

 

ACFZ is $40. You should be able to get the $40 hack from moates.net. You should also be able to get a tunerpro ecu file and the 88l69 bin from Moates. This will allow you to get what you want.

HTH

John

 

For the Monte Carlo SS TCC tps by speed in 3rd is

20 25 30 35 40 45 50
67 92 118 143 166 192 218
92 115 138 164 187 210 230

4th is
30 35 40 45 50 55 60
41 69 97 123 154 187 230
133 154 174 192 218 230 251

Min speed is 38 to lock and 35 to stay locked.

HTH

John

 

John,

Thanks much. I got the ACFZ bin and Tunerpro, but can not find the $40 hack anywhere nor the 88169 bin. Is the 88169 bin any different than the ACFZ?

Also, thanks for the Monte SS TCC TPS data. Let me look at the tables in TunerCat and see if I can get this setup. Any idea if the above 3rd/4th gear info is for locked or not locked? I see the lock/unlock speeds but need to clarify for the four tables that TunerCat has.

Bruce

 

When I looked at those tables I saw the same thing.
This bothers me because you can't have over 100% TPS.
I believe these are hex values up to 256 representing 100% TPS.
Figuring them that way makes more sense.
The top number is speed,
The next row is where the Lockup will occur IF below that TPS,
Bottom row is where the TCC will unlock IF you go above that value.
Let me know if those are correct statements. Seems right to me that way.

38 MPH to lock and 35 MPH to unlock sounds like MPH is correct and is not a hex value.

 

Yes, that is correct

 

OK, got the numbers correlated but need some help/clarification here.

I attached a pic of the TCC in 4th Lock table in TunerCat. In all 4 (3rd gear lock, 3rd gear unlock, 4th gear lock, 4th gear unlock) of the TCC tables in TunerCat, the MPH steps are all the same as the example but the references you show here have different steps for 3rd versus 4th gears.

The actual MPH step values are different in your examples than the MPH step values in the TunerCat tables. Any idea how to correlate them to one another to make sure the values shown for the TPS % will do what they should? Otherwise values in your data will not work as intended as TPS% to MPH is off.

Also, can you help with a formula to translate the hex to percentage for the TPS value? I think I have it, just not sure so I figured I would ask to make sure I am in sync here.

Let me know.

Thanks,

Bruce

 

Use this it will be close.

12 20 28 36 44 52 60 68 76 84 92 100
0.0 0.0 11.1 30.8 50.5 70.2 89.8 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 4th Lock
24.3 36.6 48.9 61.2 73.5 85.8 98.0 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 4th Unlock
10.4 26.2 41.9 57.6 73.4 89.1 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 3rd Lock
21.6 35.9 50.3 64.7 79.1 93.4 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 99.6 3rd Unlock

Here I took the first and last and made a sloped line then filled the table. The original data was divided by 2.56 (256/100) to get percent. Also don't worry about the low end because the MPH qualifiers will prevent lockup down low.

John

 

One thing to look at the 2004R has a 3/4 switch that is inverted compared to some of the TPI F-cars. Actually most GM cars/trucks 3/4 switch is inverted compared to a TPI F/Y car. What this does is tell the ECM you are in 4th when you are in LOW, 2nd or 3rd and 2nd/3rd when you are in 4th in reality. TCC gets very awkwered in this scenario. When I first tossed a 7730 in my 1983 G20 with a 1992 700r4 from a C/K truck it was reversed and it was very weird to drive.

 

Basically what you are saying is that the two tables (3rd & 4th gear) need to be reversed to work?

The ABWN is an F-Body and the data is from a Monte. How do I know if these have been inverted as you indicated? Any hard coding of this anywhere?

 

I have one other question that someone here might be able to answer.

I saw some posts about burning issues when using other than the 128k chips. I bought the 512k chips and was wondering if the start address should be "00000"?

I can try burning a chip and see if it works, just wanted to see if anyone has used the SST 27SF512 chips and what, if any, issues they have run into?

Bruce

 

Hey guys, need some guidance here with the 512k chips!

I looked around the site and cannot seem to find the reference to some of the issues for using these instead of the 128k chips.

