ForceFedC5

iTrader: (1)

Hello,

I'm hoping someone can assist me with my reluctor wheel questions.

Are there any practical HP limits with the 24x reluctor wheel on a street car with a factory ECM? If so, is it possible to upgrade to a newer OEM ECM that supports 58x wheel reluctor and retain stock functionality for gauges, active handling, etc?

Thanks in advance!

Darth_V8r

iTrader: (4)

Most limits can be overcome by scaling the tune.

ForceFedC5

iTrader: (1)

If we exclude the rpm limitations, would the limitation be the amount of time it takes for the engine to rev to redline? I realize gearing plays a factor, but if a 1000hp engine goes from 3k rpm to 7k rpm in 3 seconds, and a 2000hp engine goes from 3k to 7k rpm in 2 seconds (all numbers pulled out of thin air), at what point does the increase in crankshaft speed cause an issue where a 58x reluctor wheel would be advantageous? i.e. the PCM cant read from the 24x fast and/or accurately enough to safely support the application?

NicD

iTrader: (7)

The factory 24x reluctor wheels can come apart on bigger power builds, lots of RPM, or using a 2 step a lot but they sell billet wheels to prevent this. I remember reading somewhere that the 24x system is accurate to about a degree variance and the 58x system is accurate to a 1/4 degree but that's wouldn't really be a horsepower limit either and one could argue that if you are that close to the limit then you are too aggressive already.

cam

iTrader: (9)

The reluctor is a concern with RPM mostly. As a rough guide 7000+ the 58 is superior but up to that RPM has been run so many times so safely with 24x its proven to work. Engine failures were happening in extreme builds in early LS1 days when spinning super high. Solid rollers were called for and so on. But since genIV the 58x oem parts seem to go much higher, more reliably and the big difference is 58x and processor speed. You need to get signal feed to the ECM, process, command, and effect either spark or fuel. Doing that reliably at high RPM is a fine balance so everything you can get to gain more accuracy and speed up your commanded changes is going to help.

You can weld the 24x onto the crank with a few tacks to keep it in place and a couple tacks between the plates to keep them true or use the aftermarket billet. The 58 seems to stay put much better

ForceFedC5

iTrader: (1)

Awesome responses.. Thank you everyone

PeteS160

To answer the part of your question that others have not covered yet. Swapping from a 24x to a 58X pcm in a swap (non OE engine swap) it's doable but does require some other changes as well as harness mods. Now when you mention active handling that makes me think your talking just wanting to upgrade the pcm in a stock vehicle setting and adds a great deal of complexity and variables.

With out knowing the specific application of the vehicle the simple answer is no, you will loose function of EVERY THING that gets it data from the PCM if you were to switch from a 24x pcm to a 58x pcm.

An answer that is a bit less clear is....... some of it might work depending on the specific pcm used and what the vehicle application is but not everything would work.

I haven't been on here much this summer and I'm not all that well know on these forums anyways but my personal answer is.... I might be able to make every thing work with out moving heaven and earth to do it but it would REALLY depend on what type of vehicle it is. I've been working on data bus conversion programming and hardware designs for over a year now and have done pretty much every type of data conversion with a GM you can think of but it's only been for non safety related systems.

I was about to start work on altering the active handling system(for off road use) in the early 2000's corvette's but people either decided to sell the car or they broke the car before I did much with them and this late in the year it's probably not something I'll even touch again until spring.

So yes.....it's technically possible but at this time what your looking for doesn't exist and my work isn't targeted at any specific model so the likely hood I'd passively create what your needing for your specific vehicle is unlikely to happen in the near future.

cam

iTrader: (9)

The trouble with the OEM 58x systems is swapping. You really have to pick your combos carefully because most dont function very well with each other. There are specific year engines and transmissions that will only work with each other and trying to run an ECM set up as a stand alone is a nightmare because it looks for other go signals in the data bus from the other modules; tcm, bcm, sdm. Working around these is not only difficult, but leaves you with some features that no longer function or function very poorly.

The goal to a good 58x OEM ECM swap would be to have tuning powers that surpass the tech2 GM uses as well as being able to command all functions absent of the data bus feeds from the other modules. Then we would ALL be swapping to 58x systems

PeteS160

Not trying to post Hi-jack here but I wanted to comment on this since most of the discussion I've had with people regarding this has been in Facebook groups.

