installed dsmlink and got these codes

[highintenzity4]

When I put my car in drive(Im auto) the rpms drop real low and the car wants to shut off and sometimes does... I have a check engine light so connected my dsmlink and got the o2 sensor heater malfunction(front) and the map sensor code... Could this be why my car is dying down on drive? I cleared the codes and still same problem... I have both my o2 front installed and the map sensor is not functioning because I have the magnus but I still connected it so it wouldnt throw a cel, but still did... Help would be appreciatted, thanks.

 

[Talesin]

Given that you don't have one of the air intake sensors installed, are running a MAF-T, and so on... more information would be needed. And generally a 'bad O2 sensor' error tends to either be the sensor, or the harness. More likely the sensor.

When did this start happening? What was the last modification/change you made before it started to screw up on the idle aspect?

 

[Ultimatedsm]

You should go on the DSMLINK forum for this. You have to get the MAF settings correct in the DSMLINK to make the GM MAFT work properly.

 

[Ginglingston11]

also check your spark plugs, to me it sounds like a misfire. my car was running on 3 cylinders and kept bucking and wanting to stall unless i gave it gas. but go check your plugs and wires, and make sure you have a spark plug socket with the rubber inside and dont remove the plugs after the cars been running. 1 your mess up the spark plug wires and 2 if you remove the plugs when its hot then youll strip the threads on the head. good luck

 

[xcz504d]

You're piggy backing a piggy back... Get rid of the MAF-T and let DSMlink do it's job, you might even want to consider using the "Fake MAF" function and eliminate the MAF completely... Either way, you don't need the MAF-T... If you decide to keep it, make sure you put the settings on the MAF-T to zero, then tune DSMlink for your injector size...

Like what's already been said, check the regular maintenance on your car... MOST DSM problems are caused by lack of general maintenance... Look through the forums and you'll see I'm right, most people find their fixes to be simple things, or find their replacments could have been prevented by routine maintenance... IE transfer cases locking up... If people would check their fluid levels regularly, this could be avoided... Crankwalk, another example of routine checks avoiding catastrophes...

Check your plugs, replace them and the plug wires if they've never been replaced since you've owned the vehicle, check your oil levels, if you don't run synthetic, make sure you use oil additives like lucas (low or dirty oil can cause your vehicle to stall under load)...

Check your vacuum hoses for cracks and leaks (another good reason your car dies under load) check your EGR vlave, what about your air filter, is it dirty or old? Maybe you have an injector clogged or stuck open... Fuel injector cleaner could help solve some of this...

A bad O2 sensor wouldn't cause these problems, you would be running rich, rough idle, and couldn't tune your car... But replacing the O2 sensor is part of general maintenance too... Advanced auto parts sold me one with the stock plug (so no soldering involved) for $60...

 

[98spydert]

You should go on the DSMLINK forum for this. You have to get the MAF settings correct in the DSMLINK to make the GM MAFT work properly.

+1 There are step by step threads specifically detailing how to tune with the MAFT in the forums. I definitely wound NOT ditch the MAFT just because you got DSMLink. They each serve their own purpose and together, they make for one hell of a daily driver. I love the combo. You'll need either a WB02 or a 3 bar MAP sensor to get the most out of the combo but you can make it work without them. It sounds like your O2 sensor is the cause of the bad idle.

 

[Talesin]

If you want to rely solely on VE, then it could theoretically eliminate the MAF... I've seen nothing to that effect on the DSMLink FAQ or user's manual though.

Zero the MAF-T and just use DSMLink to tune. What I'll be doing, though I'm probably going to wait until January or so, see if V3 comes out, as it's rumored to be able to use the GM MAS directly, no MAF-T needed.

 

[xcz504d]

If you want to rely solely on VE, then it could theoretically eliminate the MAF... I've seen nothing to that effect on the DSMLink FAQ or user's manual though.

Zero the MAF-T and just use DSMLink to tune. What I'll be doing, though I'm probably going to wait until January or so, see if V3 comes out, as it's rumored to be able to use the GM MAS directly, no MAF-T needed.

http://www.dsmlink.com/details-airflow.html

"allow the user to effectively disable the MAF input after a certain point and extrapolate airflow from that point forward"

Doesn't say you can't do it from start to finish

 

[larsrya8]

What I'll be doing, though I'm probably going to wait until January or so, see if V3 comes out, as it's rumored to be able to use the GM MAS directly, no MAF-T needed.

