Gearshift Maps

[b3lha]

Originally Posted by b3lha

On a USDM model, when the FWD fuse is inserted, the program sets the "On_Time" to 1000, that's 5% of 20000, a 5% duty cycle.

Thanks Trevor, for pointing out my mistake. The USDM TCU sets the "On_Time" to 19000 (95% duty) when the FWD fuse is inserted.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by b3lha

Thanks Trevor, for pointing out my mistake. The USDM TCU sets the "On_Time" to 19000 (95% duty) when the FWD fuse is inserted.

Kia ora Phil,

You have had me all of a dizz. If you had been right, all the stuff so far recorded would have to be dug into, in order to find where a mistake had been made. Your research has now made the sequence previously held in jeopardy by some, absolutely proven beyond any possible doubt.

A very easy issue to get inverted for sure. One that can turn one's brain inside out. I do not know how you remain sane doing the job you do. But hang on, I worked on some madly confusing stuff at your age. I can attest that you do not have to be concerned regarding Alzheimer's, when you catch up to me.

Cheers for sure, Trevor.

[NiftySVX]

Would it be possible to change one of these simple values to have the effect of increasing transfer clutch apply across the board? Though I am not sure what that would do for drivability, it would be an interesting possibility.

[b3lha]

Originally Posted by NiftySVX

Would it be possible to change one of these simple values to have the effect of increasing transfer clutch apply across the board? Though I am not sure what that would do for drivability, it would be an interesting possibility.

After the TCU has calculated what the duty cycle should be, it applies an adjustment factor based on ATF temp and Battery Voltage. You could tweak the duty "across the board" by modifying this adjustment table. If you want to experiment with it then I'll try and explain it further.

It would probably be better to change the actual Sol C map though. I've got some of it decoded but I haven't got my head around all of it yet.

[TomsSVX]

Phil, playing Devil's Advocate here a little. Can you tell me what the idle and WOT "time on" is for both a VTD trans and a US spec?

Tom

[oab_au]

To put what I have found, into perspective Phil. When I fitted the EPROM that you modified for me, replacing the Economy map with the Power map, it worked fine except I found that it was binding.

I have a C solenoid out of a 92 Aust model that an Aust member replaced. It is a normally open yellow wire solenoid. When I ordered a new C solenoid from the dealers, they told me that the early solenoid part No that I supplied, was not for my VIN number, and that the C solenoid changed in the 92 to 94 model number SU31942AA051, a normally open valve, to the 95 to 97 model number SU31942AA061, a normally closed green wire valve.

Finding that the later valve was opposite to the early one, lead me to the conclusion that this was the reason for the binding. I fitted the “ Diff Lock” fuse, and the binding went. There was an obverse mismatch somewhere. Working back from the clutch to the TCU, both clutches work the same, pressure engages it, springs disengage it, there are no operational differences. The Transfer valve block is the same for both solenoids, and venting and springs are the same, yet the change of program has reversed the signal to the solenoid.

The JDM transmission also changed the C solenoid at the same time at the Euro model. There is another case of a JDM using an early JDM TCU to control a late JDM rear end. This also had binding problems, due to the signal being opposite, this too was fixed by fitting the “Diff Lock’ fuse, that should apply the clutch, but released it instead.

The only conclusion that I can come to is that the program is different, somewhere, between the early and late model TCUs.

Harvey.

[cdvs]

Originally Posted by oab_au

......The only conclusion that I can come to is that the program is different, somewhere, between the early and late model TCUs.

Harvey.

Such a difference could also be in the TCU electronics. Being run by the same code, but producing an opposite signal.

[oab_au]

Originally Posted by cdvs

Such a difference could also be in the TCU electronics. Being run by the same code, but producing an opposite signal.

Yes but, I am using the same TCU, just the EPROM has been changed, same electronics.

Harvey.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by oab_au

Yes but, I am using the same TCU, just the EPROM has been changed, same electronics.

Harvey.

Harvey,

Is Phil to accept, that your rather confusing post states ----

After installing in my SVX, an EPROM supplied by Phil, I Harvey, found it necessary to change the C solenoid from a N/O to a N/C , otherwise my car would not operate correctly ?

P.S. Are you stating that you now have the fuse switch, permanently installed ?

[oab_au]

Originally Posted by Trevor

Harvey,

Is Phil to accept, that your rather confusing post states ----

After installing in my SVX, an EPROM supplied by Phil, I Harvey, found it necessary to change the C solenoid from a N/O to a N/C , otherwise my car would not operate correctly ?

P.S. Are you stating that you now have the fuse switch, permanently installed ?

The answers to your questions are contained here,
http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/show...&postcount=201

Harvey.

[Trevor]

Originally Posted by oab_au

The answers to your questions are contained here,
http://www.subaru-svx.net/forum/show...&postcount=201

Harvey.

In the absence of any explanation I must take what you have stated, as read.

To put what I have found, into perspective Phil. When I fitted the EPROM that you modified for me, replacing the Economy map with the Power map, it worked fine except I found that it was binding.

The transmission was binding ? The EPROM was binding? Was Phil advised at the time of the problem?
Let us assume that the transmission was binding.

I have a C solenoid out of a 92 Aust model that an Aust member replaced. It is a normally open yellow wire solenoid.