Now about making a 58x swap more user friendly......This is actually one of the more current things I have been working on and I've actually been collecting parts to get a 58x setup up and running on an engine stand but in a MUCH different setting then most would think about. A lot of my work is limited by the engines/vehicles I have access to, since I don't have an LS powered vehicle currently I modified my C/K truck to run on the 0411 pcm. Sure it's not all that uncommon to see these days but when I was doing it it gave me some idea's and those are what my work with the 58x pcm are going revolve around.

I picked up a Vortec 5.7 from a 98 C1500 that's going to be my test mule and have it setup on a stand that's capable of safely running the engine although I still need to get a cooling system added into the stand before I could do anything with more then a min or two of run time. My plan is to take the E38 and get it running on the Vortec engine in the same manner you would using a 0411 on this type of engine, rather then spending a lot of time sorting out the crank trigger code in the pcm I've set the engine up with a 58x crank trigger ignition that's compatible with the 4th gen pcm's. For the cam signal I've kind of cheated, I designed a module for cummins swaps into GMT400/800/900 trucks for lt1swap.com and I've re-purposed one of these modules to create the cam signal using the pickup coil in the Vortec distributor. All the signals have been tested and verified in a lab type of setting using sensor simulation so I'm confidant that I'll be able to get spark and fuel working with the 4th gen pcm this way. Yes this was a lot of extra work when I could have just used a 4th gen engine to start with but I didn't have one and I wasn't going to spend any where near what a good running engine costs for this so my works been a lot slower then it could have been.

The next part of this I'm still working on and that's taking a "Normal" DBC tps signal and converting it into signals the pcm wants to see for the APP/TPS/Throttle plate so that the pcm's DBW programming is happy and doesn't go into limp mode. At the same time I've devised a method that will give the PCM ability to control the IAC of a normal DBC throttle body with out needing to alter any code in the pcm or make any type of hardware alterations to the pcm.All of this will be handled by a small module that would connect the TPS/IAC from a DBC throttle body to an E38 pcm's App 1/2, Tps 1/2 etc.

The rest of it's not all that hard and I can already take care of most of it with my data conversion modules. Rather then decoding the entire E38 data bus and every module on it I focused on creating a program and supporting hardware that will allow me to simulate, interact and even translate data from one type into anything I want it to be. People have spent a great deal of time over the years trying to reverse engineer the data bus on all sorts of vehicles.... and then what? Having all the data you could ever hope for is useless with out a way to use it. After all, you have no way of knowing what you actually need to decode until you start removing modules and find out that things stopped working. Until you can add each message back onto the data bus 1 at a time you have no way of knowing how much of the data flying around on the bus is actually needed and how much of it can be ignored. I've gone to the complete opposite end of what every one else has been doing for years and I feel it's worked out pretty well so far.

Here's an example of using a data bus driven cluster that relied on a P59 Pcm, 06 Silverado BCM and a DBW Tach module data from cruise. A module was being feed analog signals and was converting them to J1850VPW data and sent to the instrument cluster.

Here's a BMW Z4 that's being feed data though a module from an E38 on an LS3 engine.

To wrap this up, every car ever built can be made compatible with ANY type of computer/module/gauge with enough time. It's a matter of putting the time into something that's going to yield the greatest coverage rather then just focusing one one specific type of swap/combination and that's what makes it really hard to figure out what platform/swap would have the greatest impact.

cam

iTrader: (9)

Respetcively in bold;

We were spoiled with the Meaney influenced PCM design of the original 24x LS1 PCMs and this is what makes 58x swaps difficult its the ECM, TCM, BCM, and data bus configs that cause communication fits during swaps, especially those with non OEM matched engines and transmissions

Then what? I can only offer what I want to see and that would be a tuning suite that is capable of commanding all parameters of data bus within each module itself. So I could control a 58x ECM completely independent of TCM, BCM, or SDM data and also manipulate each module to work with different systems and devices. ( different ecm/tcm combos and various engine/trans combos ) This from todays perspective does seem rather lofty but this is the ideal end game and sooner or later we will have this. More than likely I can see this becoming an aftermarket solution, even wireless will likely take over in time with new sensors and so on. But for now having more commanding power over the genIV and newer GM hardware would be very welcomed by many especially now that the GEN3 stuff is getting so old and so many engines need rebuilding it would make the JY engine swap market literally EXPLODE if we had as much tuning power over these systems as we do with the 411 PCM systems.