How did you hear that they were coming out with a new version? I was going to get DSMLink soon (within the next month). How reliable is this information?

I suppose it doesn't matter that much, because its a mere $50 to upgrade from V1 to V2, so it'll probably be the same for V2 to V3. Still, that's $50 I could spend on... gas?

 

[rowlex]

http://www.dsmlink.com/details-airflow.html

"allow the user to effectively disable the MAF input after a certain point and extrapolate airflow from that point forward"

Doesn't say you can't do it from start to finish

Yes, it does. AFTER a certain point. That point is where the stock MAS on a 1G is overrun. Or if you are able to push enough air to max out a stock 2G mas (which is good up to about 400HP).

The MAFT is fine to use with DSMLink, zero all the knobs out on the MAFT. It would be a good idea to calibrate it to your car specifically, as it is always a good amount off on every car I have seen it on.

I also suggest using the DSMLink forums for almost anything DSMLink related. As here you will get a lot of answers from people who don't know much about it. On the DSMLink forum you will get precise answers.

To help answer your problem here is what I would try:
Check the wires for your o2 sensor. (are you getting any feedback from it in dsmlink)?
Replace o2 sensor.

About your MAP sensor, I believe in the DTC's part of DSMLink you can turn off the MAP sensor check. (I dont have my car with me so I can't check it myself to make sure).

 

[2gGSX]

How did you hear that they were coming out with a new version? I was going to get DSMLink soon (within the next month). How reliable is this information?

I suppose it doesn't matter that much, because its a mere $50 to upgrade from V1 to V2, so it'll probably be the same for V2 to V3. Still, that's $50 I could spend on... gas?

The earliest this would happen is probably spring 2006

 

[98spydert]

How did you hear that they were coming out with a new version? I was going to get DSMLink soon (within the next month). How reliable is this information?

I suppose it doesn't matter that much, because its a mere $50 to upgrade from V1 to V2, so it'll probably be the same for V2 to V3. Still, that's $50 I could spend on... gas?

There's no guarantee that the price won't go up on the next release of DSMlink. With features being looked at such as direct GM MAF support (no MAFT needed) and full time speed density, I'd guess the price will go up a little as it's getting closer to features in entry level standalone systems. I wouldn't skimp out on trying to save $50 but that's just me.

 

[98spydert]

Everyone has their own preferences, personally the MAF-T is just another piggy back on a piggy back, MAF-T combined with an AFC is a good deal, but DSMlink can eliminate the MAF completely, allowing for more air flow...

What??? It's obvious you have very little hands on experience with tuning and apparently, not a very good grasp on the basics. How is the MAF-T plus the SAFC a good choice and not "piggy backing a piggy back" as you put it? From a fuel tuning aspect, both of the above do the exact same thing. The SAFC takes the signal from the air sensor and alters it before the ECU receives the sensor, effectively tricking the ECU into thinking there is more or less air entering the engine than there really is. Welcome to piggy-back 101. The MAF-T does the exact same thing. First it alters the GM signal so it is compatible with the DSM ECU. Then if gives you the ability to do the exact same thing the SAFC does and tricks the ECU into thinking there is more or less air entering the engine than there really is.

When using the MAF-T and DSMLink, you let the MAF-T do it's primary duty of altering the GM signal into a format compatible with the DSM ECU. The GM sensor flows better over all than either DSM air sensor. It is more accurate and most people report a much more comfortable daily driver after they figure out how to calibrate it correctly. And while the 2G mas can only flow around 50lbs/min max, the GM hotwire sensor can go well above that. Rather than using the MAF-T's piggy back function of altering the airflow signal, you leave it zeroed out as others have stated and use DSMLink to redefine the internal fuel maps of the ECU, not piggy back hack them like the MAF-T or SAFC does.

And NO you cannot switch to speed density mode or completely eliminate the MAF in any way with the current version of DSMLink. You can use the fake MAF function and use a predefined or customizable VE curve to eliminate the MAF signal above a certain airflow limit but is only in effect during WOT conditions and above that airflow point. It's good if you out flow your stock MAF or for the big dogs who have outrun the GM sensor.

