CX-9 Skyactiv 2.5L turbo engine
- Thread starter CC58
- Start date
- :
- RDX Aspec Adv.
That's why I don't use it. Noone is capable of offending me or bothering me enough to have to go to an E-Safeplace.
It has nothing to do with "safe space" and more to do with that a lot of you like to represent your opinions as "fact." (Que MikeM) Until proven otherwise. Nobody here has even posted even slightly correct on how these engines and the ECMs work. Yet you guys come off like you know everything already about these engines. I have spent years looking into it. Then I talk to these forum goers who hasn't seen single line of code in the skyactiv ECU in their entire life telling me I'm wrong and their right. It's like I'm talking to baboons. And then to even compare the skyactiv to a 90 ford 5.0 ECU because you "could mod it fine" ... jesus. At this point I think you (Unobtanium) are just trying to find any possible way to argue with me about this. Why don't you go disassemble the ECUs logic and prove me wrong if I am??
Like I said, MikeM disappears and someone jumps right in to take his place. No wonder this forum is dead.. It is over-ran with baboons throwing feces everywhere.
Like I said, MikeM disappears and someone jumps right in to take his place. No wonder this forum is dead.. It is over-ran with baboons throwing feces everywhere.
Last edited:
The 5.0 Mustang ECU even worked with Paxton superchargers running 8psi.
Not only did they work well, but Paxton was able to pass CARB certification.
Last edited:
NelsonLewis
Banned
- :
- 16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica
I'm listening and trying to learn...it is rather difficult. Is there somewhere else we can go to learn and talk with fellow enthusiast, including yourself...
This forum does kind of suck overall anyways...
Absolutely, if you want to learn more I highly recommend join Miata.net. I have documented the entire process with these ECUs and some of the logic, inner workings etc. The best part about that forum? Intellectual people who you can actually have a conversation with.
this forum is trash and I really dont care if I get banned for saying it. Even MSF doesn't have people this dumb.
Last edited:
NelsonLewis
Banned
- :
- 16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica
I agree...I don't have a Miata (cool
Little cars though), but I'll see you there.
Spot on about this forum. No wonder weird looks are the norm when you tell folks you own a CX-5...
They are very flexible when it comes to variables like temp / elevation / humidity / etc.
They are not that flexible with timing. The ECU does not detect the gasoline octane rating. There are several ignition maps in the ECU for various controls. like use this map if ignition is load is lower than this and VVT is this, or use this ignition map if high load, vvt this, etc etc.
your 90 5.0 mustang ECU (probably a EEC ford ECU) was not "incredibly flexible". It was incredibly "dull," compared to todays ecu. you could get away with so much more because there were so much less controls, so much less data.
why wouldn't it do so
Because it was not programmed to do that.
Do you want to see the Skyactiv ECU disassembled? I am looking at it right now:
The ECU tests for octane indirectly with the knock sensor. I do not know the timing limitations, but ECU would certainly take advantage of 91 octane with timing in severe situation such as extreme summer heat while pulling a trailer. Its possible a tune could make it run more timing on 91 octane when not required (cool day with no load).
I have written software and firmware for 30 years, so understand your screen. Disassembled code is almost impossible to understand. You lose the labels and comments that programmer has in the assembly source code. You might be able to figure out a few thousand bytes of code, with a lot of effort, but after 10,000 bytes, much less megabytes, its not humanly possible.
That is assuming source code is assembly written by a human. However, most likely code was written in higher level language using C or C++ compiler. In that case the compiler generated intermediate assembly source code would be very difficult to understand, if you had it, and disassembled code would be hopeless to figure out AKA impossible.
Last edited:
I'm sorry but no it does not you dont even know how the knock control system works in these cars!. the ECU does not use the knock sensor to determine octane. Again, you do not understand how these ECUs work. Please show me PROOF that the ECU uses the knock sensor to determine octane rating. PROOF from THESE ecus, not another vehicle. Without proof your statement is "opinion and nothing more." I HIGHLY recommend listen to the videos about Dave Coleman explaining why you get little if any benefit of running higher octane gas with these engines on stock tune. Dave Coleman. Maybe you'll believe one of the top guys who work at mazda if you won't believe me.
You have written software and firmware for 30 years, but do you understand low level programming langauge? Whats nice is Renesas publishes the low level instructions for their processors, so you're wrong again, you can figure out everything with enough time. How do you think maps are found and tuning programs are written? People just guess??? Just because you are a software dev or have writ code does not mean you can automatically make judgements about how things work. You haven't been correct a single time so far about the ECUs logic.
Renesas publishes everything to take advantage of, and exploit their processors. Not to mention IDA disassembles it with most (damn near 90+%) of the instructions and pathways to make it readable for us.
Again you don't have a clue about what you're talking about.
Last edited:
The ECU will try to run as much timing it can without sensing knock, so indirectly adjusts for octane rating.
