Whoa whoa whoa whoa. Can you really reflash 98-99 2g ECU's?

[turbolarry]

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/tun...830-98-99-ecu-users-info-needed-flashing.html

I was looking in this thread and seeing that you guys are working on sorting out some definitions (like I know what that means ). Can you reflash 98-99 2g ECU's?
I have a buddy with a '97 GSX and I turned him on to the Evo VIII ecu in the 2g thread, but if this is option, or will be soon I'll steer him the other way.

 

[bling5tatus]

Yes, you can reflash late model 2g ecu's.

 

[the_mork]

Expect a fair amount of time before it has much in the way of more than basic functionality. The evo ecu took quite a while to progress to where it is but basic tuning should be a realization shortly I would think.

Also, unfortunately it doesn't look like it will ever have the resolution that an evo8 ecu has but it certainly takes the cake over an safc. I wonder if the chip burner crowd has some information to help. A 95 ecu is certainly different but the basics should be somewhat portable.

 

[Ceddy]

The OpenPort 2.0 cable is suppose to be able to flash 98-99 DSM ECUs.

I have yet to hear of a confirmation of anyone successfully flashing one though.


The adjustments offered by the 98-99 factory ecu are amazing, there is a map for anything you could want. The 98-99 ecu is a major upgrade over the 95-96. Its a much better tuning option then most piggybacks; SAFC, ECU+, DSMLink Lite, or a chipped 95 ECU.

As to the 98-99 not being as good as the Evo8 ecu, the 98-99 is basically the same ecu as the Evo5-6. All the Evo8 offers is slightly larger maps. There is a lot of programming support for the Evo8 from the Evo community which is a plus, though. But you lose your Boost Gauge and Tach with the Evo8 swap, which is a minus.

The 98-99 will not work correctly with the 95-96 CAS and Crank sensors. But there are ways to fix that like installing a 1G adjustable CAS, like people do for 6-bolt swaps.


I think this will be a major tuning option in the very near future.

 

[the_mork]

Just to clarify, you do not lose the tach with an evo8 ecu. You need to cut one wire and then it works perfectly, otherwise it bounces around at low RPM.

 

[bling5tatus]

98/99 ECU's aren't just a dime a dozen though... and you've also got to think that the people that have 98/99 eclipses they're probably the ones that have the largest number of cars that are in REALLY good shape due to the less time spent "in the wild".... so these cars are less likely to be giving up their ecu's in the first place.

Not saying you cannot get an ecu from one of these, but I don't think they're just plentiful. I've known that these are flashable for a while.... but certain things are worth keeping "secret" .

 

[_Madman_]

There is also a 100 flash limit that the H8 specification suggests, so there is no information if we can reflash them unlimited number of times.

Also, even if EcuFlash doesn't work, you can find schematics of programmer over at EvoScan thread ( http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/tun...-evoscan-ecuflash-tuning-5.html#post151816974 ) and make your own programming tool.

 

[twdorris]

The 98-99 ecu is a major upgrade over the 95-96. Its a much better tuning option then most piggybacks; SAFC, ECU+, DSMLink Lite, or a chipped 95 ECU.

It's very interesting news, indeed. I sent Colby a '98 ECU to play around with about 3 years ago to see if we could jump start this whole process. I guess he's finally making some progress? Last I heard he was having issues getting the kernel for the H8/539F processor to behave reliably. But that was a rather long time ago.

However, I will go ahead and disagree on the "better than ECMLink Lite" comment. It's simply different. Certainly the '98/'99 code is more flexible in terms of map definitions and such from the factory, but it's not going to have anywhere near the logging capabilities nor will it be upgradeable to a full ECMLink package down the road. So "better", of course, is a matter of opinion here.

Still some very exciting news for '98/'99 owners.

Thomas Dorris
ECMTuning, Inc.

 

[the_mork]

but it's not going to have anywhere near the logging capabilities

This I might disagree with. the 98/99 ECU is capable of logging at the same speed of an evo8 ecu (or close) and uses MUT. For an evo ecu you can change the baud rate to any number you like. Ridiculous speeds up to about 100x regular logging have been tested and I would hope that the same can be done with an H8 computer. Maybe it can't but at this time I would imagine the potential is in there somewhere as this starts to mature.