So what and why? What are we to assume from this statement? Is/was in your SVX transmission, or in your hand? What solenoid was in the car when the EPROM allegedly caused binding?

When I ordered a new C solenoid from the dealers, they told me that the early solenoid part No that I supplied, was not for my VIN number, and that the C solenoid changed in the 92 to 94 model number SU31942AA051, a normally open valve, to the 95 to 97 model number SU31942AA061, a normally closed green wire valve.
Finding that the later valve was opposite to the early one, lead me to the conclusion that this was the reason for the binding.

The binding after fitting the EPROM?
What did you order? ? What was supplied? What was in the car at the time the above was relevant? What is now in your car?

Let us presume that a N/C valve was supplied and fitted to your transmission after fitting the EPROM, in an attempt to cure the alleged binding.

I fitted the “ Diff Lock” fuse, and the binding went. There was an obverse mismatch somewhere.

Sure was and is a mismatch somewhere, if you have a N/C C solenoid valve and the fuse fitted. The fuse switch will result in an open N/C Valve releasing the clutch and providing a constantly open centre diff. Most certainly this would prevent the binding caused by the wrong C solenoid you had/have fitted. The car will run fine, without VTD, for one who knows no better. Is the switch fuse still fitted in order to prevent the alleged binding caused by the EPROM?

Working back from the clutch to the TCU, both clutches work the same, pressure engages it, springs disengage it, there are no operational differences. The Transfer valve block is the same for both solenoids, and venting and springs are the same, yet the change of program has reversed the signal to the solenoid.

You can only now record this description, because I corrected your earlier quite different, and wrong statements, which can be easily copied from the archives as evidence in this regard. You of course as is usual, you did not acknowledge your previous error, so that your current statement is of very real interest.

The JDM transmission also changed the C solenoid at the same time at the Euro model. There is another case of a JDM using an early JDM TCU to control a late JDM rear end. This also had binding problems, due to the signal being opposite, this too was fixed by fitting the “Diff Lock’ fuse, that should apply the clutch, but released it instead.

due to the signal being opposite? These statements must be qualified in order to hold water, as at present they do not. In any event the worst we can assume is that a JDM car has an owner, happy to be without VTD.

The only conclusion that I can come to is that the program is different, somewhere, between the early and late model TCUs. Harvey.

Agreed that only you, could come to such a conclusion.

Within all of this, it is easy to see that you are scrabbling to find a way to prove that the TCU signal can be, or has been, reversed, inverted turned ar$e over kite or whatever. You can not prove your wrong statements in this regard by this ruse, and this thread is not the place to do so.

There will be those who, lacking technical knowledge, will assume, "here goes Trevor again needlessly attacking Harvey." To them I point out that the integrity of a very special member is open to question here, and it is again very necessary to divulge a serious error and implication.

[b3lha]

Originally Posted by oab_au

To put what I have found, into perspective Phil. When I fitted the EPROM that you modified for me, replacing the Economy map with the Power map, it worked fine except I found that it was binding.

I have a C solenoid out of a 92 Aust model that an Aust member replaced. It is a normally open yellow wire solenoid. When I ordered a new C solenoid from the dealers, they told me that the early solenoid part No that I supplied, was not for my VIN number, and that the C solenoid changed in the 92 to 94 model number SU31942AA051, a normally open valve, to the 95 to 97 model number SU31942AA061, a normally closed green wire valve.

Finding that the later valve was opposite to the early one, lead me to the conclusion that this was the reason for the binding. I fitted the “ Diff Lock” fuse, and the binding went. There was an obverse mismatch somewhere. Working back from the clutch to the TCU, both clutches work the same, pressure engages it, springs disengage it, there are no operational differences. The Transfer valve block is the same for both solenoids, and venting and springs are the same, yet the change of program has reversed the signal to the solenoid.

The JDM transmission also changed the C solenoid at the same time at the Euro model. There is another case of a JDM using an early JDM TCU to control a late JDM rear end. This also had binding problems, due to the signal being opposite, this too was fixed by fitting the “Diff Lock’ fuse, that should apply the clutch, but released it instead.

The only conclusion that I can come to is that the program is different, somewhere, between the early and late model TCUs.

Harvey.

I'll try and get those chips programmed for you this weekend. Then we'll see if the problem goes away. This is all a bit puzzling and I'd like to find the answer.

Is it just the C solenoid that changed from NO to NC, or all the solenoids?

Phil.

[b3lha]

Originally Posted by TomsSVX

Phil, playing Devil's Advocate here a little. Can you tell me what the idle and WOT "time on" is for both a VTD trans and a US spec?

Tom

Next week, I'll post everything I've figured out so far.

[TomsSVX]

Originally Posted by b3lha

Next week, I'll post everything I've figured out so far.

Thanks Phil

Tom

[oab_au]

Originally Posted by b3lha

I'll try and get those chips programmed for you this weekend. Then we'll see if the problem goes away. This is all a bit puzzling and I'd like to find the answer.

Is it just the C solenoid that changed from NO to NC, or all the solenoids?

Phil.

I don't know about the rest, we could find out by checking the part Numbers, see if they changed.

Yes I'll use those two for mine and Tony's, both 95s, only a couple of numbers apart. The two that I have will do early models. I have one ready to go into Jordan's 92 car. So we may find out both ways.

Harvey.