I have spent many many years writing low level assembly programs. I was writing code before you were born. Just because you can disassembly a bin file doesn't mean anyone can understand it. The Engineer that wrote that code would have no clue looking at the disassembled screen you show. My guess is Mazda is using an ARM processor, a pre-emptive real time operating system (RTOS), and object oriented language such as C++. The abstraction is many levels deep before you get to assembly level. What you could learn in one day looking at the C++ source code would take you a year, full time, to attempt to figure it out (and you couldn't). There is no way you'll ever get access to that source code as its worth tens of millions.
My guess is the guys that figure out the tables use an emulator to monitor memory changes real-time ... and guess. They have too, or have inside information from the maker. Perhaps makers give out table locations and meanings? I can't see someone trying to do that even.
Last edited:
Glad you know my age...
Do you have any PROOF? The ECU will not try to run as much timing as it can without sensing knock. DO YOU HAVE ANY PROOF? Please show me PROOF. Because I know the ignition strategy.
Prove it! Please answer this question: Do you have any evidence whatsoever to prove your statements? Any at all? Now you're just taking wild guesses at the hardware.
Renesas has emulators
.
Last edited:
LOL,,, OK old mustang guys. Now your in my backyard (other post I said I was a Ford tech for 15 years) A 90's A9L (or A9P, auto) ecu was the best thing to do to a mustang back then! Why? Well, as tbot said,,, it was the most simple calibration you could get in a mustang,,,, as stated, you could do almost any mod to those cars (except bigger injectors, hence just tricking the MAF with a different sensor tube) and still run great! A9L's even worked in some of the newer Cobras back then too with great results! Why? Because they wouldn't pull timing as much as their ECU's did. More power? Yes!! Dangerous? YES! (If you didn't run higher octane fuel!)
Only one problem though,,,,,, emissions!
Back then the rules and amount of sensors were minimal!
There is just zero comparison to a A9L and the current ECU in our CX-5's.
Heck, my iPhone has more computing power than the Apollo space craft did.
Unobtainium and others, I beg you..... Please..... Don't try to compare '90's tech with 2016 tech. Just like you cant plug a A9L ECU into a current 5.0,,,, why? Because there are 20 (pot shot,,, no clue) more sensors and multiple tables for each that current cars use to meet emission/fuel mileage standards these days.
And yes, we all know a simple old car like a Festiva could easily achieve 40 MPG with a basic EEC 3 ecu but something big happened since then,,,,,, federal regulations/Big Brother stepped in!
Tbot101 clearly knows the MAzda ECU's, and even the new Ford ECU's! And has proven so numerous times on multiple different forums. If you can't/wont accept the facts fine, just bow out. Continued badgering gets us nowhere.
There are some of us here who would like to learn more without seeing the constant harassment you choose to give him.
Please just STOP!
Please!?!
Only one problem though,,,,,, emissions!
Back then the rules and amount of sensors were minimal!
There is just zero comparison to a A9L and the current ECU in our CX-5's.
Heck, my iPhone has more computing power than the Apollo space craft did.
Unobtainium and others, I beg you..... Please..... Don't try to compare '90's tech with 2016 tech. Just like you cant plug a A9L ECU into a current 5.0,,,, why? Because there are 20 (pot shot,,, no clue) more sensors and multiple tables for each that current cars use to meet emission/fuel mileage standards these days.
And yes, we all know a simple old car like a Festiva could easily achieve 40 MPG with a basic EEC 3 ecu but something big happened since then,,,,,, federal regulations/Big Brother stepped in!
Tbot101 clearly knows the MAzda ECU's, and even the new Ford ECU's! And has proven so numerous times on multiple different forums. If you can't/wont accept the facts fine, just bow out. Continued badgering gets us nowhere.
There are some of us here who would like to learn more without seeing the constant harassment you choose to give him.
Please just STOP!
Please!?!
Glad you know my age...
Do you have any PROOF? The ECU will not try to run as much timing as it can without sensing knock. DO YOU HAVE ANY PROOF? Please show me PROOF. Because I know the ignition strategy.
Now you're just taking wild guesses at the hardware.
Renesas has emulators
More fitting, do you have any proof you know what you are doing?
If you don't have inside access to Mazda's Engineers, you don't know any more than me
because you are just guessing if you are soling relying on disassembled listings.
NelsonLewis
Banned
- :
- 16.5 CX-5 GT AWD w/Tech BRMica
...
Luckily I do have friends who work at mazda and I get some very good information from them. thanks. Have a few friends in Japan that release stuff to me before the USA even knows it exists.
He comes in here making huge claims that are highly questionable, and insults people. He's got it coming.
Lets not forget you started the insults saying I sell snake oil.
You know what CC58. You're absolutely right. I have no freaking clue. I am just making all of this stuff up as I go. Happy? I have never tuned a vehicle before in my life. There. You win.
Well they should have told you that you are wasting your time looking at disassembly listings.
You're absolutely right. I am wasting my time. Couldn't be more accurate on that one. You should let all the companies know who do that very same thing they are wasting their time. Here I will list them for you, go ahead and give them all a call and let them know they are clueless and should close shop immediately.
EcuTek
CObb
UpRev
HPTuners
ECUFLash
RomRaider
SCT
etc
etc
etc
Last edited:
And NONE of them got their info from looking at disassembly listings.