Time. How fast do you want to buy? Time is money after all. Performance is all about time and our relationship with it.

pantera_efi

iTrader: (1)

Hi All, the 24ex TW has a resolution of 2* @ 2500 RPM acceleration rate.

My 60-2 TW, GM 58x, has a resolution of 1/4* @ 2500 RPM acceleration rate.

The BIG DIFFERENCE is in Coil Dwell Times (2-4ms area) AND Injector PW (2-4ms area) in resolution.

This effects engine operation (low speed areas) and coil energy greatly.

This resolution effect RETARDS the Spark timing when the engine SPEEDS up AND ADVANCES the Spark timing when it SLOWS down as the thansmission shifts into a HIGHER Gear. (10* +/- @ 2500 RPM Rate)

Lance

PeteS160

If I had even a nickle for every hour I've invested in this stuff over the last couple of years I'd take the next couple of years off and be set lol.

Now some of what you said is possible and legal and some of it isn't and that's why it's not out there. With out going into details is boils down to Engine and Trans controllers have to be accessible to repair shops for programming purposes since they can impact emissions. There is actually a couple of sections that protect access and give specific rights to alter these computers but it was with the intent of emission control repair not removal. Things like the Bcm, Onstar, and even the HVAC controls are specifically listed as being illegal to alter the programming on at the federal level. Again not going into why but that's how the law is currently setup. Now sure some people are doing this but it's kept small enough and in niche markets were it's not really noticed but that doesn't mean that won't change next year when it comes back up for renewal again and they may start to crack down on it as seen with the new security algorithms being implemented on modern pcm's.

So a "Tuning Suite" is likely never going to happen unless it;s on the black market and in that case it would never be discussed on forms like this. What can be done and is easier to do(some would argue its not) is data manipulation. Altering data in real time from one value into something else or even just simulating data for modules that aren't present.

But you might want to go take a look at this thread.....
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...l#post19962411

Near the end of your post you reference a JY engine swap, I'm not a jeep fanboy and even a quick google search doesn't come up with a JY model. What vehicle are you referring to specifically?

G Atsma

JY = Junk Yard

cam

iTrader: (9)

The demand for these solutions is obvious and it doesnt take much adaptation to call code proprietary. Plus this is as enviro green of an effort as there is. Re-purposing new tech into good existing chassis is so green it literally cant get better reduction of energy cost. Theres far more benefits than negatives for the end result of what we need to do what we do to the best of our abilities and to the best that technology affords. It does take courage to wade into such a development but no guts no glory.

Look at how well HP and efi-live did off cloning LS1edit and modding the code to be proprietary "enough"

Something to think about on a financial stand point. Now open source? If you go open source and there is legal troubles? You put up your online payment info and I will be the first to drop in a hundred bucks for the battle and I would venture to say many others would too. We want this tech, because we need it.

PeteS160

Hmm Open source you say? Ok here ya go..... https://ls1tech.com/forums/pcm-diagn...you-think.html

And more free stuff https://ls1tech.com/forums/pcm-diagn...velopment.html


I haven't posted the source code for the Android stuff but it's not your average type of code and it's actually a whole bunch of separate apps that are all under development and will be rolled into one app once it's done. By keeping them as separate apps right now it makes various parts of my apps usable. The serial/vin app is actually coming up on it's 1 year anniversary

cam

iTrader: (9)

I followed that thread I didnt realize you had posted a beta. Regarding hardware, what do you recommend?

