hi at all


i need to set rpm limit at 8000rpm, but i don't find it.
can someone help me?


thanks


br


roby

grofone said:

hi at all


i need to set rpm limit at 8000rpm, but i don't find it.
can someone help me?


thanks


br


roby

Click to expand...

no one can help me?

You might be interested in this thread:

https://www.fiatforum.com/cinquecento-seicento/253576-iaw-ecu-live-mapping-tech-info.html

It mentions the definitions I developed somewhere, but the link is probably dead, this one should work though:

https://forum.autokacik.pl/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=107476

woj said:

You might be interested in this thread:

https://www.fiatforum.com/cinquecento-seicento/253576-iaw-ecu-live-mapping-tech-info.html

It mentions the definitions I developed somewhere, but the link is probably dead, this one should work though:

https://forum.autokacik.pl/index.php?app=core&module=attach&section=attach&attach_id=107476

Click to expand...

thanks Woj for help , i test your file and report, one question:


for you is the best iaw16f or iaw8f?.


thanks.

Best for what? They are made for different engines and have slight differences in the engine control scheme (for example, 16F injects fuel twice per engine rotation)

Also, I forgot to say that the check sum calculation in the definition is wrong.

woj said:

Also, I forgot to say that the check sum calculation in the definition is wrong.

Click to expand...

hi


for chk no problem,
i have 500 sporting with iaw16f, I want to replace the head and plant Injection (ecu cable injector ecc) fiat punto 75 ecu iaw8f.


I changed
gasket, pistons, exhaust,camshaft.


iaw16f two injection for revolution, and iaw8f?


thanks Woj.


br

8f 1 injection per revolution. You should always try to use the ECU closest to what the top of your engine normally uses.

Hi Woj

I am looking for some advice for my Cinquecento Sporting with 16F.

I live in Austria where cars have to pass an inspection with exhaust gas measurement every year to keep them on the road. Last year I had a problem with the value of the HC emissions. The main reson for the high HC values was a worn catalyst and a new one was not at my hand at that time. To overcome the emissions problem I made some changes to the Eprom using Tunerpro and your xdf file. I increased the idle speed by 200 rpm and reduced ignition advance ba about 5 deg in the idle igintion table.

When I installed the new burnt Eprom with these mods the engine ran fine, the car passed the emissions thest but the ECU light was on and showed an Eprom error when using IAW scan.

Could this be caused by the checksum of the Eprom? How can I modify the checksum to make the error disappear? This year I will install a CAtcams camshaft with a lot more overlap of the valves which will require some changes to the fuel maps.
I know I could deactivate the warning flag of the eprom error but would prefer a better solution and deeper insight...

Thanks for the xdf, I like it a lot to play with it.

I am happy I could be of help. There is really nothing wrong with having the checksum flag switched off, but if you really want to do things right you will have write your own CS fixer in the programming language of your choice. The checksum is calculated in the following way:

You add up all the words starting from address hex $6000 until the end of the file ($FFFF), you store the word result (call it CS) at address $FFAE (so far this is what the checksum definition in the xdf file I published does, but this is not complete), and then at the next address $FFB0 you store the complement of CS to $FFFF, that is ($FFFF - CS). That's it. But note that the two words at $FFAE and $FFB0 have to add up to $FFFF in the first place, otherwise the procedure will not work.

Thanks Woj for giving me some more insight into the secrets of the ECU.

Just for beeing sure:
A word is a byte, isn't it? Tee FFs are not to be added up? Otherwise the sum will get very (too) high?

No, a word is two bytes. All data within the range I specified is to be added, the addition of checksums is always modulo the word size 65536 (that should have been obvious?).