 

[larsrya8]

There's no guarantee that the price won't go up on the next release of DSMlink. With features being looked at such as direct GM MAF support (no MAFT needed) and full time speed density, I'd guess the price will go up a little as it's getting closer to features in entry level standalone systems. I wouldn't skimp out on trying to save $50 but that's just me.

I don't want to skimp out, but when I start modifying my DSM this Christmas I'm going to need something to tune with. I don't want to spend money on a logger and S-AFC when I could just get DSMLink. Without a guaranteed date for V3's release, I'll have to use V2. But I don't plan on using a MAF or speed density, so I suppose V2 will be sufficient for now.

They still don't have a memory board option for the 2G, so I was skeptical when I read that V3 was coming out. I would've thought the memory board would've been easier to create, and they've had a lot of time to pull it off.

 

[highintenzity4]

Sorry for not saying too much... Well I dont have the maf-t installed yet... I currently installed the 1g throttle body and I installed the denso o2 sensor....I also put on a billet torque stall converter, magnus intake manifold, and coil on plug ignition... Could it be a bad egr or isc on throttle body? Car also surges on park.... I installed new tb gaskets when I installed the 1g... I think I used the 1g egr though...

 

[98spydert]

I don't want to skimp out, but when I start modifying my DSM this Christmas I'm going to need something to tune with. I don't want to spend money on a logger and S-AFC when I could just get DSMLink. Without a guaranteed date for V3's release, I'll have to use V2. But I don't plan on using a MAF or speed density, so I suppose V2 will be sufficient for now.

They still don't have a memory board option for the 2G, so I was skeptical when I read that V3 was coming out. I would've thought the memory board would've been easier to create, and they've had a lot of time to pull it off.

Good point, we don't even know if V3 will happen in a few months or a few years. Another reason not to wait.

They have had time to develope the memory board for our 2Gs, and most likely, they already finished it. The problem is, they're not going to waste everyone's time upgrading their ECUs with memory boards, then later on, upgrade the software with the rest of the features. It's been discussed on the DSMLink boards and they do release little updates here and there and post them on the forums but they would like to keep all of the major updates for the next big release. Some upgrades will require equipment changes or changes to the PC software. So far, the small upgrades just require us to download a single file and update that file in our PC software, rather than a new chip or a whole new or rewritten software program.

 

[Talesin]

Actually, I took the time to email the DSMLink staff. Apparently the noises I'd heard were mistaken. Design for the V3 DSMLink is starting this December. They don't expect to have a finished version for at least 3-4 months, and are not sure if the GM MAS support (sans MAF-T) will make it into the final feature-set.

There will be an upgrade option for V2->V3, once it is ready.

Looks like I'll be placing my order as soon as I find a local place to do the socket service. Can't have my baby down for a full week-plus.

 

[larsrya8]

Looks like I'll be placing my order as soon as I find a local place to do the socket service. Can't have my baby down for a full week-plus.

Quote from DSMLink.com:
"We can almost always get ECUs back out the morning after we receive them."

So if you choose faster shipping DSMLink can take care of everything in a timely manner. Otherwise I suppose having a local shop do the socketing would be faster...

 

[xcz504d]

What??? It's obvious you have very little hands on experience with tuning and apparently, not a very good grasp on the basics. How is the MAF-T plus the SAFC a good choice and not "piggy backing a piggy back" as you put it? From a fuel tuning aspect, both of the above do the exact same thing. The SAFC takes the signal from the air sensor and alters it before the ECU receives the sensor, effectively tricking the ECU into thinking there is more or less air entering the engine than there really is. Welcome to piggy-back 101. The MAF-T does the exact same thing. First it alters the GM signal so it is compatible with the DSM ECU. Then if gives you the ability to do the exact same thing the SAFC does and tricks the ECU into thinking there is more or less air entering the engine than there really is.

When using the MAF-T and DSMLink, you let the MAF-T do it's primary duty of altering the GM signal into a format compatible with the DSM ECU. The GM sensor flows better over all than either DSM air sensor. It is more accurate and most people report a much more comfortable daily driver after they figure out how to calibrate it correctly. And while the 2G mas can only flow around 50lbs/min max, the GM hotwire sensor can go well above that. Rather than using the MAF-T's piggy back function of altering the airflow signal, you leave it zeroed out as others have stated and use DSMLink to redefine the internal fuel maps of the ECU, not piggy back hack them like the MAF-T or SAFC does.