Otherwise you have by all accounts a superior product and right now the average Joe can't even use this. You certainly don't need to listen to me about your business but it seems to me like this is the solution to 2g eprom shortages and has the potential to significantly defray a large part of the cost of your product and specifically the cost that doesn't even go to you. You might have already considered that though.

 

[knochgoon24]

All 95 EPROM ECUs have been stripped from most junkyards. Finding one that way would be rare. However, the 98-99 ECU should show up more, since it's been just about worthless until now.

And 98-99 cars are now 10 years old. They are in junkyards and they are in wrecks.

 

[twdorris]

This I might disagree with. the 98/99 ECU is capable of logging at the same speed of an evo8 ecu (or close) and uses MUT.

Yeah, I do understand that. But our logging system isn't just cranking up the baud rate. It's frame capturing related elements inside the ECU so that you have a snapshot of a "moment in time" of all sorts of related items so that the calculations presented outside on the laptop all appear to be instantaneous.

In addition, all the other logging implementations I've seen before use a request/response mechanism, basically based off the factory MUT protocol. Which means you take a hit on every byte you request from the ECU. You have to request it first and get a response back to that one byte and then move on to the next.

Our system is a streaming-system where the ECU captures frames and ships the data out constantly, as fast as it possibly can.

So I do still feel the logging system you get with ECMLink is going to be much nicer than anything I've seen so far on the '98/'99s or even the EVOs for that matter. EVOScan, IMO, is a horrible piece of software from a use-ability standpoint. Again, that's just my opinion of course. But I've heard much the same from several other people before.

As for the 100-flash limit on the H8/539, has anyone actually confirmed that? I thought all that was old-school mythology. I think the docs might suggest something like a 1000x limit, but even that I thought was proven false. Am I recalling incorrectly? I really thought there was no observed limit on the number of times the '98/'99 ECUs could be reflashed.

Thomas Dorris
ECMTuning, Inc.

 

[_Madman_]

As for the 100-flash limit on the H8/539, has anyone actually confirmed that? I thought all that was old-school mythology. I think the docs might suggest something like a 1000x limit, but even that I thought was proven false. Am I recalling incorrectly? I really thought there was no observed limit on the number of times the '98/'99 ECUs could be reflashed.

No confirmation yet, but some of the flash memory technologies have this drawback when after some amount of writing they become useless. Could be true, H8/539F spec only suggests that 100 flashes are guaranteed to be good.

P.S. EvoScan is really good from my point of view. The only problem is that we don't know if all formulas are valid and correct for DSM ECUs.

 

[twdorris]

Could be true, H8/539F spec only suggests that 100 flashes are guaranteed to be good.

Oh, yeah, you're right. I thought it said 1000, but I just checked: "Flash memory contents can be erased and reprogrammed up to 100 times." I guess I'm suffering from my own version of memory overload.

EvoScan is really good from my point of view.

I'll give it another shot then. That is, honestly, the first positive comment I've heard about it. But most comments I hear, of course, are from our own users. So I guess I should expect some bias.

Thomas Dorris
ECMTuning, Inc.

 

[_Madman_]

I'll give it another shot then. That is, honestly, the first positive comment I've heard about it. But most comments I hear, of course, are from our own users. So I guess I should expect some bias.

Well I like the graphing possibilities of it, like ( http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/tun...-excessive-knock-vibration.html#post151830713 ). And you can also add a wideband O2 to log, and display the results right below the load/rpm table.

All in all it's pretty good. We just need to verify the formulas. For example speed sensor, 97 2Gs outputs something really weird, and I don't know how it behaves on H8 ECU.

 

[turbolarry]

I'm sure ecmlink is great, but I didn't start this thread to debate which logging software is better. Can we stay on topic please?

So I need an Openport 2.0 cable, a 98-99 ecu, and possibly some kind of programming tool, if ecuflash does not work, right?
Will I need to change any pins/wires at the ecu plugs?
Do I need to splice in the flashing plug, or the secondary plug that's sepearte from the regular OBD-II plug? It's been a while since I peeked under a 2g dash.

Hey bling5tatus,
Start giving up some secrets buddy.

 

[_Madman_]

I'm sure ecmlink is great, but I didn't start this thread to debate which logging software is better. Can we stay on topic please?

So I need an Openport 2.0 cable, a 98-99 ecu, and possibly some kind of programming tool, if ecuflash does not work, right?
Will I need to change any pins/wires at the ecu plugs?
Do I need to splice in the flashing plug, or the secondary plug that's sepearte from the regular OBD-II plug? It's been a while since I peeked under a 2g dash.

