On 8051 ecm for an original 94 Auto F body, 3.23 (confirmed). When I ran the EEHack, it pulled the vin and factory cal
The cal stored in the ECM is 16199611
(edit)
Per FBody, it updates to 16210011
(note: the information on Fbody differs from the EE_CALIBRATION_LIST PDF)
So before I do anything inside the ECM, why shouldn't I put the corrected cal in there?
And I'll be honest, 100% noob
Last edited by Bent72; 05-31-2021 at 02:22 AM.
You COULD put the updated calibration in there, of course.Originally Posted by Bent72
You may want to study the differences between 16199611 and 16210011.
Although it's unlikely that there are any meaningful differences, you never know for sure if you might learn something.
THEY are NOT Lying to You.
You are NOT Even Lying to Yourself.
You ARE Being Lied to ... by Your SELF.
The Last Psychiatrist, aka ... Alone ...
Hi, and thanks for replying
I did compare each of the two .bin files in TunerPro. Looks like lower VE numbers across the board in the newer bin, as well as some changes in the downshift table on the 3-2 shift. I kinda suspect that just trying it is an option. I wasn’t sure if I would lose anything on the flash. Still reading through all the EEHack info I can find, there’s a lot of tools in there I don’t know how to use yet, and others I don’t even know are there
Regarding those changes, did the numbers changed go up or down?
Either way, GM's normal shift table is written to achieve the Corporate Average Fuel Economy City & HiWay MpG scores on the Monroney sticker.
Instead, you should write your normal shift table so that the shifter can stay in 'OD' and need never visit 'D' '2' or '1' under normal circumstances.
It may cost a few MpG compared to the Monroney sticker, but it's usually better for the transmission.
If as a driver you've very unusual circumstances that occasionally necessitate using another shift table, that's what the Performance Shift table is for.There's always a non-zero chance that you could brick the pcm each time you try to flash it, but FlashHack minimizes this so well that you should only need one spare pcm to feel perfectly at ease - and most people will never need to use the spare pcm.
If you save 16199611 prior to flashing in 16210011, you'll lose nothing, and you can always go back to 16199611.
THEY are NOT Lying to You.
You are NOT Even Lying to Yourself.
You ARE Being Lied to ... by Your SELF.
The Last Psychiatrist, aka ... Alone ...
Not at the laptop this moment, but I can post the shift chart later
All the movements on that downshift are negative value (see edit post 8)
I don’t have a spare ECM, but I almost to the point of flashing the ECM anyway to tune it. Haven’t read too many posts about flashhack and ECMs having a problem, so I’m going to give it a go tomorrow I think. I’ll make sure to copy my ECM before sticking my fat fingers in there
Last edited by Bent72; 05-31-2021 at 06:01 PM.
Making the 4L60E less responsive to the enthusiast's foot. No thanks.In my experience with TunerCAT LT1 OBD1's flash utility, I've experienced less than .1% brickage - and FlashHack is clearly superior.
Go ahead and flash it.
Last edited by LeMarky Dissod; 05-31-2021 at 06:22 AM.
THEY are NOT Lying to You.
You are NOT Even Lying to Yourself.
You ARE Being Lied to ... by Your SELF.
The Last Psychiatrist, aka ... Alone ...
You’ve confirmed what my inclination was, skip the shift table change and add the rest of the updated bin. I’ll give it a shot and post back
Thanks
Update to correct my information above
On the table for down shift pressure modifier 3>2
mph change
14 15.00
22 8.00
26 -12.00
In the table for "Performance Up/Down Shift Points" for the 3>2
0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -7.00 0.00
6.3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -7.00 0.00
12.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -5.00 0.00
18.8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -3.00 0.00
25.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -2.00 0.00
31.3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00
37.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00
Might try it, dunno. It will be hard to test if it doesn't stop raining
Last edited by Bent72; 05-31-2021 at 05:59 PM.
Using Flashhack, copied and saved what was in the PCM just fine. Loaded the new bin, said success.
Running EEHack, it was displaying the original bin number. Not sure if I did something wrong of if it is just showing the start point. I hit "RELOAD" and had no change
I suggest you load the latest cal from GM, unmodified and start tuning from there.
There is a service bulletin about the 3-2 clunk which I actually had long time ago and the update fixed it.
Here is some more info
https://tis2web.service.gm.com/tis2w...1&bm=_top#_top
The cal number is written in the eeprom and is not updated during flash. You can manually edit in eehack main window. Write your new cal id and hit Set CALID.
I dumped it straight in, no changes. I figured it was best to log it and if there was an issue, fix it later. For some reason got the CEL to come on and turned the fans on that time. Haven't found what it was though
I think I'm going to start using a notebook and just keep track as I go. That's how I deal with tech stuff at work, it leaves a nice paper trail.
Thanks for the info!
Got an E4214 error trying to open that link. Is there a browser setting i need to manipulate to make it open? This laptop is a bit clunky itself...
The link is broken. Try this site and enter the random google vin. Than follow instruction.
https://tis2web.service.gm.com/tis2web/
2G1FP22P8R2106454
It comes back with 16210011 as the "part number" and then has "CalId#", am I correct that those CalID numbers (16209578 and 9) are included in the 16210011?
I hope so, that's the one I loaded earlier!
Thanks for the link
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks