When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The writing is cake. It takes me a few minutes to bust out an entire subroutine complete with hooks.
It's having to go back in to add in more and more to a subroutine as I enhance it with new tables and new features that I can't simply copy paste or compile it after writing the code. I have to manually type it out somewhere since Ida won't copy/paste hex then write in new crap and then Rewrite it all over again.
Tested Wideband F14 input. Works and datalogs.
Last edited by Vanilla Ice; Jul 21, 2016 at 05:10 PM.
Thinking of adding a "happy ****" (potentiometer) function and wiring it to one of the many extra pins for temp sensors.
This could allow for mode switching or timing retard for nitrous people. or adding timing for fuels, or even could be used for manual flex fuel adjusting...
Last edited by Vanilla Ice; Jul 31, 2016 at 01:43 PM.
The writing is cake. It takes me a few minutes to bust out an entire subroutine complete with hooks.
It's having to go back in to add in more and more to a subroutine as I enhance it with new tables and new features that I can't simply copy paste or compile it after writing the code. I have to manually type it out somewhere since Ida won't copy/paste hex then write in new crap and then Rewrite it all over again.
Tested Wideband F14 input. Works and datalogs.
Why not?
For example, Bruce Plecan's $60 hack, it's pure assembly and assembles into a bin no issue. Just edit it in a text editor.
I assumed you were starting from an assembleable source ?
I'm editing the bin "directly." So it's set at an address and having to move it around, if you look at the bin it has patches of patches because I have to add and elongate the subroutines to add to them. It's annoying, but also simple.
Probably going to alter the course of this bin to utilize an IAT instead of a MAT. With this being a boost oriented rom there's more need for an IAT in my opinion especially now that the temp sensor directly effects timing and fueling. Not just VE calc.
I'm editing the bin "directly." So it's set at an address and having to move it around, if you look at the bin it has patches of patches because I have to add and elongate the subroutines to add to them. It's annoying, but also simple.
That's how we used to modify Commodore 64 games back in the day. Fun stuff.
The S_AUJP file that JP linked to (and Rbob forgot-again!) is set up to be relocatable. Just cut an paste your new code text. Then assemble. Several cheap or free text editors out there. I'd swear I had a hex editor that would cut paste. I rarely used it except to do a change w/o all of the assemble steps. I haven't touched it since we released the v4 bin.
Also, one of the original S_AUJP testers had a MT. I copied of all of the vette MT code changes. So it's supported a MT as far as I know since it was released. I thought we added a line in the info file about that getting done.
There weren't many changes in the code.
Also, one of the original S_AUJP testers had a MT. I copied of all of the vette MT code changes. So it's supported a MT as far as I know since it was released. I thought we added a line in the info file about that getting done.
There weren't many changes in the code.
Doesn't matter since it can't handle boost. If they had released the disassembly info somewhere where I could find it I'd just have continued on the SAUJP, but nobody could help. So I did this.
Vanilla - did you fix the alpha-N map failure code? Or did it need anything?
It's not documented AFAIK. I just found it one day during bench testing.
That part of the code jumped around too much and I couldn't follow it mentally at the time. Code work had been interfering with family life for a while at that point and I stopped working on it after we got V4 out.
MAT won't work well for boost. They get over ranged very quickly on 3 bar.
If you're going to share your code work, you might consider going with the 3.3 bar setup. In theory, the 7730 w/ 8d should work on a 4 6 or 8 cylinder w/ a 4x Ign. trigger.
F14 is used by most for the WB. Some people back in the day used the other pin that I don't recall at the moment but we included it in our version of the WB code.
You'll want to remove that bit switch if running two map sensors. The repin is simple but people still complain...
It sounds like you have a better hand on this than JP and I did. It's not much code work to add a 2 or 3 bar bit switch.
Doesn't matter since it can't handle boost. If they had released the disassembly info somewhere where I could find it I'd just have continued on the SAUJP, but nobody could help. So I did this.
There are two individuals that contributed code that don't want it public.
The WB code and the flashing lights code.
The file JP linked has the base 8D code commented.
Lot's of people have said they would do 8D-B but you seem to be the first to do it and talk about it. Posting code on the board tends to put people more at ease.
I don't come on here much. Talk to JP about it. As long as you don't repurpose too many bits and pins with out checking with people, your code should port to the super assembly very easy. It really depends on if you are going to make things public or not. We only release bins but share code behind the scene.
Vanilla - did you fix the alpha-N map failure code? Or did it need anything?
