krzychulbl
New member
you can use am29f010b-55jf or -70jf. They work with wide temperature range.
MSA15 re-flasheable chips ???
- Thread starter adamss24
- Start date
adamss24
Veteran Member
Thank you, i will try the ones i bought last week first then use the ones you suggested if they don't work as they should...
krzychulbl
New member
I use -70jf all the time without issues
The more you dig with the older ecu's msa11 / 12 the more your realise the limitations of the system/s You can by pass some of the harward to make up for this but still there is only so fare one can reach into the wormhole!!I like the logic, it just doesn't seem to work for me for some reason.
I wonder if i work hard enough..hmm... if I put in that extra i might be more tempted to say 'screw it' come 5 o clock haha
Seriously though, you do have to dedicate some time to this, otherwise you just end up dabblingnothing wrong at all with working with ecu's but it's a complex subject and it needs some time to sink your teeth into. The more you know, the more you realise you don't know, which means you dig more, and the more you dig the more you find, which is allright but the more you find the more you dig.
You just need an understanding family haha
A friend of mine has developed a stand alone fully programmable ecu for diesel use as well as for gassers but only cost effective for big tunes................its Bmw / Porsche based.
Oh aye? You got any links I could look at that'd be right up my street
About the limitations, it's an awkward subject. I suppose it depends what you have in mind as limitations, most tuners work that I've seen work with the ecu maps they have available for instance, but there's nothing stopping people experimenting with code changes, there's quite a few instances (not so much on the diesel side) of people adding their own subroutines to an oem ecu and literally enhancing it's feature set.
I think limits are often imposed not by technical possibilities but rather viability and the provision of information. Unfortunately you need a high demand for a solution to justify r+d to go quite deep.
Line I take is - anythings possible, not everythings practical.
Just my 2 cents though.
About the limitations, it's an awkward subject. I suppose it depends what you have in mind as limitations, most tuners work that I've seen work with the ecu maps they have available for instance, but there's nothing stopping people experimenting with code changes, there's quite a few instances (not so much on the diesel side) of people adding their own subroutines to an oem ecu and literally enhancing it's feature set.
I think limits are often imposed not by technical possibilities but rather viability and the provision of information. Unfortunately you need a high demand for a solution to justify r+d to go quite deep.
Line I take is - anythings possible, not everythings practical.
Just my 2 cents though.
Well !! there are simply limitations of what an ecu can accomplish as the best tuner in the world can only work with in the limits of what an ecu can give , Some tuner at that stage may add a piggyback system which adds more parameters / finer tuning which a more expansive newer system would give.
If not an add on then the oem ecu will be binned usually for an after market fully programmable edc but they are expensive especially for diesels.
If not an add on then the oem ecu will be binned usually for an after market fully programmable edc but they are expensive especially for diesels.
I'm probably looking into this in too low a level perhaps, in the 'a computer will do whatever it is instructed to do' sense
In aftermarket diesel tuning, do you think things are leaning towards wanting more power and flexibility that perhaps only aftermarket and open controllers can deliver?
In aftermarket diesel tuning, do you think things are leaning towards wanting more power and flexibility that perhaps only aftermarket and open controllers can deliver?
Only if your jumping from one gen to another or two gen's at once! With each new generation usually brings more power and a cleaner burn and a more adaptive tunable edc's................But because of the ever increasing emission protocols the diesel engine designers / builders have to come up with ways in which to make more power with better piston design and higher injection pressures!
So with this increasing extra power with each new gen ! A % of this power is always sacrificed because the newer increasing emission laws................We will soon be seeing multiple stage injection systems of even higher order that of peizo which will all have to be controlled by an edc with even greater cpu power and chipsets , To be able to control all these finite events and emission parameters.
P.S Some of these new engines in the not to distant future and some of those today would have been classed as race engines in the diesel world a few years back.
Last edited:
I think I may be debating semantics, but nonetheless it's natural for engine control technology to evolve with hardware. Engineering, both mechanical and electrical as all about getting a job done within set constraints, and it's these tightening constraints, emissions and fuel economy for example that is giving developers a chance to flex their creative muscles in finding solutions that can still deliver a good balance of power whilst meeting a lot of other criteria.
That said, whilst this is all true, I still do not look back at older engine management systems and see them as limited. I think this is because, whilst they may not have the digital signal processing capabilities, or speed, or resolution of newer engine control units, I've never, myself found myself in a situation where the ecu itself has been wanting. Sometimes ecu's do get swapped for convenience for example, you might swap an ecu with chips for a newer flashable type for instance, but it has to be said, for a given engine and injection type, sufficient knowledge of the original management system should give you enough to have a good go at working with it.
Of course, as far as tuning is concerned, getting this information is an issue in it's own right, but if we ignore that aspect then the job should be quite comfortable.
That's not to say I'm not interested in hearing benefits of aftermarket management systems over stock types, or do not believe benefits exist because I'm very open minded on the subject so do send me any links you have it'll make good evening reading (once i've finished coursework haha )
I've digressed a bit but I do find all this intruiging.