And NO you cannot switch to speed density mode or completely eliminate the MAF in any way with the current version of DSMLink. You can use the fake MAF function and use a predefined or customizable VE curve to eliminate the MAF signal above a certain airflow limit but is only in effect during WOT conditions and above that airflow point. It's good if you out flow your stock MAF or for the big dogs who have outrun the GM sensor.

Theoretically (never done it but have heard of it) you can eliminate the MAF completely, with a little electrical knowledge, you can send "default" signal to the ECU, somthing like a 1000hz signal, so your idle isn't jacked... You'll have to forgive me, I'm only going to school to be a computer engineer...

You give this lesson about air flow, but know nothing about practical applications... AFC can adjust 50% up or down that calculates out to what? 660 injectors... Hmmm... Now tuning with just a MAF-T... hmmm... SOOO we "piggy back a piggy back" and "jerry rig" our automobile, put in lets say... 800 CC injectors... Bump up the MAF-T to compensate, then dial it in with the AFC... Maybe you're thinkin "thats stupid the MAF-T does the same job why would you back to back two systems like that" Again, lack of practical application... SAFC II allows you to tune from 12 different RPM points if I remember correctly? and the original is 6? Either way... MAF-T only sets a BASE LINE

So... part 2... the MAF-T is accurate for 2 reasons, one it's not a Karman type sensor, but that is a fraction of the reason it reads better... The real reason, is... can you keep a secret? the placing of the MAF... Because you're not reading 10 degree air and really injesting 90 degree air like the stock MAF (because of it's location before the turbo) you get more accurate results, you're getting a TRUE reading of the actual air entering the intake...

Just a little piggy backing 101 for ya

 

[rowlex]

So... part 2... the MAF-T is accurate for 2 reasons, one it's not a Karman type sensor, but that is a fraction of the reason it reads better... The real reason, is... can you keep a secret? the placing of the MAF... Because you're not reading 10 degree air and really injesting 90 degree air like the stock MAF (because of it's location before the turbo) you get more accurate results, you're getting a TRUE reading of the actual air entering the intake...

Just a little piggy backing 101 for ya

I agree with you on some of this stuff, while it may work I doubt its best to piggy back a piggy back. The wiring alone would be retarded. I think injector dead time would also play a big role when getting into larger injector sizes, I notice when I change my IDC from 160 to 320 the car smoothes out A LOT.

The idea of eliminating the maf completly is useless. You still need something to "count" the air. Or else it would have been done by now. Since every car is different, every turbo produces a different amount of air I think it's really silly to try to "default" something like that, it needs to be calibrated to the specific car and circumstances.

finally, the placement of the maft doesnt do anything for telling the ECU temperatures. The MAFT has a locked in temperature at 79 or 80 degrees. It never changes from that (as far as our cars see) so the best option(between MAFT and stock MAS) unless your going to re-tune for each substantial weather change is to use a stock 2g mass unless your pushing enough air to overrun it.

 

[98spydert]

Theoretically (never done it but have heard of it) you can eliminate the MAF completely, with a little electrical knowledge, you can send "default" signal to the ECU, somthing like a 1000hz signal, so your idle isn't jacked... You'll have to forgive me, I'm only going to school to be a computer engineer...

Hacking up your air metering system has nothing to do with DSMLink's ability to run any sort of speed density mod. Like I said, you cannot remove the air metering device just because you bought DSMlink. On top of that, I've never heard of anyone successfully remove the air metering device and sending a "default signal" as you put it without doing a lot more work. Some REAL computer engineers who are also DSM enthusiasts have managed to write their own code for a speed density system while retaining the DSM ECU.

You give this lesson about air flow, but know nothing about practical applications... AFC can adjust 50% up or down that calculates out to what? 660 injectors... Hmmm... Now tuning with just a MAF-T... hmmm... SOOO we "piggy back a piggy back" and "jerry rig" our automobile, put in lets say... 800 CC injectors... Bump up the MAF-T to compensate, then dial it in with the AFC... Maybe you're thinkin "thats stupid the MAF-T does the same job why would you back to back two systems like that" Again, lack of practical application... SAFC II allows you to tune from 12 different RPM points if I remember correctly? and the original is 6? Either way... MAF-T only sets a BASE LINE

Again, you lack experience even though you can bang out "theories" on your keyboard all day. You're not going to get a vehicle to run to the best of it's abilities by hacking the air signal twice and trying to run 800cc injectors without any sort of eprom chip. A lot of people have trouble just trying to use 650s and a piggy back. 95% of the time, anything bigger is out of the question without some sort of eprom modification. It's obvious you can do both and add together the corrections but no one with any common experience would recommend it. You said, "Why duct tape your car?" So why would you by going this ghetto route?

