Page 15 of 18

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 1:37 pm
by Poetique
I understand what he meant, but my predator is more than 2 years old. 2 Years and exactly 1 month in 5 days actually.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So anyway, Mikel what do you think would be the best course of action for this.

If there's little to no chance simply re-flashing the Predator's crom could restore it, well I'd rather have a broken predator and keep my current tune in the truck. That whole losing 4-5 MPG thing just really wouldn't sit well with me. So I wouldn't want to restore my original backup and be unable to put the tune back in it after (though I suppose there's a chance even the force wouldn't work anyway if either of the two problems you mentioned is the culprit, right?)

Also, I have a little bit of an engineering background (hardware specifically). Is there anything I could possibly check to narrow down the issue? I suppose trying another Predator would be the best idea for figuring out if it's the predator's problem or an issue with the port, but unfortunately that's not an option for me. I'm the only one I know of that owns one.

The main reason I went ahead and diagnosed the problem as being the Predator's though was because I noticed the diagnostics options didn't both just stop showing up one day. For a while the only option that disappeared was the GM complete option. I managed to log for a little while on the GM short option, but sometime between that last log (which didn't actually save itself apparently) and my next attempt to use the Predator, it disappeared.

is there any differace between r08 and /9r09.

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:07 pm
by carmos
i have r08 in my 08 ls3 vette ...is there any tune change form that to 9r09. ? thanks for any help

RE: is there any differace between r08 and /9r09.

Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:07 am
by 06MonteSS
nope...

only change was to add support for additional trucks that were left out from the previous one...

no need for you to update...

Re: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:35 am
by anton
johan wrote:Ok this has been brewing for a while.
And no, no TCM support yet but this is a big step in the right direction.
*07-08 Truck tunes are ALL updated for better performance.
*COMPLETE support for 2009 vehicles, there where some missing in the prior crom.
*A new process for unsupported calids implemented where:
**You will be notified that it is unsupported and the Predator will let you read the file out so you can send it to us for quicker turnaround for support.
If this happens to you please go ahead and get the backup and then upload it to your pc via DSdownloader and e-mail it to me so we can add it in.
*Support for 08-09 G8 GT and GXP added.
*Uses DSDL ONLY now, old custom tunes can not be used with this newer version.
Link:
http://www.diablosport.com/downloads/pr ... 9t09h.crom

Request that the next revision of U7194 reduce the Knock Retard Max Valid from 12.0 (GM value for the 06-08 z06's) to 1.3 (GM value for the 09 z06) in the Spark Control Table. GM has finally realized that the value needed to be changed because of too much Knock Sensitivity producing KR.

RE: Re: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:49 am
by jlemaire1
what is the difference between 9r07 and 9r09 for 5.3 j motors.any advantages to change?

RE: Re: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 9:55 am
by 06MonteSS
jlemaire1 wrote:what is the difference between 9r07 and 9r09 for 5.3 j motors.any advantages to change?
nope... no differences for you... they've just been adding support for additional calibration ID's for trucks that wouldn't work with 9r07...

if your 9r07 is working for your truck, leave it alone...

if it ain't broke, don't fix it ;-)

:lol:

Re: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:01 am
by 06MonteSS
anton wrote: Request that the next revision of U7194 reduce the Knock Retard Max Valid from 12.0 (GM value for the 06-08 z06's) to 1.3 (GM value for the 09 z06) in the Spark Control Table. GM has finally realized that the value needed to be changed because of too much Knock Sensitivity producing KR.
the "Knock Retard Max Valid" has nothing to do with the knock sensor sensitivity...

the "Knock Retard Max Valid" tells the ecm the maximum amount of timing that is allowed to be pulled if/when knock is detected... i.e. the maximum spark/timing that is allowed to be pulled.

obviously it won't just be pulling 12* anytime that knock is detected, but it makes sure that at the MOST, it can never pull any more than 12*...

and, from what I can remember, I don't think I've ever seen it even set that high in the tune files anyway... it's usually 8* - 10*... and when I do my tunes, if I see it at 10, I reduce it to 8.


but as for the knock sensor "sensitivity", that is already reduced in the tune...