That said, whilst this is all true, I still do not look back at older engine management systems and see them as limited. I think this is because, whilst they may not have the digital signal processing capabilities, or speed, or resolution of newer engine control units, I've never, myself found myself in a situation where the ecu itself has been wanting. Sometimes ecu's do get swapped for convenience for example, you might swap an ecu with chips for a newer flashable type for instance, but it has to be said, for a given engine and injection type, sufficient knowledge of the original management system should give you enough to have a good go at working with it.
Of course, as far as tuning is concerned, getting this information is an issue in it's own right, but if we ignore that aspect then the job should be quite comfortable.
That's not to say I'm not interested in hearing benefits of aftermarket management systems over stock types, or do not believe benefits exist because I'm very open minded on the subject
so do send me any links you have it'll make good evening reading (once i've finished coursework haha )I've digressed a bit but I do find all this intruiging.
Last edited:
"That said, whilst this is all true, I still do not look back at older engine management systems and see them as limited"
They definitely were not limited and well up to the job in hand (For 90hp / 110hp) with built in 20% headroom depending which gen where talking about.............But neither of us are talking standard here and in order to build these motors and get 200hp to 300hp the systems hardware must be modified changed along with internal changes have to be considered..............And some times to do this depending on how wild you go! Then an aftermarket edc is necessary plus in some cases upgraded injection systems.
They definitely were not limited and well up to the job in hand (For 90hp / 110hp) with built in 20% headroom depending which gen where talking about.............But neither of us are talking standard here and in order to build these motors and get 200hp to 300hp the systems hardware must be modified changed along with internal changes have to be considered..............And some times to do this depending on how wild you go! Then an aftermarket edc is necessary plus in some cases upgraded injection systems.
Personally I don't think many even serious builds need to worry too much about aftermarket diesel engine management (don't get me wrong, i'm not turning my nose up at it). But it'd be interesting to hear of situations where this has helped a project along
I do think sometimes people can jump to aftermarket too soon, the petrol T16 rovers are an example because most use aftermarket management for tuning these up, when I asked why at a recent dyno session, apparently the ecu boost cuts, and nobody with the right knowledge has yet turned up to disable it. On forums everyone describes the management system as limited. It isn't. We [as people] are. Send the right resources in the right directions and the next forged build might not need so much investment on management.
In this example it just appears to me to be cracking a nut with a sledgehammer, someone with the gumption to do a bit of digging might resolve that quite easily.
I've not heard of many people using aftermarket management on their diesels, so its hard for me to form an opinion on it really.
Be interesting to see if the securing of ecu's against tuning over the next few years has any sort of impact on the desirability of aftermarket tuning systems.
I do think sometimes people can jump to aftermarket too soon, the petrol T16 rovers are an example because most use aftermarket management for tuning these up, when I asked why at a recent dyno session, apparently the ecu boost cuts, and nobody with the right knowledge has yet turned up to disable it. On forums everyone describes the management system as limited. It isn't. We [as people] are. Send the right resources in the right directions and the next forged build might not need so much investment on management.
In this example it just appears to me to be cracking a nut with a sledgehammer, someone with the gumption to do a bit of digging might resolve that quite easily.
I've not heard of many people using aftermarket management on their diesels, so its hard for me to form an opinion on it really.
Be interesting to see if the securing of ecu's against tuning over the next few years has any sort of impact on the desirability of aftermarket tuning systems.
Last edited:
How many tuners that you know actually write there own full programs from start to finish? Or can!! Most all buy and sell modified ones on line in the data domain web sites.
Have you noticed the time delay between how long it takes before a map becomes common place for a new model of car that comes out...........Because no ones cracking ecu's but waiting instead for the big tuning houses to do so before those maps once again get modified for larger turbo and fueling.
There may come a time where every ones totally locked out from engine management systems which would be interesting.
Have you noticed the time delay between how long it takes before a map becomes common place for a new model of car that comes out...........Because no ones cracking ecu's but waiting instead for the big tuning houses to do so before those maps once again get modified for larger turbo and fueling.
There may come a time where every ones totally locked out from engine management systems which would be interesting.
In an ideal world, all of them!
I do understand though if you consider that assessment either unrealistic or overly optimistic!
We know that knowing the address and function of maps is, as far as tuning is globally concerned the mere tip of the iceberg, but it's a nightmare task convincing someone when they believe everything they need to be interested in for a job is on an eeprom dump.
Hypothetical question - If you can make a car hit or get close to the target power, or at least get the car to a state where it can be handed over using a list of known maps, do you need to understand the system?
I actually beleive you ought to, but that does take a rather uncompromising stance biased more towards r+d then doing actual tuning.
There will always be ways, but I think it's going to take clever individuals to ensure tuning remains possible. This is not a bad thing
Are you still local to leeds dude?
Last edited:
Haha I was being optimistic!
Despair not, there are good tuners out there
The tuner is the key to tuning an ecu, that we'll agree on. Everything I've said about ecu's being flexible, it can happen, it's not the fault of the ecu, or a limitation of the ecu if we don't know what buttons to press is it.
Despair not, there are good tuners out there
The tuner is the key to tuning an ecu, that we'll agree on. Everything I've said about ecu's being flexible, it can happen, it's not the fault of the ecu, or a limitation of the ecu if we don't know what buttons to press is it.