I burned my first chip, installed it, and it is not being seen by the ECM appropriately. I think I saw an article somewhere on this siite about issues with the starting address being different when you use the 512K chips opposed to the 128k chips, but don't seem to be able to find it.

I know this question has been asked before and don't mean to be a pain, but do need someone here to guide me to the right article or provide the starting address so I can rule that out as the issue.

As Milla Jovovich said in Fifth Element, PLEASE HELP!

Bruce

 

Here you go.
http://support.moates.net/2010/04/05...using-offsets/

 

JP,

Thanks. I'll give it a try! Hope this works.

Sloooooowly becoming familiar with this stuff. FUN and fruitful but probably more than I should have ever taken on! :-)

Bruce

 

The learning curve is steep, but once you reach a certian proficiency level it all a piece of cake after that. And all your friends will think you are a EFI Jedi Master even while you may be just a novice I'm sure you've already seen the blank stare they give when you tell them what youre doing to tune it.

 

Yes! So many of my buddies are interested but do not have the same FI setups (most are carb) and can not really relate. I have several FI setups, two are '87 Buicks (one GN and other is Turbo SFI T-Type), so I think I might be able to get into that setup next.

This '87 el Camino is a little modified setup from stock but will make a nice daily driver when completed.

Still looking around to replace my '88 IROC Convertible, just have not found the right one yet. I really like the 5.0 TPI setup in those for driveability. They are just fun cars to drive. Wife has been trying to push me into the '93 and up Z-28 convertibles, just not sure yet??

I am going to gather the info from the Moates article later today and re-burn this chip and try it again. Only issue is that the el camino is snowed in! Garage it is in has two feet of snow all around it so I can not take it out to try to see if the TCC works they way I expect it will.

Bruce

 

I tried what is suggested in the article, setting the offsets (starting @ 003FFF) for the SST SF27C512 chip for a 16k bin, but no good. I am using a prom burner called TopWin6 and seems to work fine. I am just not sure the parameters I am setting are correct based on the article. The article uses 6 digit addressing but my burner only uses 5 digit, I truncated the staring address by using 03FFF.

Any other articles out there that might help?

Bruce

 

You were looking at the buffer address.
The position on the chip is the far right column.
The working bin always must be at the end of the chip if that helps.
Should be 00C000 to 00FFFF for the 16K on the 512

On the chart,
Buffer size = size of the bin (0 to 3FFF= 16,383 or 16K size)
The location is from the end of the chip FFFF so
counting backwards...
FFFF - 3FFF (0r 65,535 minus 16,283) = C000 ( 49,152) starting position to hold the 16K data

 

Ok, still having trouble with the burning of the new chips!

I have tried the starting/ending values of 00C000-00FFFF and still having trouble reading the chip when I put it in the MEMCAL and in the ECM.

I did do a little trouble shooting to make sure this is where the issue is.

I can take the stock MEMCAL with the stock ABWN chip in it and put it in the ECM, start the car up, runs fine with no SERVICE ENGINE light on. I also can link to the ECM via the Rhinda cable and DIACOM software and read what is going on. I also try the HyperTech chip I had from my Monte Carlo and that also gets the same results, so I am sure that the issue is not the HyperTech MEMCAL I am using, not the Rhinda cable, nor the DIACOM software.

What I am doing is taking the 27FS512 chip in my burner, selecting the 32b$ bin which I have modified from the original ABWN bin (only the TCC tables at this point have been changed), burn the chip with the start/end values of 00C000-00FFFF and do a verify, so according to my burner, all seems fine!

When I put this chip in the Hypertech MEMCAL and put this in the ECM, as soon as I start the car the SERVICE ENGINE light is lite and when I try to read the ECM via the Rhinda cable with the DIACOM software, it can not link to the ECM. Assumption here is that the starting/ending address I am using is the culprit!

Any ideas on how to proceed? I am lost at this point on what to do next!

HELP GUYS!

BTW, the reason I am using the Hypertech MEMCAL is that it is setup so I can insert/remove the chips without any soldering, works fine. Also, the Monte Carlo Hypertech chip is very modified for a 406 TPI MAF setup and I am running a much leaner configuration with this 305 TPI MAF setup.

 

BTW, meant to mention that the burner I have is a TOP 2009 Universal Programmer.