ESM Chips - Information & Help

[Doug]

Alex,<br>Alan will answer, but if you can actually see and record from ElanScan, that is already a good indicator!!  Just turn the car on, open ElanScan, hit F1 to start talking, then go to File --> Dump PROM to BIN, and save the file as whatever, then email the file to Alan . . . and in a few months he'll have time to decipher it  [smiley=mf_type.gif]

[runix3]

Awesome! I've logged a couple runs on ElanScan from my RS before, but unfortunately the hardrive took a dump, and I lost those. But I'll try to log some runs this coming weekend. Anything in particular you'd like to see? Run-wise?Once I dump the prom, where exactly will I find the file? In the ElanScan folder? Thanks for your help. [smiley=thanx.gif]<br>Alex

[Doug]

You could do 0-60 runs, 30-70 runs, or just burnouts !!  ;)<br><br>The PROM dump will go to whichever folder you pick and title it whatever you want.  I don't know how to read them though.<br><br>Post 'em all to Alan, but you can send me ES logs which would be fun to see as I have been lookig at a lot of my own.<br><br>What is the HP rating on the Isuzu 4XE1-T?  And what is the stock boost level?<br><br>

[ESM]

Alex,<br><br>The PROM dump is a binary image of the PROM in the MEMCAL - the program code and the lookup tables for the ECU. If you run it through a 68HC11 disassembler you can reverse engineer the code then modify it and create a new EEPROM with the modified binary on it. I don't need any runs of logged data at this point - just the PROM dump would be fine.  You might need to get a newer version of ElanScan though, this feature is only present in later versions.<br><br>Doug,<br><br>Assuming the AYFZ PROM is from an Impulse then the boost peaks at 0.7bar.<br><br>Alan

[runix3]

Sounds good. I just downloaded the latest version of ElanScan today. So if all goes well, I'll email you the prom dump over the weekend. Thanks for your help guys!<br><br>Doug, stock power rating on the 4XE1-WT is 160hp/150ft lbs of torque with a 47/53 front/rear torque split with the AWD system. Once I installed an accurate aftermarket boost gauge, with the stock turbo and the ECM controlling boost, I was able to get between 9 to 12 pounds of boost. This was at 231 feet above sea level. The 12psi of boost would come at high rpm WOT.<br>Hope that sheds some light.<br>Alex<br><br>P.S.-We share the same motor, so your power rating should be about the same as mine in stock trim shouldn't it?

[TStevens]

Fitted my lovely new ESM chip today (yay!) And she runs nicely. Very Smooth, definate improvement to using a Bleed Valve. <br><br>During my testing though I hit the Fuel Cut in 5th gear with my foot flat to the floor  ??? At the time I had been about 3/4 throttle sitting at 115/20, I pushed my foot to the floor (gradually I didnt just stamp on it  :P) When the little evil orange light came on.<br><br>My cars an SE (91) I recently replaced the mid-section and backbox of my exhaust, with stainless, the mid section is the same bore as the original, but the back box is 2 1/2" instead of 2 1/4" I had to turn down my bleed valve slightly but all was well. Am I right in thinking that I have some slight boost creep? And if so how am I to resolve this? (no I dont have a FCD and have never had one fitted)<br><br>The car acts as expected all full throttle through 1st to 4th gears at all revs, seems it only occurs in 5th at high revs. It's a little late now to do more test runs with a passenger to get the revs at which it hits.<br><br>Anyhow, if anyone has any gems of wisdom they feel like sharing, please do.

