MS42 ECU definitions

323toslow · **Posted:** Fri Dec 14, 2018 10:30 pm

pazi88 wrote:

323toslow wrote:

Dashpot - Nominal (MS42 AD address- 0x4CF4 ??)
Dashpot - Decay Limitation (MS42 AD address- 0x59FB ??)

KF_ABR_PWG_DIF_NEG and KF_PWG_DIF_NEG_FAK. I will add those to next definition version.

Okay and as far as I can tell, the listed addresses are correct for the partial file.

Lambda1 · **Joined:** Sat Jan 14, 2017 9:46 pm **Posts:** 534

For Version 011025 (25) in Fullread, values in hex => dec *32 for conversion:

VSS Error Limiter:482C2
Hard Limiter Hys:482C7
Softlimiter MT:4EFCB-4EFCD
Softlimiter AT:4EFC2-4EFC4
Hardlimiter MT:4EFC8-4EFCA
Hardlimiter AT:4EFC2-4EFC4

For adress in partial easy use ... for e.g. : 482C2 Fullread = 2C2 in partial (only need last 3 digits).

Maybe someone who work at this version and do some work will put inside xml at next version.
Wouldnt be add this and publish extra new version for this ...
Thanks.

If someone need other map adresses ... please ask for

.

pazi88 · **Posted:** Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:03 pm

Lambda1 wrote:

For Version 011025 (25) in Fullread, values in hex => dec *32 for conversion:

VSS Error Limiter:482C2
Hard Limiter Hys:482C7
Softlimiter MT:4EFCB-4EFCD
Softlimiter AT:4EFC2-4EFC4
Hardlimiter MT:4EFC8-4EFCA
Hardlimiter AT:4EFC2-4EFC4

For adress in partial easy use ... for e.g. : 482C2 Fullread = 2C2 in partial (only need last 3 digits).

Maybe someone who work at this version and do some work will put inside xml at next version.
Wouldnt be add this and publish extra new version for this ...
Thanks.

If someone need other map adresses ... please ask for

.

Way ahead you

I will post next definition probably tomorrow with other changes too.

Lambda1 · **Joined:** Sat Jan 14, 2017 9:46 pm **Posts:** 534

Nice. So I havent offer my time for writing it by hand here.
Only post limiters because mostly this is the first thing the most searching for and its only few signs for writing ... because havent got time to tip all the informations down. But you will do this job

. If there are maps you lost I will fullfill them.

pazi88 · **Posted:** Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:08 pm

Well if you know the ignition, vanos and fuel maps for 25, that would be nice. I'm not 100% sure which one is which.

Lambda1 · **Joined:** Sat Jan 14, 2017 9:46 pm **Posts:** 534

let me have a look at weekend.

ghostrider328ci · **Joined:** Thu Mar 02, 2017 3:15 am **Posts:** 81

LKMT wrote:

ghostrider328ci wrote:

So is there a way to optimize for best performance or should these maps/values be left as is?

I'm no tuner but when logging ov_maf_ti on a stock 330i and a 330i with headers it followed the measured maf load very closely so I would say that on a stock engine or with headers these tables will not need to be altered.

Intake manifold swaps, aftermarket cams or boost could possible need some tweaking to the intake model or vue/vo tables but I haven't logged cars with those modifications so I can't be sure if that is the case.

Returning back to the 8 KF_LM_VUE maps in the MS42, does the MS43 330i incorporate a set of 8 maps of well to register the KF_LM_VUE maps found on the MS43? As stated by LKMT, a non M54B30 E46 with a 330i intake manifold conversion would benefit from adjusting these values to 330 specs

The "neg" maps are just about the same in terms of values as previously stated by another member here so, should the MS42 have 2 other maps as does the MS43 but we may not know of?

I haven't looked into the MS43, so thats why i post up this inquiry.

ghostrider328ci · **Joined:** Thu Mar 02, 2017 3:15 am **Posts:** 81

LKMT wrote:

ghostrider328ci wrote:

So is there a way to optimize for best performance or should these maps/values be left as is?

I'm no tuner but when logging ov_maf_ti on a stock 330i and a 330i with headers it followed the measured maf load very closely so I would say that on a stock engine or with headers these tables will not need to be altered.

Intake manifold swaps, aftermarket cams or boost could possible need some tweaking to the intake model or vue/vo tables but I haven't logged cars with those modifications so I can't be sure if that is the case.

Coming back to these 8 maps for a second.

Just curious to know if you can obtain this scenario when adjusting these 8 maps

1- excellent power response and increased performance, but drinks up fuel as if you were flooring the gas pedal as if there is no tomorrow but in reality, all you do is normal driving using premium fuel

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

lkmt · **Joined:** Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:55 pm **Posts:** 47

ghostrider328ci wrote:

LKMT wrote:

ghostrider328ci wrote:

So is there a way to optimize for best performance or should these maps/values be left as is?

