CX-9 Skyactiv 2.5L turbo engine

[Tbot101]

And NONE of them got their info from looking at disassembly listings.

Is that so?............LOL Yeah I know some people who work at these companies. Yes they do. You really have NO IDEA what you are talking about.

Why don't you head over to the open source forums (ecuflash) and look at thier tutorials on Disassembling the ECU and how they found maps for the cars they support.

you are wrong. Just face it. It's okay to be wrong.

Here you go, just to prove you wrong:
http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6303
http://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...ly-beginners-guide-evo-ecu-table-lookups.html
http://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ecuflash/564101-rom-disassembly-raw-text-file.html
http://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ecuflash/268974-evo-anti-lag-ecu-disassembly.html
https://www.tactrix.com/index.php?o...nesas-boot-mode&catid=42:ecu-repair&Itemid=41

that was 5 seconds of googling. I can pull up much more.

I think that is enough arguing with you. You have been wrong every single time, and I can continue to pull up evidence to prove you wrong. So stand your ground, be wrong. It is okay, this is America where you are legally allowed to be wrong and shout it out to the world.

 

[NelsonLewis]

And NONE of them got their info from looking at disassembly listings.

"The first goal the group set for itself was to document the ECU by disassembling it byte by byte. " -lol

 

[NelsonLewis]

Is that so?............LOL Yeah I know some people who work at these companies. Yes they do. You really have NO IDEA what you are talking about.

Why don't you head over to the open source forums (ecuflash) and look at thier tutorials on Disassembling the ECU and how they found maps for the cars they support.

you are wrong. Just face it. It's okay to be wrong.

Here you go, just to prove you wrong:
http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6303
http://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ec...ly-beginners-guide-evo-ecu-table-lookups.html
http://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ecuflash/564101-rom-disassembly-raw-text-file.html
http://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ecuflash/268974-evo-anti-lag-ecu-disassembly.html
https://www.tactrix.com/index.php?o...nesas-boot-mode&catid=42:ecu-repair&Itemid=41

that was 5 seconds of googling. I can pull up much more.

I think that is enough arguing with you. You have been wrong every single time, and I can continue to pull up evidence to prove you wrong. So stand your ground, be wrong. It is okay, this is America where you are legally allowed to be wrong and shout it out to the world.

Oooooh, the Evo's ecu...finally, my language! Lol. Well that, and the Honda...

 

[vroom]

On a different (cough) but related subject...

Tbot, have you looked at the European ECU? I'm still puzzled as to why with premium fuel and 14:1 compression to boot, they were only able (or unwilling?) to get more than a slight gain in HP and torque. I think we all agree that the Mazda guys know what they are doing: I mean, they designed the thing... Any details on the differences between the NA and the Euro ECU tuning that could explain this?

 

[Tbot101]

On a different (cough) but related subject...

Tbot, have you looked at the European ECU? I'm still puzzled as to why with premium fuel and 14:1 compression to boot, they were only able (or unwilling?) to get more than a slight gain in HP and torque. I think we all agree that the Mazda guys know what they are doing: I mean, they designed the thing... Any details on the differences between the NA and the Euro ECU tuning that could explain this?

Yes because most of the calibration is identical.
Same target A/F a full throttle, same Valve timing, ignition is slightly different, not enough to make a big difference.

 

[vroom]

Yes because most of the calibration is identical.
Same target A/F a full throttle, same Valve timing, ignition is slightly different, not enough to make a big difference.

Definitely explains the lack of differences. Can you think of reasons why they did it that way? If what you say is true (not doubting you, I just don't know enough to judge) and you have room for 25 hp in the NA model, what could you gain extra from the 14:1 compression (if anything)?

 

[Tbot101]

Definitely explains the lack of differences. Can you think of reasons why they did it that way? If what you say is true (not doubting you, I just don't know enough to judge) and you have room for 25 hp in the NA model, what could you gain extra from the 14:1 compression (if anything)?

Most likely cost. Why pay to write an entirely new calibration for an engine that is 95% identical.

Same gains actually. Here is why. The cylinder heads can't flow for crap. They cannot take full advantage. You will probably get more torque with the 14:1 version, but similar top end.

 

[vroom]

Most likely cost. Why pay to write an entirely new calibration for an engine that is 95% identical.

Would it really be that expensive? As opposed to tuners like you, they don't have to work with disassembled ECU bins. They have the original code. All they have to do is tweak the parameters to take full advantage of the premium gas. In the grand scheme of things, a couple guys working on this, even over few months, would not even put a dent in the development costs I would think. They developed a new motor basically from scratch after all.