Last edited:
Digital Corpus
Top Post Dawg
This is worth a bump imho.
You don't need to specifically buy the AMD/Spansion Flash NOR chips. Electronics just needs something specifically compatible. I've noted this factually by overclocking a calculator of mine and I swapped out the SRAM/RAM chips with lower access timing equivalents. Brand is irrelevant as long as you can trust the distributor such as mouser, digikey, element14/newark/farnell, etc.
With that said, the following chips should be adequate replacements. I don't recall if the access speed of the OE chips is 120 ns or 70 ns, but 55 ns chips will not harm anything.
You don't need to specifically buy the AMD/Spansion Flash NOR chips. Electronics just needs something specifically compatible. I've noted this factually by overclocking a calculator of mine and I swapped out the SRAM/RAM chips with lower access timing equivalents. Brand is irrelevant as long as you can trust the distributor such as mouser, digikey, element14/newark/farnell, etc.
With that said, the following chips should be adequate replacements. I don't recall if the access speed of the OE chips is 120 ns or 70 ns, but 55 ns chips will not harm anything.
I actually ended up finding a pin compatible eeprom that cost half as much with four times the addressing space, I've yet to try them out but they're here for if I ever feel like having four maps at once
Not yet seen a C166 whinge about checksums changing on the fly, so I expect to get away with it.
So yeah, it's definitely worth a shop around, worth looking at datasheets etc.
Not yet seen a C166 whinge about checksums changing on the fly, so I expect to get away with it.
So yeah, it's definitely worth a shop around, worth looking at datasheets etc.
Digital Corpus
Top Post Dawg
Unless you jump a couple pins your ECU wont be able to address the additional memory. Or you've confirmed those pins aren't NC's to the ECU's controller?
Well aware of it, back in the MSAxx 8-bit days and 27sf512's were cheaper than the 256 equivelents I'd just install them as normal and write the file offset 0x8000.
In this case to use the chips the main thing is to avoid having the upper two address pins floating, otherwise I can't see there being too much greif.
It's no biggie to use them in place of the older chips, unless you actually want to use the extra space for other maps, in which case you need to manipulate the upper address bits, you could do it with switches, or a micro connected up to, say a rotary potentiometer. Guess it depends how much you want your multimaps haha.
I'm not personally too mithered, just curious.
In this case to use the chips the main thing is to avoid having the upper two address pins floating, otherwise I can't see there being too much greif.
It's no biggie to use them in place of the older chips, unless you actually want to use the extra space for other maps, in which case you need to manipulate the upper address bits, you could do it with switches, or a micro connected up to, say a rotary potentiometer. Guess it depends how much you want your multimaps haha.
I'm not personally too mithered, just curious.
Last edited:
You picked a day to bump the thread - just had a car in, flash through port <crash>, restart routine <crash>. Eek
using homebrew obd programmer so looked at logs and was getting a negative response to the eeprom erase routine so whipped ecu out to find it'd been socketed and the 29f010's replaced with OTP chips.
So the new chips are getting a trial.
using homebrew obd programmer so looked at logs and was getting a negative response to the eeprom erase routine so whipped ecu out to find it'd been socketed and the 29f010's replaced with OTP chips.
So the new chips are getting a trial.
Nah, non-vag I'm afraid. (DDE3). Pretty much as old but we can write to them- so took me completely by surprise when I got booted out
Just surprised the threads popped up today of all days because I've had these chips to try which I've not really gone round to and I've had my hand forced into using them.
Ah well, I still need to test how they program in-circuit, they work when pre-programmed but it's still not a guarentee of a 100% match but so far so good. I'm not too fussed about using the extra address space, but it would be nice to have wouldn't it.
Might be worth keeping an eye out for pin compatible chips anyway as the 010's get harder to find.
Just surprised the threads popped up today of all days because I've had these chips to try which I've not really gone round to and I've had my hand forced into using them.
Ah well, I still need to test how they program in-circuit, they work when pre-programmed but it's still not a guarentee of a 100% match but so far so good. I'm not too fussed about using the extra address space, but it would be nice to have wouldn't it.
Might be worth keeping an eye out for pin compatible chips anyway as the 010's get harder to find.
Last edited:
Digital Corpus
Top Post Dawg
I'd advise that they stay as NOR Flash. NOR is kinder about random access where as NAND will have higher latencies. Unless you find a quick NAND chip, it's possible you'll run into read problems.
Can anyone confirm the original access times? I remember 120 ns, but I'm not certain
Can anyone confirm the original access times? I remember 120 ns, but I'm not certain
Digital Corpus
Top Post Dawg
Confirmed 125 ns access times to the memory chips so the parts were originally 120 ns parts. If one uses 70 ns or 55 ns parts, no harm will bestow you if everything else is equal.
Ta - chips I've described above are NOR and rated to 70ns, though 55ns are available too. Going from your above posts (I don't have any OTP IC's to hand), this is overkill.
So yeah, it was worth a bit of research, no problems on the memory supply front
So yeah, it was worth a bit of research, no problems on the memory supply front