It's not documented AFAIK. I just found it one day during bench testing.
That part of the code jumped around too much and I couldn't follow it mentally at the time. Code work had been interfering with family life for a while at that point and I stopped working on it after we got V4 out.
Can you go into a little detail as to what it does or doesn't do? Using IDA I can run through it in seconds.
Originally Posted by Z69
MAT won't work well for boost. They get over ranged very quickly on 3 bar.
Only using a 2 bar. My biggest hurdle is no turbo yet and no testers.
Originally Posted by Z69
If you're going to share your code work, you might consider going with the 3.3 bar setup. In theory, the 7730 w/ 8d should work on a 4 6 or 8 cylinder w/ a 4x Ign. trigger.
My work is already shared. If anybody wants anything more I can get it to them. I'm only building a 2 bar setup because that's all I plan. This isn't a race car it's a Vert cruiser. I'll worry about 3 bar when I get a Formula.
Originally Posted by Z69
F14 is used by most for the WB. Some people back in the day used the other pin that I don't recall at the moment but we included it in our version of the WB code.
You'll want to remove that bit switch if running two map sensors. The repin is simple but people still complain...
Already done. A3 Is the other, but there are many more. I don't plan on 2 MAP sensors still happy with OEM drivability I currently have on a 2 bar.
Originally Posted by Z69
It sounds like you have a better hand on this than JP and I did. It's not much code work to add a 2 or 3 bar bit switch.
I don't know how far your reach goes so I can't comment, but I've already build in many switches for future plans. It's quite simple.
If you have any SAUJP background files, I'd love to see them. Maybe I'll copy paste my work into that if you have it all. Otherwise I'll continue on my merry way as-is!
There are two individuals that contributed code that don't want it public.
The WB code and the flashing lights code.
Ha! Don't worry about that. The secret's out. I haven't perfected the flash, but it's working already. I didn't know SAUJP flashed any lights. News to me. And the wideband I've been running in my own car for weeks with my own code.
There are two individuals that contributed code that don't want it public.
The WB code and the flashing lights code.
What does the WB code actually do? I was under the impression that it just spit out an AFR based on a lookup table in the target AFR word, which is the wrong way to do it anyway if you're just trying to log AFR.
It should spit out ADC counts and let tunerpro scale the gauge, that way you can support multiple wideband controllers.
What does the WB code actually do? I was under the impression that it just spit out an AFR based on a lookup table in the target AFR word, which is the wrong way to do it anyway if you're just trying to log AFR.
It should spit out ADC counts and let tunerpro scale the gauge, that way you can support multiple wideband controllers.
-- Joe
Mine does but it's filtered prior(actually you can log unfiltered too if you really want). For now that's all it does. Eventually it will cut timing and attempt to dump fuel in the event of a lean condition among other things I deem worth doing.
What does the WB code actually do? I was under the impression that it just spit out an AFR based on a lookup table in the target AFR word, which is the wrong way to do it anyway if you're just trying to log AFR.
It should spit out ADC counts and let tunerpro scale the gauge, that way you can support multiple wideband controllers.
-- Joe
Ok smart guy - what about the people that don't use pc based scan tools?
A 0-255 number displayed isn't very useful while you are driving.
At the time a lot of people used Datamaster too.
Of course it has bit selectable raw output. I'm glad you have time to critic 10yr old code instead of contribute to adding boost code.
Ha! Don't worry about that. The secret's out. I haven't perfected the flash, but it's working already. I didn't know SAUJP flashed any lights. News to me. And the wideband I've been running in my own car for weeks with my own code.
My sig has the link to the released test bin.
Post code not bins. Very few want to hac your bin.
You'll have to switch to assembly from direct hex.
There's plenty of people that will critic your code. Some will offer better solutions too. Or something you didn't consider. -Rbob for one.
JP and I did this as a hobby. No schooling on it at all. Completely figure it out as we go. We spent weeks trying to figure out the 8D I/O controls.
To me it appears that GM got a custom chip since the registers don't line up with the 68HC11 manual.
All the guys that we think or we know they know how it works wouldn't offer up any hints of where to look at as a starting point.
Ok smart guy - what about the people that don't use pc based scan tools?
A 0-255 number displayed isn't very useful while you are driving.
At the time a lot of people used Datamaster too.
Of course it has bit selectable raw output. I'm glad you have time to critic 10yr old code instead of contribute to adding boost code.
I was asking a legitimate question, not trying to get your undies in a twist.