Would it impact fuel economy, or perhaps emissions?

Same gains actually. Here is why. The cylinder heads can't flow for crap. They cannot take full advantage. You will probably get more torque with the 14:1 version, but similar top end.

Makes sense, thanks! That means that there is room for improvement by redesigning the heads. Maybe the Europeans will eventually benefit from that in a future generation Skyactive release!

 

[CC58]

Is that so?............LOL Yeah I know some people who work at these companies. Yes they do. You really have NO IDEA what you are talking about.

Why don't you head over to the open source forums (ecuflash) and look at thier tutorials on Disassembling the ECU and how they found maps for the cars they support.

you are wrong. Just face it. It's okay to be wrong.

YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. Writing firmware was my life for 30 years. You have the gall to acuse others of being ignorant, while talking about stuff you you have no clue about. I've had enough of your BS.

None have gotten info disassembling code and figuring it out, at least not modern cars. They may have guess where the tables were with a hex listing. They may have gotten help from the makers on what those tables are defined as.

I've seen enough. I wouldn't trust you with my CX-5.

 

[Tbot101]

YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. Writing firmware was my life for 30 years. You have the gall to acuse others of being ignorant, while talking about stuff you you have no clue about. I've had enough of your BS.

None have gotten info disassembling code and figuring it out, at least not modern cars. They may have guess where the tables were with a hex listing. They may have gotten help from the makers on what those tables are defined as.

I've seen enough. I wouldn't trust you with my CX-5.

I have already proven you to be incorrect. We have all had enough of your BS. You have the gall to accuse me of lying, cheating, posting false information, selling snake oil. We have all had enough of your BS. Several members here have seen that you are incorrect and pointed you out on it, not just me. Heck members here have even asked you to go away. You have been writing firmware for 30 years, great. That doesn't mean any of it translates over to this.

They may have guessed wehre the tables were wit ha hex listing..seriously? Do you know the complexity of some of these tables? the worlds best geniuses wouldn't be able to guess that the skyactiv ECU has tables that correspond to oil temperature that is dynamically calculated because the engine has no oil temperature sensor. How in the world would anyone conclude they are oil temperature maps???? By GUESSING? LOL. Cmon guy you have to do better than that.

Now you know how I feel when you work hard to gain knowledge at something and some random person on the internet tells you that you're a clueless idiot. Exactly what you have been doing to me this entire time.

Would it really be that expensive? As opposed to tuners like you, they don't have to work with disassembled ECU bins. They have the original code. All they have to do is tweak the parameters to take full advantage of the premium gas. In the grand scheme of things, a couple guys working on this, even over few months, would not even put a dent in the development costs I would think. They developed a new motor basically from scratch after all.

Would it impact fuel economy, or perhaps emissions?



Makes sense, thanks! That means that there is room for improvement by redesigning the heads. Maybe the Europeans will eventually benefit from that in a future generation Skyactive release!

You'd be surprised but it isn't that simple.

 

[CX5_Pete]

I wonder if we can get someone from Dynatronics to tune in. They've been around much longer, it would be interesting to hear what they say.

 

[Tbot101]

I wonder if we can get someone from Dynatronics to tune in. They've been around much longer, it would be interesting to hear what they say.

What would that prove? He is a SKyG Master tuner for EcuTek Just as myself and members here have said that means nothing at all.

anyways folks. For those truly interested in learning more, I recommend join Miata.net. Lots of good discussion about this stuff.

 

[CC58]

Now you know how I feel when you work hard to gain knowledge at something and some random person on the internet tells you that you're a clueless idiot. Exactly what you have been doing to me this entire time.

You come on this forum making radical hp claims selling your $600 "tune" but offer no in depth details on how you achieve that or the tradeoffs, while acting like a prima donna and having little knowledge of the tools you are using. I wouldn't let you touch my CX-5 with a ten foot pole.

 

[Tbot101]

You come on this forum making radical hp claims selling your $600 "tune" but offer no in depth details on how you achieve that or the tradeoffs, while acting like a prima donna and having little knowledge of the tools you are using. I wouldn't let you touch my CX-5 with a ten foot pole.

Sure.
I have posted multiple dyno sheets. Many of which validate my claims about how much HP is possible to achieve with a tune. Every single dyno sheet being run, controlled, and completed by third parties.
Have posted in depth information on the controls of the ECU, logic, and how it runs. no indepth detail? I gave several in depth details.
Little knowledge of the tools I am using. OK.
I actually explained in great detail how it is done, what is changed, and the tradeoffs in the other thread that had most of the posts deleted. Surely you will use that as your defense because I can't bring deleted posts back.