 

[98spydert]

finally, the placement of the maft doesnt do anything for telling the ECU temperatures. The MAFT has a locked in temperature at 79 or 80 degrees. It never changes from that (as far as our cars see) so the best option(between MAFT and stock MAS) unless your going to re-tune for each substantial weather change is to use a stock 2g mass unless your pushing enough air to overrun it.

The placement of the MAF-T does indirectly tell the ECU the temperature of the air like our rocket scientist pointed out above. The stock sensor uses the Kv system to count air, although it has no way to determine the density of the air that it counts. That's why the stock MAS has a temp circuit built in and our ECU receives a temp signal.

The GM hotwire sensor measures the "count" and the density in one reading. Therefore, the single signal going to the ECU accounts for the amount of air entering and the density (temp) of that air.

 

[xcz504d]

While programming is part of ocmputer engineering, along with digital circuits and what not... Doesn't mean I like to do that, I do computer networking for a living, the engineering degree is for job opportunities in the future... As far as programming my own code... Thats like chemist creating his own tires for his car, "why recreate the wheel?" In my mind, DSMlink is tried tested and proven, and I don't want to do their footwork all over again...

Now... I said up above not to piggy back a piggy back... Somehow this turned into how I "would do a setup" instead of how things work...

98spydert, good info on the MAF with the temp sensors, my next post was going that exact same route

Second part of your post says how the GM meter works, and perfectly explains why placement after the air is intercooled would give more exact readings...

I would never rheostat a 1000hz oscillator into my car, hell thats a basic version of a AFC, and I think those are cheap (i know the AFC doesnt have a oscillator in there)... BUT I HAVE heard of people trying it... didn't care to follow up with their success...

Dead time on injectors, perfect reason why you shouldn't use an AFC at all... i would spend $100 at keydiver for a chip programmed to my injectors before re-installing an AFC into my car...

Again... for the cost of MAF-T and DSMlink... I would wait another month, and save the extra money and put it towards a stand alone...

Rowlex criticized for piggy backing a piggy back... but didn't read very well, this all started with me saying piggy backing a piggy back is bad, turned into a side discussion about how how different setups work, then into this...

 

[98spydert]

Rowlex criticized for piggy backing a piggy back... but didn't read very well, this all started with me saying piggy backing a piggy back is bad, turned into a side discussion about how how different setups work, then into this...

I believe you critisized the idea of "piggy backing a piggy back" while refering to using DSMLink and the MAF-T and suggested using an SAFC and MAF-T instead which is rediculous. DSMLink is not a piggy back.

 

[98spydert]

If thats the way it sounded, thats not at all what I meant... I read back over what I posted, maybe the verbiage through off what my intent was... Im not a fan of piggy backs, AFC was a good temporary install, but ultimately, I didn't like it... DSMlink is a piggy back though, it alters the way the stock ECU deals with incoming data, AFC does similar, but instead of altering how the stock ECU deals with the data, it alters teh data it sees... Either way you're mainpulating the stock ECU data...

I don't think you understand what a piggy back is or what DSMLink does. A piggy back, (auxiliary computer or interceptor) changes a signal before the ECU receives it or before a sensor receives it. It tricks the ECU or sensor and is basically a hack. ANY EMS book will flat out tell you this. It’s not a matter of my opinion vs yours.

That chip that DSMLink replaces is simply the same information that was already there (more or less) but the user is now able to alter it. You don't trick anything, you physically re-write the fuel maps, the airflow maps, or whatever you're playing with in there. The end result is the same as getting your EPROM chip rewritten by DSMChips.com or any of the people that offer custom eprom chips except that you're able to change that information without removing the chip using the OBD com port and you have super user friendly Java based software so pretty much anyone can do it. Is a custom EPROM chip a piggy back also? No. Ultimatedsm, you answered your own question. No it's not a piggy back and no it's not a standalone system.