I've seen and used the old $8D wideband patch, and it did exactly what I said. My question simply was, did someone actually extend the functionality for feedback or is it the same old patch that has been floating around for years.
It's 2016. Pretty much everyone uses Tunerpro, TTS doesn't even sell Datamaster anymore.
Post code not bins. Very few want to hac your bin.
You'll have to switch to assembly from direct hex.
There's plenty of people that will critic your code. Some will offer better solutions too. Or something you didn't consider. -Rbob for one.
JP and I did this as a hobby. No schooling on it at all. Completely figure it out as we go. We spent weeks trying to figure out the 8D I/O controls.
To me it appears that GM got a custom chip since the registers don't line up with the 68HC11 manual.
All the guys that we think or we know they know how it works wouldn't offer up any hints of where to look at as a starting point.
I'm self taught as well. Nothing but my own pee brain to figure it out.
No code to post. I'll gladly share my IDA file but nobody uses IDA.
Last edited by Vanilla Ice; Sep 8, 2016 at 07:32 PM.
I was asking a legitimate question, not trying to get your undies in a twist.
I've seen and used the old $8D wideband patch, and it did exactly what I said. My question simply was, did someone actually extend the functionality for feedback or is it the same old patch that has been floating around for years.
It's 2016. Pretty much everyone uses Tunerpro, TTS doesn't even sell Datamaster anymore.
-- Joe
It's 10yo code. -based off the WB patch w/ added features that were requested at the time.
I got it from the $59 guys.
And IIRC TTS is one the reasons things aren't made public.
$59 has WB feedback but I never got around to porting the code over and they won't let us make it public.
I will say this- you were one of the few to thank me for the large displacement ve calc fix.
I will say this- you were one of the few to thank me for the large displacement ve calc fix.
I sure did. I used Super $8D on my C4 for a number of years and it worked fantastic.
I think you took offense to my question, which wasn't intended to offend you. I was simply asking what was so special about the WB patch that it was top secret.
I do software for a living by the way, and I spend a good portion of my time dealing with the attorneys. So I'm well aware about intellectual property, I just don't see the big deal in these patches. It's not like anybody is making money with this stuff.
If you remember, Bruce absolutely lost his mind when everyone was making custom bins and refusing to release the source (after spending years learning from Bruce and others). Sometimes I think when Bruce died, diy_prom died with him.
I haven't posted much anywhere for a while now.
Been doing a lot of lurking on yellow bullet. Easy to get corrected over there by someone who's done the trial and error to figure things out. Just have to figure out who's paid someone else to do that trial and error for them for context.
Easy to take text wrong w/o audible tone or facial expression.
Memory coming back now that I have to not read anything extra into your posts.
It's a problem that I have. Maybe before I retire I'll get these things figured out.
All of that stuff with the diywb and other things happened before I joined.
You had to learn how to talk to Bruce via email. I'd repeat something I read and he'd well - you know...
He gave me and JP a lot of encouragement behind the scenes when we started on S_AUJP.
The only thing special about any of our code mods was that they were new to JP and I.
Several of the contributors gave us their code on condition it was never made public.
That all there is too it. So only bin's are released. It frustrates me too.
Not that it's that hard to hack our mods anyway. Dis the stock bin and ours and do a compare...
;---------------------------------------------
; SPEED DENSITY Base Pulse Width CALCULATION
;---------------------------------------------
ldd *L006F ; GRAMS AIR/CYL
ldx *L00F1 ; FINAL TOTAL AF VAL (AFR) (**SWAP THIS TO REMOVE LIMIT)
; (0.359 SEC/GRAM, 2.86 g/Sec)
jsr LE42C ; 16 * 16 (RET W MIDDLE 2 BYTES IN D) (Is LE424 in ANHT)
; (PROD/256)
ldx L841C ; SEC/GRAM PROD OF INJ FLOW Rate, (**SWAP THIS TO REMOVE LIMIT)
jsr LE3F6 ; 16 x 16 (RET W/UPPER 2 BYTES IN D) (Is LE3EE in ANHT)
rolb ; MULT X 2
rola ;
std *L00E2 ; Base Pulse Width
PW adder for now hooks into the VE table look up. Could put it into a PW adder directly but haven't. In actuality as its set it'll work better as a subtractor.
Last edited by Vanilla Ice; Sep 10, 2016 at 09:13 PM.
The WB routine was setup to read most of the popular devices at the time and also had an option for RAW output.