Re: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:36 am
by anton
06MonteSS wrote:
anton wrote: Request that the next revision of U7194 reduce the Knock Retard Max Valid from 12.0 (GM value for the 06-08 z06's) to 1.3 (GM value for the 09 z06) in the Spark Control Table. GM has finally realized that the value needed to be changed because of too much Knock Sensitivity producing KR.
the "Knock Retard Max Valid" has nothing to do with the knock sensor sensitivity...

the "Knock Retard Max Valid" tells the ecm the maximum amount of timing that is allowed to be pulled if/when knock is detected... i.e. the maximum spark/timing that is allowed to be pulled.

obviously it won't just be pulling 12* anytime that knock is detected, but it makes sure that at the MOST, it can never pull any more than 12*...

and, from what I can remember, I don't think I've ever seen it even set that high in the tune files anyway... it's usually 8* - 10*... and when I do my tunes, if I see it at 10, I reduce it to 8.


but as for the knock sensor "sensitivity", that is already reduced in the tune...
Thanks, this is a great reply. Could you explain to me and probably others, what is involved in making a custom tune for us? When it is necessary. What you need from us. Timeframe. etc... etc..

I was thinking of a custom tune that would help the vet run a little stronger in the warmer weather of Florida. Mods to tables that would not pull as much timing, etc.

Thanks again, Lew

RE: Re: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 10:55 am
by 06MonteSS
regarding your email you sent me...
anton wrote:Yes, great reply. But GM changed the Max KR from 12* to 1.3* It appears that DS changed it from 12* to 10* in the Performance Tune because mine never pulled more than 9.492*
In the stock tune it, pulled a little over 10*
where are you seeing that the Max Allowable KR was reduced from 12* to only 1.3* of timing????

that would be NUTS to only allow the ecm to pull out only 1* of timing, and would be asking for serious engine damage...

I can tell you from the many many many vette tunes I've done, from 2004's through 2009's... there is no drop from 12* max allowable timing retard down to 1.3* at all, anywhere, from a 2006-8 to a 2009 vette....

Re: RE: Re: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:05 am
by anton
06MonteSS wrote:regarding your email you sent me...
anton wrote:Yes, great reply. But GM changed the Max KR from 12* to 1.3* It appears that DS changed it from 12* to 10* in the Performance Tune because mine never pulled more than 9.492*
In the stock tune it, pulled a little over 10*
where are you seeing that the Max Allowable KR was reduced from 12* to only 1.3* of timing????

that would be NUTS to only allow the ecm to pull out only 1* of timing, and would be asking for serious engine damage...

I can tell you from the many many many vette tunes I've done, from 2004's through 2009's... there is no drop from 12* max allowable timing retard down to 1.3* at all, anywhere, from a 2006-8 to a 2009 vette....
Sent you email, GM tables pulled from hptuners

RE: Re: RE: Re: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:06 am
by 06MonteSS
send me screenshots of those tables you're talking about...

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:17 am
by anton
06MonteSS wrote:send me screenshots of those tables you're talking about...
Done, attached to emails.

I believe the new GM settings say: Any instantaneous read of over 1.3 is considered bugus, False. Rattles or whatever. Logic is "zero to 12 knock in one instance?" False.

RE: Re: RE: U7194 update, again...

Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2009 9:22 pm
by sk65stang
still have ABS/Brake problem

Posted: Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:03 pm
by georgiaguy
Okay I am mechanically retarded so can you break this down for me. I just bought the U7194 and it does not download to my truck, 2009 GMC Sierra. So do I need to go back and buy the PC interface? If I do what do I do then?

Posted: Mon Oct 19, 2009 1:44 pm
by nodaker
Georgiaguy- Yup, that's what you gotta do. If the tool is telling you that the cal ID is not recognized, then you need to upload the original backup tune to the tool, then use Diablosport Downloader program (available on the website for upload to your computer) to get the tune onto your computer so it can be e-mailed to either MikeL or Johan on here and they can add your truck to the next revision. When they get that done, then you need to update the CROM file from the computer back to the tool. So you need to buy a power adapter and a USB to serial cable, both of which can be found at your local radio shack, so the tool and computer can talk to each other.

Seems like a raw deal if you bought the tool brand new and it won't work...but I've been there, done that with other programmers too. If you need more help with this, hopefully you can get ahold of Diablo folks on the phone or maybe another member on here has a more step by step on what to do.