PeteS160

None of the above are in beta, I've been doing an open Alpha on the Vin/Serial App for probably 6 months now. I started by doing it on a per request basis and ended up just posting the download on the YouTube video with instructions. There are 3 full time tuners I know that are using the app to fix the serial numbers when updating the 99/00 896 pcm's OS to the 2002 OS and maybe 50-75 others using it for....I'm not gonna ask what. I'm just going to assume it was to make the vin match the vehicle for inspection purposes or to fix 896 pcm's when they update the OS.
Unfortunately the Obdlink Lm and Mx are the only one's that are Bluetooth and work with the App that can be bought off the shelf so to speak. The Allpro from ObdDiag in the BT version has a firmware versions that's not compatible, I don't have USB OTG working with the app at this point so the Normal Allpro USB is out and so it the Obdlink SX. There is a version of the Allpro you can buy and turn into a BT version that works quite well and it still a good bit cheaper then any of the Obdlink devices but you have to make a couple of connections to an HC-05 BT module and add a 5 volt regulator. Total cost to build it that way is around 31 bucks + what ever shipping cost. The reason I would even suggest that is that the DIY BT Allpro will work with the Pcm hammer once we get the flash kernel thing sorted out and can release it. The Allpro's can read a 512K pcm in about 5 minutes....the Obdlink Mx costs almost 4x as much and will take you almost a 1/2 hour to read the same pcm.

Honestly if the Allpro BT doesn't get fixed here soon I may just start making them myself but I'd have to add something on top for my time to assemble one and I don't like doing that. I've got enough boards that need to be built already lol.

The Pcm hammer has been opensource from day one and any one is able to install MS Visual Studio and run the program however we have not been able to release the flash kernel we were using for development. There is one person that could get the PCM hammer finished and it wouldn't take long but no one has been able to get in contact with Dimented24x7. He wrote a read and write kernel for the Ls pcm's something like 4-5 years ago that would be compatible with our program but we would need his permission to use the kernels. So in the meantime we are waiting for Antus@pcmhacking.net to write a new flash kernel that he would be willing to opensource for use with the program. NSFW is the fallback guy in the event we are unable to come up with kernels though other channels but it would take him a good while to create one from scratch.

Hardware wise with the Pcm hammer it's almost a toss up on what to suggest. It really comes down to what you plan to do with it and what you want to spend. The Allpro USB is by far the best all around bang for your buck and is almost as fast a a cheap J 2534 but it also also a bit pickier on late model vehicles that have 10+ computers. The Elm command structure isn't designed or even remotely well suited for what we've done with it but we were able to make it work it's just picky on things with a lot of bus traffic.

cam

iTrader: (9)

I can read and understand the words to this post, but the tech terminology is beyond my comprehension. I can tell you what I need to do what I want to do and I have discovered plenty of road blocks with the E38 that could narrow focus, but how to go abouts remedying them is also beyond my scope due to lack of language knowledge. Im not a coder and even as a tuner im pretty green.

That said I applaud your efforts I literally salivate at being able to command/delete GENIV data bus feeds via the ECM to free up functionality

PeteS160

What exactly is it your wanting to do? Give me an example of a "road block" you've run into.

I'm not a programmer either, most of the code in the Pcm Hammer is well outside of my skill set to the point I don't even know what I'm looking at in parts. But then again I started writing code in C++ a little over 2 years ago I want to say and when I started I couldn't even get a damn hello word program working with out beating my head on it for a couple of hours. But I stuck with it and WANTED to learn what I was doing because I had some idea's and no one else was going to do them so it was learn how to do it or move on.

cam

iTrader: (9)

I understand completely. I used to code, learned binary math, super easy really, then i got bored as I prefer to be elbows deep so I moved on. But that was some time ago now, eeks. Anyways the OS locked up is big problem with the E38 as well as the VSS feed, and fan control for starters. Getting the e38 to function freely outside of safety mode absent of a BCM/TCM data bus feed is a hell of a pain to work around when isolating the E38 into a stand alone that is not also coupled with a transmission previously programmed for that specific OS. Those are a few of the issues I clearly recall, but there are more I just need to think on it some. Ahh yes, rev limiter is something I also struggle with because my dang ECM keeps trying to roll into safety mode because the VSS feed is bricked at 158mph. This is even more tricky because its slowly and subtly closes the TB to 50% or making the engine seem slow, and underwhelming. The rev limiter on these is not jittery like the 24x, its butter smooth. The work around we did was entering 8596 or whatever the four digit over ride code was into the commanded value box and that allowed the throttle 100% but now I have no rev limiter. Hmmm theres probably more, but thats a good start