[Nige]

Sounds like boost creep to me, but not a severe case.  I was hitting boost creep on my S2 with a 2.25" exhaust (no cats) and intended to port the wastegate to cure this.  However, once I checked and reset my base timing to the specified 16 deg BTDC the fuel cut caused by the boost creep ceased.  Suggest you do a full hose and pipe check for leaks (if not done already) and then check base timing and reset if necessary.  You don't say which spec of chip you have but Alan raised the fuel cut level on the Everest chip to .96 bar from the stock .92 bar <br>

[TStevens]

Oops, knew id forgotten a detail, I went for what my friends call the "tart" chip, Kilimanjaro, my intentions were to start at the bottom  ;)<br><br>The timing could be the problem, I'll look into that, as my car had a very high CO output when it was MOT'd a short time ago, (although someone else took it for me and didnt know about the CO pot)<br><br>Thanks, I shall look into this as soon as I get a chance, weather is not on my side, and dads 300zx is dead in the garage at the moment *me grumbles about losing his parking space*

[ESM]

Another possible culprit is the wastegate. The higher boost targets mean that if you have a sticky (but not stuck) wastegate you're much more likely to tip into overboost. I've seen this effect in an S2 test car. you certainly shouldn't see overboost with a Kilimanjaro. <br><br>If you have access to ElanScan try to log an event and send it to me.

[Paul.P]

Alan, i have been following this topic with great admiration for what you have done ( wey beyond me ), my question is simple, apart from the cost, do you consider the ESM chips a better solution for more power than the bbr conversion, & why ? :-/

[John_W]

[quote author=Paul.P link=board=upgrades;num=1092641037;start=30#31 date=10/01/04 at 13:09:17]Alan, i have been following this topic with great admiration for what you have done ( wey beyond me ), my question is simple, apart from the cost, do you consider the ESM chips a better solution for more power than the bbr conversion, & why ? :-/[/quote]<br>Paul,<br>I'm also interested to hear Alan's rationalisation of the pros and cons, but what I'm also interested in is the "proof of the pudding", in the form of Elanscan and dyno runs of the different setups.<br><br>Alan's doing a huge amount of work optimising the chips and making them suitable for S2s and USA cars.<br><br>The data will come, but it's dribbling in slowly at the moment. For my part, I'm trying to produce comparative datasets of bog-standard, Kilimanjaro and Everest chips with a standard exhaust and then with a bigger (2-1/4") exhaust. Unfortunately the local exhaust shop is being more than a bit slow in doing its stuff. <br>http://www.lotuselancentral.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=upgrades;action=display;num=1092641209;start=87#87<br><br>What we do have so far is one set of dyno data from my car with an standard setup plus Everest chip and some data from Rob's S2 (MBC) and Philbo's SE (BBR) which appear to show that Alan's Everest chip (even in its early form) provides about the same power and torque as a BBR but does it across a broader rev band.<br>http://www.lotuselancentral.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=upgrades;action=display;num=1092641209;start=90<br><br>Additionally, when using one of Alan's chips the overboost fuel cut-off safety feature of the ECU is retained (rather than defeated as with the MBC/FCD or BBR kit) as well as still having all the other standard ECU "protection" against eg overboost owing to a stuck wastegate.<br><br>As far as I can see the BBR kit is basically a non-adjustable MBC plus a fuel cut-out bypass, and works by fooling the MAP sensor into seeing boost which is lower than actual. <br><br>If my exhaust fitters ever get their act together I'll be able to comment on the "big exhaust" question. If more people with different setups publish any dyno data they have, that'll be interesting to demonstrate the potential of the various setups (Stevo's promising some data from Missy which will be really interesting as he's ported the wastegate). Don't suppose you have any BBR dyno data do you?<br><br>I find this very interesting, but it's a bit frustrating that it takes so long to assemble the data. Never mind, the thing to remember is that we're doing this as fun aren't we?<br><br>John <br><br>

[ESM]

