sent him an email 
Currently reading:
Technical IAW ECU Live Mapping & Tech Info
hi
someone has the definitions for the iaw 18fd.5z of tunerpro?
I'm trying desperately to
programs that are usually used for reading and writing the bin?
and hardware?
I now use motorola v1,is okay?
try these definitions because I mounted a 18fd.5z on a 8v instead of 8f.5t
Why is sequential 2 +2
but now I have to edit the map because I think he has too much advance
(was a 1200 16v)
I accept any suggestions or how to change the map
(I tried ache with ECM2001 but the driver does not recognize me the bin)
thanks
someone has the definitions for the iaw 18fd.5z of tunerpro?
I'm trying desperately to
programs that are usually used for reading and writing the bin?
and hardware?
I now use motorola v1,is okay?
try these definitions because I mounted a 18fd.5z on a 8v instead of 8f.5t
Why is sequential 2 +2
but now I have to edit the map because I think he has too much advance
(was a 1200 16v)
I accept any suggestions or how to change the map
(I tried ache with ECM2001 but the driver does not recognize me the bin)
thanks
I will give you an answer that you probably do not expect, but I suggest you listen anyhow Do not use 18FD for the 8V engine. 18FD is a piece of crap that is really difficult to get working right. And the half-sequential injection is not really anything useful, and this is the only thing functionally that this ECU does different from 8F/18F. What kind of engine setup do you have anyway?
Do not use 18FD for the 8V engine. 18FD is a piece of crap that is really difficult to get working right. And the half-sequential injection is not really anything useful, and this is the only thing functionally that this ECU does different from 8F/18F. What kind of engine setup do you have anyway?hello woj
thanks for your interest
I have a fiat tipo 1100 fire
I removed the carburetor and I installed the injection of a Punto 1200 75 mpi
with 8f.5t is fine but I wanted to try it with a controller with different qualities, also the compression is increased, the head of the 75, 421 exhaust
the main problem that presents the 18fd on my car is that the rpm to a minimum
especially cold rise and fall
and that at low revs with speed type 3rd 4th 5th feels beat the Pistons
I think it has too many degrees of advance or that the air pressure is wrong
What do you think?
thanks for your interest
I have a fiat tipo 1100 fire
I removed the carburetor and I installed the injection of a Punto 1200 75 mpi
with 8f.5t is fine but I wanted to try it with a controller with different qualities, also the compression is increased, the head of the 75, 421 exhaust
the main problem that presents the 18fd on my car is that the rpm to a minimum
especially cold rise and fall
and that at low revs with speed type 3rd 4th 5th feels beat the Pistons
I think it has too many degrees of advance or that the air pressure is wrong
What do you think?
As I said, there are no "qualities" in 18FD, in your case you are really much better off with 8F. The fluctuating rpm is most likely due to skewed fuel map. With ignition, there is a problem of a different sort. In 16V engines the TDC mark on the trigger wheel is shifted 18 degress with respect to 8V engines (3 teeth on the trigger wheel). Effectively your spark advance is *increased* as you suspect, by 18 degress, this is *a lot*. Anyhow, it will be a nightmare to map 18FD ECU to your engine.
(I know folks in PL commonly do a reverse operation. Because 18FD ECUs are so problematic they use the 18F ECU on 16V engines.)
(I know folks in PL commonly do a reverse operation. Because 18FD ECUs are so problematic they use the 18F ECU on 16V engines.)
Great to know that the 8v and 16v pulley are different!
Thanks
Ming
Thanks
Ming
I did not find it, I made it, I posted this on a forum in PL, here is a direct link:
http://autokacik.pl/download.php?Number=284901093
Hope it works for unregistered users too. And no, I will not provide xdf-s for any other IAW-s.
Due to recent popular demand, I repost this link with a fix, the old one does not work:
http://forum.autokacik.pl/download.php?Number=284901093
kpematop
New member
Hello,
I want to do some tuning to my Lancia 1.2 8v 188.A4 but it is equipped with IAW 59F.