I'm no tuner but when logging ov_maf_ti on a stock 330i and a 330i with headers it followed the measured maf load very closely so I would say that on a stock engine or with headers these tables will not need to be altered.

Intake manifold swaps, aftermarket cams or boost could possible need some tweaking to the intake model or vue/vo tables but I haven't logged cars with those modifications so I can't be sure if that is the case.

Returning back to the 8 KF_LM_VUE maps in the MS42, does the MS43 330i incorporate a set of 8 maps of well to register the KF_LM_VUE maps found on the MS43? As stated by LKMT, a non M54B30 E46 with a 330i intake manifold conversion would benefit from adjusting these values to 330 specs

The "neg" maps are just about the same in terms of values as previously stated by another member here so, should the MS42 have 2 other maps as does the MS43 but we may not know of?

I haven't looked into the MS43, so thats why i post up this inquiry.

I do think you are interpolating a little to much when you managed to get "As stated by LKMT, a non M54B30 E46 with a 330i intake manifold conversion would benefit from adjusting these values to 330 specs" from "Intake manifold swaps, aftermarket cams or boost could possible need some tweaking to the intake model or vue/vo tables but I haven't logged cars with those modifications so I can't be sure if that is the case."

As I said earlier the intake models and vue/vo tables are used by the ecu to filter the maf readings to handle faulty readings and wear and tear. So improvements to these tables will at best only bring the filtered load closer to the measured load which could be useful when tuning. At the worst changes to these tables will break all correlation between the filtered load and the measured load which will probably make the engine behave very strange.

When boosting the MS42/43 these tables would be more important to address as the load values in the vo tables are the maximum load the injection will use. If we take the 330 tables as an example. If the vo_4 table is the one currently used by the ecu and we produce a load of 1200mg/stk at 3000rpm the load used by the injection routines will only be around 767mg/stk.

Finally you need a way to log the filtered load values so that you can compare them to the measured load value otherwise you will only be making changes in dark.

ba114 · **Joined:** Wed Oct 21, 2015 6:36 am **Posts:** 980

LKMT wrote:

When boosting the MS42/43 these tables would be more important to address as the load values in the vo tables are the maximum load the injection will use. If we take the 330 tables as an example. If the vo_4 table is the one currently used by the ecu and we produce a load of 1200mg/stk at 3000rpm the load used by the injection routines will only be around 767mg/stk.

Finally you need a way to log the filtered load values so that you can compare them to the measured load value otherwise you will only be making changes in dark.

Interesting. I haven't run into any issues with *not* modifying these tables for boosted applications.
That said I haven't maxed my MAF yet either.

dkmi · **Joined:** Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:44 pm **Posts:** 46

Attachment:

MS42_ECU_Definitions_v0.39-ewsoff.xml

Added: EWS Disable on 0110C6.
Full read (512kb) is needed.

Set to Disabled to turn EWS off.
No need to remove EWS module if not broken.

Attachment:

ewsoff.png

323toslow · **Posted:** Thu May 23, 2019 11:17 pm

dkmi wrote:

Attachment:

MS42_ECU_Definitions_v0.39-ewsoff.xml

Added: EWS Disable on 0110C6.
Full read (512kb) is needed.

Set to Disabled to turn EWS off.
No need to remove EWS module if not broken.

Attachment:

ewsoff.png

I am assuming you have tried this with the EWS module electrical connector unplugged?

dkmi · **Joined:** Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:44 pm **Posts:** 46

323toslow wrote:

dkmi wrote:

Attachment:

MS42_ECU_Definitions_v0.39-ewsoff.xml

Added: EWS Disable on 0110C6.
Full read (512kb) is needed.

Set to Disabled to turn EWS off.
No need to remove EWS module if not broken.

Attachment:

ewsoff.png

I am assuming you have tried this with the EWS module electrical connector unplugged?

Tested in a car - works.
On the table with camshaft emulator - works.

This thread for more info:

viewtopic.php?f=59&t=15583

pazi88 · **Posted:** Fri May 24, 2019 6:20 am

I have EWS deletes by sda2 for RR definitions for other versions too. I will add those here when I have time.

dkmi · **Joined:** Mon Feb 11, 2019 7:44 pm **Posts:** 46

323toslow wrote:

I am assuming you have tried this with the EWS module electrical connector unplugged?

In theory, it must works. There is no reason do not to work.
Not tested without EWS module.

RomRaider

Forum rules

MS42 ECU definitions

Who is online