You on the other hand make wild assumptions about the control system, knock retard system, benefits of running 91 octane, etc. With absolutely NO proof whatsoever, and use the excuse "I wrote firmware" as your reasoning for thinking you understand. You also compare them to other control systems and think they all work alike (about as wrong as anyone can possibly be)
You claim using IDA to disassemble the ECU is a waste of time, Several companies use this exact strategy and are quite successful.
You claim every company I listed does not disassemble these ECUs to understand them. Proven wrong with a 10 second google search.
You claim that it is impossible to learn the structure and logic of the ECU with IDA and low level instructions. Proven wrong with a 10 second google search
You, without any form of proof whatsoever, make claims to how the ignition strategy, knock control strategy, and other control parts based on... nothing.
You then compare the skyactiv ECU to an old Ford unit (26 years old) and fail to understand why the skyactiv ECU doesn't work the same way.
You claim the knock sensor indirectly adjusts the ignition timing for octane ratings.. how? Any evidence whatsoever?
You do not even know what processor these control systems use
You do not even know the actual size of the BIN file (until I told you).
You do not even know the various temperature controls in the ECU
You do not even know the fuel strategy
You do not even know the thermal efficiency strategy
You do not even know the cold start ignition strategy and why it used
You do not even understand the ignition timing system or how it functions AT ALL.
You do not even know the variable cam timing strategy, how and when it is used, under what conditions and ideal angles.
You do not even know how the ECU uses the ideal variable cam degrees to calculate fuel
You do not even know anything about the Skyactiv Ion system.
You do not even know the Torque control strategy
You do not even know how the ECU limits XXX YYY ZZZ for the torque control strategy (feel free to tell us what XXX YYY ZZZ is if you do know, but I already know you do not )
You do not even know about the oil temperature system
You do not even know about the EGT control system
You do not even ...... I can keep going.


You sir, are a troll. I literally just listed out several in depth control systems inside this ECU yet I am the clueless one.
Proof you are a troll: my tune for the CX5 is $500, not 600. But I understand why you did that

You casually skipped over the fact a 3rd party on this forum also concluded you were false in your statement and you made some BS excuse about the companies giving the information away, but not long before that post you were saying how the source code and information is worth millions of dollars and held under tight security and nobody could gain access to it. But after being proven false, these companies now give it away, only it a crude attempt to make it look like using IDA to disassemble these ECUs is the wrong way of doing it. However, you were already proven incorrect in that very statement.

"The first goal the group set for itself was to document the ECU by disassembling it byte by byte. " -lol

Thanks. This is my final reply to you. Everyone here knows you are a troll.
Oh and to counter your argument that I have no proof, how do I know all of these control systems exist?

 

[NelsonLewis]

Zing!

 

[Unobtanium]

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.

I had one question...does your tune compromise carbon accumulation mitigation inherent to Mazda's factory tune. I never really feel that you answered that. I got a lot of "we have a couple with thousands of miles on them..." and such replies, but you never really said anything about mitigating it, or what is specifically done to do so, and how your tune maintains those specific parameters. So no, I don't know everything, but if you know so much...why have you not answered this one simple but very pertinent question? Or did you and did I miss it somehow? "Sample of 1 still running" is not an answer. It's antecdotal.

 

[Unobtanium]

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.

Yep. It was a helluva ECU and I wish all of them were still like that.

 

[Unobtanium]

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...

Of course. Because everyone out there has visited this forum...

You get a wierd look because it's a tiny economy suv, and sometimes that doesn't fit your image as a person, and people have to reconcile that. My dad still shakes his head in befuddlement that I bought this thing. But...it is effective at the bare needs of locomotion in my environ.

 

[Unobtanium]

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!?!

Damn the epa, those ECUs worked. I agree though, lots more emission stuff. The job of the ECU is infinitely harder than the days of "give us maximum power and economy safely, Mr ECU! "

 

[Unobtanium]

Yes because most of the calibration is identical.
Same target A/F a full throttle, same Valve timing, ignition is slightly different, not enough to make a big difference.

This is what I mean...maybe there is a reason for that? Carbon deposits vs. Valve timing events. More power on the table...and they left it there. I am curious the reason...and I doubt "oh, they were just too tired of messing with it" or "it would cost time and money" is viable for Mazda, if a little guy (comparatively ) like you can come behind them and spruce it up perfectly well to such dramatic effect (25bhp).

So again...why did mazda leave it on the table...it's my concern.