I found only maps which were present in ECM definitions. Is there XDF with binary somewhere on the net for this engine?
I want to do some tuning to my Lancia 1.2 8v 188.A4 but it is equipped with IAW 59F.
I found only maps which were present in ECM definitions. Is there XDF with binary somewhere on the net for this engine?
No, there are no definitions for this ECU on the net other than what you would find in ECM. What ECM gets you is not really much, and also not really accurate (in terms of what the maps actually mean). I do have complete definitions for some of the ECUs from this family, but not to be shared publicly I am afraid.
kpematop
New member
Do you know if someone is selling map pack for this ECU IAW 59F?
kpematop
New member
I just want to give some advance and disable secondary O2 sensor to remove the catalyst.
Fit one of these to start then... There are other makes about.
http://www.bigdaddiesgarage.com/mini-cat-cel-fix.html
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2013
- Messages
- 9
- Points
- 0
Hello Woj
Thank you for your effort in investigating the IAW ECUs. I learned a lot reading your posts.
I own a Cinquecento Sporting from '97. I intend to put in a Punto 75 engine keeping the SPI injection with a 36 mm throttle. To get the fuel right I will change the maps based on lambda measurements. Have done this on my Guzzi bikes with P8 and 15M ECUs.
I removed the original eprom and read out the content. When I tried to look at the maps in tunerpro using your .xdf file I could not see correct values in the maps. Compared to the original eprom in your link from post one, the maps are at different places on my eprom.
Comparing the eproms in a hex-Editor, I could find out the positions of the maps on my eprom and work out a modified xdf file. Most maps have the same values which made the work easier finding them.
Don't know why they changed this for some cars, but they did. In case of interest I will share the changed xdf file. It might be helpful for other people.
Finally one question - when I disable the Lambda correction switch does this switch off the closed loop operation?
Thank you for your effort in investigating the IAW ECUs. I learned a lot reading your posts.
I own a Cinquecento Sporting from '97. I intend to put in a Punto 75 engine keeping the SPI injection with a 36 mm throttle. To get the fuel right I will change the maps based on lambda measurements. Have done this on my Guzzi bikes with P8 and 15M ECUs.
I removed the original eprom and read out the content. When I tried to look at the maps in tunerpro using your .xdf file I could not see correct values in the maps. Compared to the original eprom in your link from post one, the maps are at different places on my eprom.
Comparing the eproms in a hex-Editor, I could find out the positions of the maps on my eprom and work out a modified xdf file. Most maps have the same values which made the work easier finding them.
Don't know why they changed this for some cars, but they did. In case of interest I will share the changed xdf file. It might be helpful for other people.
Finally one question - when I disable the Lambda correction switch does this switch off the closed loop operation?
First of, welcome to the forum :wave: It is not often that we have somebody from Austria, and in fact I cannot recall a single (active) person in the Cento section.
Glad I could be of help. If you want to share your work with .xdf file feel free to do so. One thing I should note here is that there is an error in the checksum calculation that I provided. In short, it has to be done a bit differently and it cannot be done with the standard TunerPro checksum calculator, a separate plugin using TunerPro SDK has to be written (technically, the two bytes that follow the checksum location have to be an bit inverse of the checksum bytes). This has been recently pointed out to me (I actually knew it, but forgot that I did it wrong in this definition). Perhaps one day I can be inclined to do something about this.
Indeed there are several versions of the 16F program. This is due to the multiplicity of the cars and engines this ECU was used on, and also due to the multiplicity of software configurations (for example, supporting immo or not, having stepper autocalibration, having a slightly modified map design (again for example, WOT fuel map 3x16, instead of 1x16), etc, etc.). Minor things mostly, but it is enough to shift the data regions by a few bytes making one redo the definitions. It is somewhat better with the 8/18F(D) ECUs, still they also have at least 2-3 different program versions each with different map offsets.
In these IAWs there are two lambda switches, the one you talk about indeed kills the lambda correction altogether, the engine will never go into closed loop mode. The other switch "O2 sensor error" just disables logging oxygen sensor faults (if there are any this ends up in working in open loop again, but this is different).
