Once we it the end of September/beginning of October, the weather got dramatically cooler and wetter so the mpg figures have dropped significantly. I also had to swap the 505 back in as my 345 began throwing an error code for something to do with a v-tec problem. Swapping the 505 back in made the error go away so I'm fairly certain there was no actual problem present. I have noticed that the 505 doesn't drop into lean burn nearly as smooth/quickly as the 345. The speed ranges are pretty much the same but there seems to be a larger delay in the lean burn led lighting up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 02insight
If anybody's interested, I have an earlier -345sp ECU with the key for sale.
So no having to remove immobilizer or anything, just tape the included key near the receiver and use your own key.
PM me if interested.
It seems my 316 ECU that is being modded has encountered some unexpected delays so I'll send you a PM about your 345.
__________________
Silver '00 MT
90.2 LMPG
80+ psi in RE92's for the past 2 years without incident
Calpod switch
Warm air mod
Grill block
EPS fuse removed
FAS/fuel injector interrupt circuit
grid charger
OBDII C&C gauge
I received my 316 today and installed it. I won't be driving again today so I'll have to wait until tomorrow morning to get any first impressions. Unless there is an earlier version of the ECU, my '00 Insight is about as production original as I can get as far as computer modules go.
__________________
Silver '00 MT
90.2 LMPG
80+ psi in RE92's for the past 2 years without incident
Calpod switch
Warm air mod
Grill block
EPS fuse removed
FAS/fuel injector interrupt circuit
grid charger
OBDII C&C gauge
Last edited by diamondlarry; 01-07-2013 at 05:26 PM.
What computer controls background charging? MCM, BCM, ECU? A combination? My car starts background charging at 65% SoC, which stops once SoC goes above 70%.
Are there different thresholds for different computers? If so, what are the thresholds and what are the computers? My background charging kicks in too early; it's a stupid feature, working contrary to fuel economy...
What computer controls background charging? MCM, BCM, ECU? A combination? My car starts background charging at 65% SoC, which stops once SoC goes above 70%.
Are there different thresholds for different computers? If so, what are the thresholds and what are the computers? My background charging kicks in too early; it's a stupid feature, working contrary to fuel economy...
As far as I know, it would be the BCM that controls charging. I don't know what the lower limits are since I'm rarely ever down there. I do know that there are differences in the upper SOC when using the OBDII C&C to set the SOC high. On the 010 BCM, the SOC will go to 75%. On the newer version, it goes up to 81%. There are varying views on benefits/disadvantages of both. On going up to 81%, you get a bonus background boost of about 2A until you get back down to around 76%. On only going up to 75%, you don't get the background boost but it also doesn't put any strain on the IMA battery and bring it's voltage down.
__________________
Silver '00 MT
90.2 LMPG
80+ psi in RE92's for the past 2 years without incident
Calpod switch
Warm air mod
Grill block
EPS fuse removed
FAS/fuel injector interrupt circuit
grid charger
OBDII C&C gauge
For the most part you're addressing a different issue, something more akin to positive recals, the '72%' hanging threshold, etc. I'm only concerned about the background charge - when you're battery drops to such and such state of charge, in my car 65%, the IMA system will charge the battery at about a 7 amp rate until it reaches such and such state of charge, in my car 70.1%. This charge generally doesn't show up on the in-dash charge gauge, thus the term "background charge."
Part of what brought me to ask this is that I've read a few threads where people are saying their packs get down really low in their day-to-day driving, and I'm thinking 'How is that even possible?' - given that my background charge kicks in below 65%, which is still 18 bars. Originally I thought it might be a weak HV battery, but now I'm pretty sure it's a hard and fast threshold, simply at 65%... So, I'm thinking one of the differences in the different computers/software versions might be those thresholds, the 65% and the 70%. Personally, I'd want one with a lower threshold...
id agree its the version of the bcm that dictates the background charge. My 30 would alow the pack to fall rather low before charging. the new bcm almost never stops charging. even the recal points are diffrent. The new bcm also seems to be very picky about Soc. If i get below 3/4 on the gauge, It force charges, get near "full" (18-20 bars) it fights tooth and nail to depleat the pack some. I dont have a obd cnc, so i understand the gauge isnt the best way to decipher the charge rate, or even show background charge. so i use another method,(to monitor charge on/off) the dash lights. (when charging, they are brighter-when its not charging they dim a bit)
This is part of what Peter R. wrote in the OBDIIC&C thread in response to questions I asked about whether the OBDIIC&C might be programmed to disable background charge. His basic answer is "no," but he also discusses some strategy:
"You might be able to prevent [background] charge by looking at the signals coming from the MCM to the ECM rather than the other way round. MIMA works by overriding the signals going from the ECM to the MCM thereby... preventing any regen request from the ECM getting through to the MCM. But the ECM must be making the background charge request in response to a signal from the MCM about the SOC. So if you find the signal the MCM is sending out about SOC to the ECM and block/fake/hack that then the ECM will think the soc is fine and never feel the need to send a background [charge] request to the MCM. The proper soc as reported via the OBDIIC&C should still work correctly but not sure about the oem gauge. This is just a theory if you want to explore it be our guest. There are at least two signal lines from the MCM to the ECM with info. Get a helm workshop manual if you havent got one already."
So, this suggests that the background charge is a request made by the ECM to the MCM; the BCM is not playing a role...
that is a very interesting way for the car to command a charge. I would have thought the opposite-bcm says charge needed, sends signal to ecm showing a additional load will be put on motor, ecm tells mcm the calculated load, and mcm charges accordingly, while telling the bcm what the rate of charge is-(kind of like a looped process)
Of course, that was just my theory on how it works. I'm definitely no guru when it comes to the interconnectivity of all the computers. lol
My cvt with a year old battery and modules behaves very differently in the cold weather. Now it is charging when the soc gets to 64, and stops taking a charge at 72. Over the summer I could run it into the low 40s. Also over the summer you can drop it much lower if the ac is not running. A number of times I looked at the soc, then hit the ac button, and it immediately charged. I use the defroster sparingly in the winter, but maybe that is what is keeping the low end at 64.
I also have noticed when below about 20f it runs the rear defroster without my turning it on, the button is not lit, but you can see the lines on the glass clear more then the rest of the window.
__________________
2001 Red CVT
19,351 miles lmpg 19.0 as of Oct 7, 2011
Best tank 78.9 MPG, 738.9 miles
Email dave@groe.us
I have been reading from page one and I am lost. Can someone please tell me in a nutshell what ECU gives best gas mileage? I would truly appreciate it if someone can cut me slack and let me know in a nutshell what ECU I should change/get?
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
I also had to swap the 505 back in as my 345 began throwing an error code for something to do with a v-tec problem. Swapping the 505 back in made the error go away so I'm fairly certain there was no actual problem present. I have noticed that the 505 doesn't drop into lean burn nearly as smooth/quickly as the 345. The speed ranges are pretty much the same but there seems to be a larger delay in the lean burn led lighting up.