From the docs:
Code:
Wide Band 02 (WBo2) [Don Dibble, 1981TTA & Scott Lopez]
WBo2 reporting is provided for 7730/7749 ECMs and is controlled with the following Flags describing the supported sensors/controllers:
0x99A WB OPT 1, b7 = Zeitronix
WB OPT 1, b6 = AEM Linear
WB OPT 1, b5 = Innovate LC-1 (1-2 V)
WB OPT 1, b4 = PLXWBLin
WB OPT 1, b3 = TE 2.0 Linear
WB OPT 1, b2 = AEM NonLinear
WB OPT 1, b1 = Innovate Linear L2H2 (vdc*2+10)
WB OPT 1, b1 = FJO
WB OPT 1, b0 = DIY_TE NonLinear
0x99B WB OPT 2, b0 = RAW A/D Output
If a bit is set, WBo2 AFR or Raw Output will be reported.
WBo2 data is ONLY reported.
Engine functions continue to be controlled by an installed NBo2 sensor.
Locations moved around from version to version but the items remained the same.
Jp
The WB routine was setup to read most of the popular devices at the time and also had an option for RAW output.
From the docs:
Code:
Wide Band 02 (WBo2) [Don Dibble, 1981TTA & Scott Lopez]
WBo2 reporting is provided for 7730/7749 ECMs and is controlled with the following Flags describing the supported sensors/controllers:
0x99A WB OPT 1, b7 = Zeitronix
WB OPT 1, b6 = AEM Linear
WB OPT 1, b5 = Innovate LC-1 (1-2 V)
WB OPT 1, b4 = PLXWBLin
WB OPT 1, b3 = TE 2.0 Linear
WB OPT 1, b2 = AEM NonLinear
WB OPT 1, b1 = Innovate Linear L2H2 (vdc*2+10)
WB OPT 1, b1 = FJO
WB OPT 1, b0 = DIY_TE NonLinear
0x99B WB OPT 2, b0 = RAW A/D Output
If a bit is set, WBo2 AFR or Raw Output will be reported.
WBo2 data is ONLY reported.
Engine functions continue to be controlled by an installed NBo2 sensor.
Locations moved around from version to version but the items remained the same.
Jp
While that's nice and "easy" for Noobs, isn't the internal math taxing the ECU when tunerpro can easily handle that and a commented/uncommented ADS/X file be better and equally easy?
That's how I have it. Let tunerpro do the mathing. I guess it really depends on how much coding you're planning on adding. A little would never be noticed.
I added a counter to my last 32 bit rom to tell me cpu cycles so I knew what effect I had implemented.
Not really, it only does the calc for the selected sensor. Only a couple of lines.
Output is always one scale so TP doesn't need multiple setups.
Users get really confused with items in ADXs that they do not use and have the same address in the datastream that they do use.
Multiple $8D definitions already abound that are all different to some extent.
Trying to keep it simple.
Not really, it only does the calc for the selected sensor. Only a couple of lines.
Output is always one scale so TP doesn't need multiple setups.
Users get really confused with items in ADXs that they do not use and have the same address in the datastream that they do use.
Multiple $8D definitions already abound that are all different to some extent.
Trying to keep it simple.
I can see it your way, but I still prefer mine. As far as I'm concerned any amount of code that can be run by the laptop is always better run by the laptop processor.
As far as the ADX scare, you can start the ADX file with commented instructions at the top that simply and easily tell you how to enable/disable parameters and is just as easy as changing the parameter in the tune.
Then there's the people that need somebody else to tune and they swap Widebands. Now they have to pay some guy to click a button and call it tuning. There's a ton of people that can receive your emailed ADX file, edit it for you and email it back. There's no easy snailmailing of a PROM to do the same thing.
PW adder for now hooks into the VE table look up. Could put it into a PW adder directly but haven't. In actuality as its set it'll work better as a subtractor.
Rather than jump around questioning things- Lets wait till you're done and post the assembly code of the new routines you added.
I remember why I didn't switch to IDA. I had to work out getting all the comments from 10k lines of commented text file that would assemble into IDA since we had spent all of the time adding the comments from ANHT to AUJP.
What exactly do you want to see? I'm not changing anything until I can test it. Which I don't plan on until 2018 or later. This car is getting some resto love first. So unless a tester pops up its set now.
I got my basics done but have so little time to devote to this I spend the little time I do on useful features mostly.
So you want to see oem code with the actual jsr written in?
Or do you want to see where I've changed the scaling of a sensor?
Talk about boring and pointless.
Open the bin in a hex editor and and look at the changes. Theres not many.
There's no magic in this rom.