Glad I could be of help. If you want to share your work with .xdf file feel free to do so. One thing I should note here is that there is an error in the checksum calculation that I provided. In short, it has to be done a bit differently and it cannot be done with the standard TunerPro checksum calculator, a separate plugin using TunerPro SDK has to be written (technically, the two bytes that follow the checksum location have to be an bit inverse of the checksum bytes). This has been recently pointed out to me (I actually knew it, but forgot that I did it wrong in this definition). Perhaps one day I can be inclined to do something about this.
Indeed there are several versions of the 16F program. This is due to the multiplicity of the cars and engines this ECU was used on, and also due to the multiplicity of software configurations (for example, supporting immo or not, having stepper autocalibration, having a slightly modified map design (again for example, WOT fuel map 3x16, instead of 1x16), etc, etc.). Minor things mostly, but it is enough to shift the data regions by a few bytes making one redo the definitions. It is somewhat better with the 8/18F(D) ECUs, still they also have at least 2-3 different program versions each with different map offsets.
In these IAWs there are two lambda switches, the one you talk about indeed kills the lambda correction altogether, the engine will never go into closed loop mode. The other switch "O2 sensor error" just disables logging oxygen sensor faults (if there are any this ends up in working in open loop again, but this is different).
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2013
- Messages
- 9
- Points
- 0
Thnks Woj
I was very glad when I found that much expertise here in this forum.
Prior I was around in a german Cinque community. When I asked there about tunerpro and modifying the maps in the eprom, I got zero resonance. The only way they worked in mixture was measuring the voltage of the small band Lambda sensor and modifying fuel pressure apart from using eproms not tuned for the engine. I went through this with my bikes and was not satisfied with the results. Measuring with a wide band probe and tunerpro allowed to address the problems exactly.
It is good to hear that the closed loop can be deactivated. This makes lambda-measurements easier, as the AFR will not be regulated to 14,7.
I was very glad when I found that much expertise here in this forum.
Prior I was around in a german Cinque community. When I asked there about tunerpro and modifying the maps in the eprom, I got zero resonance. The only way they worked in mixture was measuring the voltage of the small band Lambda sensor and modifying fuel pressure apart from using eproms not tuned for the engine. I went through this with my bikes and was not satisfied with the results. Measuring with a wide band probe and tunerpro allowed to address the problems exactly.
It is good to hear that the closed loop can be deactivated. This makes lambda-measurements easier, as the AFR will not be regulated to 14,7.
Hi,
I have got around to putting my car on the laptop to see if anything is obviously wrong with it.
I used IAW and got plenty of information in the logs but I am wondering where I could find comparison information to work out if mine is different from where it should be.
The ignition advance shows 31 degrees the air temp is 22 (outside was 6)
but I can't understand if these are ok. Any thoughts on this?
I have got around to putting my car on the laptop to see if anything is obviously wrong with it.
I used IAW and got plenty of information in the logs but I am wondering where I could find comparison information to work out if mine is different from where it should be.
The ignition advance shows 31 degrees the air temp is 22 (outside was 6)
but I can't understand if these are ok. Any thoughts on this?
Is there anything wrong with the car, or are you just curious?
You have to differentiate between inputs and outputs, ignition advance is an output, so there is not much really to judge here, it's just what the ECU calculated should be the advance. Advance will in general raise with RPMS and drop with load increase.
As for the temperature - the engine is hot, so in a steady condition it is likely that the slowly flowing air will actually warm up considerably. (A totally different story applies to turbo engines, where IAT sensor can show even +40 degrees over the ambient air temperature).
You have to differentiate between inputs and outputs, ignition advance is an output, so there is not much really to judge here, it's just what the ECU calculated should be the advance. Advance will in general raise with RPMS and drop with load increase.
As for the temperature - the engine is hot, so in a steady condition it is likely that the slowly flowing air will actually warm up considerably. (A totally different story applies to turbo engines, where IAT sensor can show even +40 degrees over the ambient air temperature).