Ok pros & cons.<br><br>BBR<br><br>Pros:<br><br>1) Always on - fast ramp up of boost to set level<br><br>Cons:<br>1) Cost <br>2) The ECU's ability to limit boost to passive levels when coolant is under/over temp, knocking is occuring or a sensor fault occurs is removed<br>3) An FCD (a device which 'clips' the MAP sensor output and fools the ECU that the boost is lower than it actually is) is included. This messes up mappings beyond the clipping point (around 0.75bar), most notably the fuelling and timing, and inhibits the safety overboost fuel cut (this is its intended function).<br>4) The leak is fixed and so the maximum target boost may not be attained across the full rev range (the RPM/Boost curve is generally not flat)<br><br>Chip<br><br>Cons<br><br>1) The boost control code only executes at 5Hz - this can cause control issues (like boost overshoot, oscillation around the target value & slow boost pickup) if parameters are not set up precisely. Shouldn't be a problem once properly set but a slight compromise on the reaction time will have to be made to prevent boost overshoot.<br><br>Pros<br>1) Cost ::)<br>2) Existing safeties preserved<br>3) Dynamic boost control - since the target boost is attained by dynamically changing the 'leak' the target boost can be sustained for as long as the turbo can produce it.<br>4) Programmable - for example if boost comes in too aggressively then the setup can be tuned to be more progressive. Although I'm generally getting steered towards the most aggressive boost ramp possible.

[Paul.P]

This is very interesting Alan, especially as you are getting a true 203bhp. This is what the bbr is supposed to give, but in reality gives approx 190 apparantly. So you talk about setting up properly, is this something you do with elanscan, or can any rolling road merchant set it up. As you can tell, total novice at this sort of thing !

[ESM]

The ECU doesn't give the ability to re-program the PROM while its installed (as some modern ECUs do). It can only be modified by re-writing the (E)EPROM out of the ECU and, obviously you have to know what you're doing - a tuning guy knows about tuning but not the Elan ECU, he'd need software tools to help. So its tunable by me rather than by the owner or a rolling road guy at the moment..

[ESM]

Ok the chip site is up and ready  :o<br><br>http://www.astb91.dsl.pipex.com/MountainChipMenu.html<br><br>All you S2 & US Elan owners can knock yourselves out now!<br><br>The current chip version is 4.1. This version includes an increase in the BSV starting duty cycle and the BSV duty cycle rise rate and a decrease in the minimum RPM at which the BSV is utilised. This makes for for much more rapid boost/power delivery. This, of course, is as well as the higher boost target. <br><br>The K2 chip has been dropped for the moment, it was too much work mantaining three maps for four different PROM types and it wasn't that different to the Everest in practice anyway.<br><br>Cheers<br>  Alan<br><br>

[Sy V]

We are very privileged to have you amongst our fraternity Alan, thanks a million for your efforts.  You deserve some form of award for this mate.

[ESM]

Monty<br><br>Tug slightly? Not sure what you mean. I think I sent you a 9930 (I send SE owners 9930s unless asked otherwise) so you already have the low emissions chip. Maybe the 'tug' is because its a bit lean at idle? Time to read John_W's bit about adjusting the CO pot I think.<br><br>Regarding fuel economy I don't notice much difference myself, I generally get around 280 miles on a tank whatever chip is in but I suppose if you stay on boost a lot fuel economy will suffer.<br><br>Alan

[ESM]

The chip the person sent for was the 9930 PROM... The problem you have now is that your emissions are too low!

[John_W]

[quote author=ElanScanMan link=board=upgrades;num=1092641037;start=30#37 date=10/12/04 at 14:04:04]Ok the chip site is up and ready  :o<br><br>http://www.astb91.dsl.pipex.com/MountainChipMenu.html<br>[/quote]<br>Alan,<br>Very nice looking site. Well done. [smiley=thumb.gif] <br>Are you planning to attach any graphs of dyno results to show what these great chips can do?<br><br>Since I've been having problems accessing Tony's picture site, I've also been trying to set up a website (but for me it's a bit more difficult, being a luddite). Anyway, maybe this picture will show something like I mean.<br><br>It shows good power and torque gains over standard for the Everest chip on both SE and S2 (nb the S2 results are a bit approximate since I only read them off Elanman's posted graph). Interestingly it also seems to show that MBC and BBR actually lose a bit of power and torque low down although they gain at higher revs.<br><br>John   <br><br>PS: Monty, I've sent you a pm about the CO pot.