Last edited by Vanilla Ice; Sep 18, 2016 at 08:57 PM.
So you want to see oem code with the actual jsr written in?
Or do you want to see where I've changed the scaling of a sensor?
Talk about boring and pointless.
Open the bin in a hex editor and and look at the changes. Theres not many.
There's no magic in this rom.
The problem is a double edged sword. Anyone who currently has a boosted car is already using something to control their boost fueling and spark.
Anyone thinking of going to a boosted car won't try something that is untested.
The Delco hacking guys are all into that 12p stuff, so they won't care.
The Code 59 guys, same thing.
I'd try it, but I'm not willing to change my Delphi 56 connectors to plug in a '730 ECM.
I think Rob is running a '730 variant, maybe he's interested in giving it a try on his new turbo car.
Only reason i wanted to use it was because i had a stock car that ran great on stock 8d code. Code $59 works good but does require a start-from-scratch type deal which takes longer to tune. A simple start from 305 tpi code i already was running on would have been perfect
Regardless, if my car dont sell soon, i may freshen the motor and go front mount over winter. But i think a 5.3 swap would give it more retail value or retail desire so that may be a better investment
I do want to go boosted someday, I do not have any hardware planned yet for it.
Will be 2 bar max on my setup for sure.
I do want to try it, I have a test car but only 1 bar
I can simulate on a bench but not much more. That will take a bit of cleaning up but it still works. Hopefully can find some play time soon.
Regardless, if my car dont sell soon, i may freshen the motor and go front mount over winter. But i think a 5.3 swap would give it more retail value or retail desire so that may be a better investment
The biggest problem is it's not a t-top car. The market is soft, and the most desirable cars are t-top, convertible. Most guys looking for hard tops want a track car, and they are not paying. Guys who are paying want a mint t-top/vert.
LT1 C4's are on craigslist now in the 3-6k range. I saw an early C5 for 6k yesterday.
I think the opposite is true. I dont know why anyone would want A flimsy weak leaking t top car lol hard tops are where its at
Oh well
Not everyone wants an 8 second drag car. Most of the people who are buying these are in their 40s and looking for a nice Sunday car.
And the t-tops don't leak when the car is in the garage. Who drives these in the rain!?
I know a few people on the forum say that these cars are their "Daily Driver", but that's cuz they are poor and can't afford something made in the last 5 years.
If the body is in mint shape though, someone may want to buy it to make a strip/street car, so I wouldn't do anything to it. Just wait for a buyer.
And the t-tops don't leak when the car is in the garage. Who drives these in the rain!?
More than you think, i see them out alot but then again they arent always the nicest cars. More often than not its getting caught in a flash rain storm that just pops up in the summer. Happens to me often on race tire that makes me nervous. Or some people may not have garage space
Anyway i just wanted to test this code but i sold all the turbo stuff. Wish i didnt cuz i basically let it go for cheap
I still have flanges and bunch of 1.75" mildsteel bends... Cant sell that stuff it seems so should use it up
I know a few people on the forum say that these cars are their "Daily Driver", but that's cuz they are poor and can't afford something made in the last 5 years.
Jesus what a thing to say.
While I wouldn't say it is my daily I do drive it as much as my daily.
I guess I'm poor and can't afford it.
How about we stop this conversation in this thread.
Have an NVSRAM board now so this project is officially headed for flexfuel.
If you have any other ideas for what to add with NVSRAM let me know, just know that I'm not interested in flashing bins!
I will keep it on a switch so that this can still be used without it to continue the turbo freeware.
Have an NVSRAM board now so this project is officially headed for flexfuel.
If you have any other ideas for what to add with NVSRAM let me know, just know that I'm not interested in flashing bins!
I will keep it on a switch so that this can still be used without it to continue the turbo freeware.
dude, how hard would it be for you to make the code work with a 3 bar map. currently my car is wired for a 3 bar, i'd be willing to test this code under boost. i'm having a lot of difficulty with code59 in the idle arear
dude, how hard would it be for you to make the code work with a 3 bar map. currently my car is wired for a 3 bar, i'd be willing to test this code under boost. i'm having a lot of difficulty with code59 in the idle arear
Are you using the closed throttle table for idle instead of the main 3bar table?
dude, how hard would it be for you to make the code work with a 3 bar map. currently my car is wired for a 3 bar, i'd be willing to test this code under boost. i'm having a lot of difficulty with code59 in the idle arear
There's a post on the first page where I give the addresses and values necessary to run this with a 3 bar.