Hey bling5tatus,
Start giving up some secrets buddy.

You need:
OpenPort 2.0 (not verified yet)
Latest version of EcuFlash ( EcuFlash - OpenECU free)
98/99 plastic H8/539F based ECU
Extra wire from ECU harness. Pin 79 from harness must go to second connector of OpenPort cable.
Definition (few people are writing these, so something should appear soon)

A ton of info can be found here ( http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/tuning-engine-management/311214-evoscan-ecuflash-tuning.html )

P.S.: If you have a car with 95/96 style CAS sensor, you are in deep trouble

 

[bling5tatus]

I'm sure ecmlink is great, but I didn't start this thread to debate which logging software is better. Can we stay on topic please?

So I need an Openport 2.0 cable, a 98-99 ecu, and possibly some kind of programming tool, if ecuflash does not work, right?
Will I need to change any pins/wires at the ecu plugs?
Do I need to splice in the flashing plug, or the secondary plug that's sepearte from the regular OBD-II plug? It's been a while since I peeked under a 2g dash.

Hey bling5tatus,
Start giving up some secrets buddy.

Lol, I dunnnnnooooo. You'd be surprised what some of the "smaller" dsm sites have stored on them in terms of a high concentration of VERY smart people posting vs. some smart people and an ass load of noobs spreading misinformation.

This is also off topic... so I'll move on. The way that I LOOK at it, is if you can flash the stock factory ecu w/o adding anything to it... and you have software that can change anything that the Mitsu engineers had access to.. then you've got a superior tuning system. The hardware was made for the car to begin with, and you're simply changing the way it works.... it's like adding more RAM to your Windows computer then being able to go into the performance manager and add some more swap space... where as some other solutions require you to put some box w/ an led w/ a knob on it and it just displays your swap space for you on the LED.... and you can twist the knob to "easily" change your swap space, yet this is all accessible WAY easier than people would give credit for. So they spend money on this silly box that's really unneeded. Sorry for the long analogy, but that's how I look at things, I like to put on my white lab coat and pretend I'm from mitsu when I'm changing my tune in my flashable eprom setup (moates ostrich).

The huge plus of an evo8 ecu or the 98/99 dsm ecu is that you don't have to have any thing to emulate the eprom chip, it just has the eprom flashing capabilities built into the board... which is HUGE advantage. That's all ECMLink is doing, they've built custom eprom emulators w/ ecmlink silk screened onto them and then made software to talk to it. There's plenty of things like this that a person on a tight budget can use and function the same way w/ less bloat. Not trying to knock Link, but I REALLY wish people would open their eyes more to tuning options around here instead of always doing what the guy next to you did. There's a reason I call them "sheep" .

What is going on in this thread is NOT sheep like activity.... until someone comes in here and says, "screw all this noise, get a gm-maft and a _________... and you're set."

 

[twdorris]

That's all ECMLink is doing, they've built custom eprom emulators w/ ecmlink silk screened onto them and then made software to talk to it.

ECMLink has added reflash capability to ECUs that Mitsubishi never intended to have that function. We've basically done what Mitsubishi did for you in the '98+ ECUs AND we wrote the logging and tuning tools to go along with it AND we added a TON of functionality to the codebase! Believe me, a simple standalone emulator is a LOT easier to create. So please stop trying to trivialize our work.

To the OP, I'll GLADLY stop defending our products in this thread if others will quit dragging me into it. I don't have time for this.

Thomas Dorris
ECMTuning, Inc.

 

[twdorris]

There's a reason I call them "sheep"

I don't consider people that make an informed decision to go with a proven product with YEARS of support doing new exciting things every day for the platform they enjoy to be "sheep". People are free to do what they want and if they want a product from a company that supports their platform on a daily basis and has done so for years, that's not "sheep like" behavior. That's simply a well informed decision weighing all the options available to them.

What is going on in this thread is NOT sheep like activity....

Of course not. It's something new and exciting, that's why I was trying to work with Colby three years ago to get something moving on this platform. I even started documenting some tables and such for the release, but it just never happened.

0804: 00 FF                   dw   0x00FF
0806: 00 45                   dw   0x0045
0808: 00 C0                   dw   0x00C0

That 0x0045 at offset 0x0806 is your injector scaler.

At offset 0x1804 you'll find your primary MAS frequency volumetric adjustment table (the one based on documentation from Mitsubishi).

At offset 0x181E you'll find your secondary MAS frequency adjustment table (the one that adjusts the documented value according to field test results).

Etc., etc.,

The '98-'99 ECU is a nice little box, assuming the rumors of a reflash limit are false. I have nothing against it. I just get really irked when people keep beating us up over stuff over and over again. I feel scared to even post on this forum most of the time. I know someone, somewhere is going to make snide comments about us and try to drag me into a big long debate about something they probably don't even understand themselves.

Thomas Dorris
ECMTuning, Inc.

 

[bling5tatus]

Tom I wasn't trying to drag anything anywhere to be honest, and I'm not going to debate with you because it's a losing battle for me every time. There is nothing I could say that will overcome your work in the DSM community.

I did not mean that you haven't added things to the ecu code that weren't there before like NLTS, Rev Limits, and the like. That's fine... and I wasn't calling anyone a sheep in particular, I was saying that there are MANY forms of sheep like activity... You will not see me buying a Civic because everyone raves about mpg... I'm not going to go buy a PS3 because a million people say that it's "the best". I wasn't trying to put you on the defense about your product and I apologize if I did. I would like to see this thread make it some where other than turn into a comparison to dsmlink like most other threads inquiring about tuning solutions.

 

[twdorris]

OK, fair enough. Let's just end it here then.

Can someone actually point me to a working version of the '98/'99 reflash tool? I can certainly wire it all up here on the bench and test it out. I might even try pushing that 100-fold reflash limit and see if this little ECU blows up or not.

One very nice feature the '98/'99 code base has that the '95 does not is the re-definable indices like the EVO8 has. That definitely requires a higher HP CPU and a LOT of work to manage. So assuming my read of the '98/'99 stuff is accurate, those index limits you have currently on the fuel/timing stuff are just a few clicks away from being "fixed". Well, sort of. You still have the limitation of the table size to some extent. But you should be able to change the indices at least.

Thomas Dorris
ECMTuning, Inc.

 

[bling5tatus]

What do redefinable indices do?

 

[twdorris]

What do redefinable indices do?

Provides for redefinable indices.

The EVO8 code has support for this from the factory and just based on my quick look at the '98/'99 stuff, it appears to as well.

Each table has a header attached to it. Inside that header are some pointers to things related to that table, including the address where the code can find the variable used to index each axis of the table *and* a pointer to a table that defines the indices in units of that variable! So you can simply change the indices in that other table and have the original table indexed by different values! I've thought several times about doing something similar in the '90-'95 code, but haven't found a real pressing need yet. Still a pretty cool design, though, if you're forced to work with factory defined tables.

Thomas Dorris
ECMTuning, Inc.

 

[mike96]

I can’t say from experience on the 98 - 99 ecu but there was a brief discussion on EvoM about how many times an evo ecu can be flashed. COBB clams the 100 flash limit on their website, that’s what they use to push their "live tuning" option. There are several individuals on EvoM that clam that they are closing on close to 1000 flashes with no problems. Me personally I am coming up on 50 flashes and I have only been running an evo ecu for about 5 months. I would imagine it is like anything else when it comes to limits, build it to withstand X-amount then advertise it as capable of R-amount. R amount = X-amount - 100..... If the 98 - 99 ecu is similar to the evo I would guess it would be close to the same. That being said I don’t see why you wouldn’t be able to use an OpenPort 1.3 cable to read and flash. my understanding is that the only difference in the flash ability of each ecu is that on the older H8 ecu's (98 - 99) is that you need the 14v flash power. That’s where the open port 2.0 comes in. I may be mistaken but I think I saw where someone was already ably to read a 98 – 99 ecu with the 1.3 cable.

 

[Ceddy]

I think the best part of the 98/99 ECUs is the amount of adjustment the user has, there is a table for anything you would want to change. And all the major tables are rescalable.
A lot of standalone don't have this level of fine tuning.

Plus if anyone would want to add something to it, there is a lot more unused processor power and memory then in earlier ECUs. The EVO guys have done some amazing stuff with their plastic case ECUs.

If anyone has a OpenPort 2.0 cable please chime in, I have an almost complete definition file you could test with.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.