[IMINHELL]

I have BE/EA and QH.
I read my ECU (EEC-V, ZYF5, KRAF4ZC) and got a .BIN.
... I should note that there is nod definition file available for me and am trying to figure out what steps are required to make one.

Now what do I do? (lol)

Best I can figure I need to "dis-assemble" the .BIN I just made. But I'm not finding a program to do this. I've found a few old posts that say 'use this, do this, etc', but the links to the program downloads are dead. I see something about CATS, so I downloaded that as a trial, but it comes up with and error "runtime error 339" (I'm running Windows 7 x64, maybe that's an issue?).

Just need a push in the correct direction.


FWIW, I have SCT Advantage III that I have been tuning with. I got the QH and BE/EA for the live tuning abilities. I hate going through datalogs and would love to adjust on the fly. IMO, things like spark are far easier that way.

[cgrey8]

You seem to have dived in head first on this BE/EA/QH venture. While you got good hardware and software, if there's no definition written, they may not do much for you using that EEC. Your realistic options would be to find out for sure if there is a def file for your EEC or replace the EEC with one that does have a def file and will work with your setup. Contact Adam of Popsracing (username POPSRACING on the forum) to see if he has a def file that will work with your EEC. If he does, then there you go.

But realistically, disassembling the BIN and making your own definition isn't likely an option. While it is true that this can be done and indeed is how others make def files, they don't have an automated program that does all this for them. There's a significant amount of work just to get a clean disassembly. Then once they have that, they have to make heads-or-tails of the code, identify the meaningful pieces, and make a def file that points to them, associate English names and descriptions to them, and convert them from their computer-centric values to units that mean something to humans (e.g. kg/hr, lb/m, seconds, degrees advance, etc). While it sounds straight forward the way I've said it, it most definitely is not. It is an extremely time consuming task that requires a great deal of foundational computer science skill and understanding of Ford's Intel assembly coding practice just to begin. Thus there's only a handful of people that do this work...most of which protect their work by locking down their def files and requiring a registration fee to use them. Most of the "open source" EEC-V defs are not that well maintained, not broken out completely, and in some cases labeling & conversions are inaccurate or just flat wrong. But because the original creators aren't paid, there's little incentive for them to make them any better (a real-world example why socialism fails and capitalism works when allowed to)...sorry for the political side-track.

Anyway, here are some links to start getting you up to speed:
How to get started and Best Practices
In this thread, there are additional links with topic-specific information. Good luck...

[IMINHELL]

I'd read through those last night and didn't find anything I didn't already know. Much as the author (you) was distraught with not being fully informed at the time of purchase, so am I. I bought my hardware/software at a time when Clint was slowing down and Adam was picking up. I'd though I could get a 'custom def' for the $30 as stated in years past (and assumed it was a total of $30). Little did I know that was not the case. It seems the truth was a 'custom def' was just a modified version of an existing one and not something new/from scratch.
When I'd contacted Clint about it he directed me to Adam. We spoke over the phone and he didn't really sound like he wanted to take on the project and that if he would it wouldn't be cheap (he'd hinted at it costing me $100/hr and taking up to 15 hours). I'm not spending that kind of money for what is now a novelty and not a necessity.
So I'm left with hardware that's paid for and software that's paid for and registered and nothing to do with it. And being I have SCT I'm able to go in and change things in my tune, copy the .BIN and compare, in that way I should be able to find what goes where so long as I can dis-assemble the BIN's. Or at least that's my hope/intent.
I don't expect to find a program to do everything for me, just one that can give some type of rational order to the BIN I have now which looks something like this:

Code: Select all

ÿú'þÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿë¾î¾ñ¾ô¾÷¾ú¾ý¾ ¿¿¿
¿¿¿¿!¿&¿+¿0¿5¿:¿=¿B¿G¿L¿Q¿V¿[¿`¿e¿j¿o¿r¿w¿z¿}¿€¿…¿Š¿¿”¿òôÀïT?
ýGïP ±–
àå³ÚH‘HÇÚH "Hð
H'þæïd3yn£ºJ£¼Lqû°

(and it doesn't look like the actual code shows up properly)


Alright, so in doing more digging/reading I found a .pdf that might have shed some light on this: http://www.tiperformance.com.au/Technic ... rt%201.pdf
I went to the link fro the HEX explorer and opened my .BIN with it. It looks to be something relevant as it's in an order. I "exported" the .BIN as Intel HEX and this is what the result is:
http://www.filedropper.com/kraf42

Does that sound/look like progress in the correct direction?

I know that I'll have to figure out what is for what still and I'm fine with that, have nothing but time. I just need to know that I'm on the correct path so as not to waste more time than needed (even though I admire Thomas Edison).

*edit again

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_HEX
That seems to shed a bit more light on the converted .BIN. I'll have to format in a way I can easily edit just the 'data' portion (by hand it seems) than compare it to various changes I make with SCT to try and find what goes where. So Right now I think I have more of a handle on this than I have in the past, which is progress (wasn't sure my head could break this wall anyways).

[TWINE]

(a real-world example why socialism fails and capitalism works when allowed to)...sorry for the political side-track.

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck."

-Robert Heinlein

[IMINHELL]

^I'm sorry but what does some random quote have to do with the topic at hand?
ergo, if you can't help or don't wish to, just keep your irrelevant thoughts to yourself.

[TWINE]

I wrote a nice long snarky response for this but eh, why bother? :dunno:

TWINE keepin' it light! :bananadance:

[kenco1]

is it a 2000 focus 2.0l

[IMINHELL]

Build date was October of 2000 IIRC and it is sold/titled as a 2001. And yes it is a Focus, zetec.

*sidetrack
It's nice because it's before the added/complex BCM (mid 2001 Ford switched to using a 3 plug BCM vs the early cars that had a 1 plug unit, holdover from the ZX2/Contour from my understanding).

[kenco1]

ok i found it over at tweecer.com Mike Glover is the man to talk to he should point you in the right direction

[cgrey8]

...Much as the author (you) was distraught with not being fully informed at the time of purchase, so am I. I bought my hardware/software at a time when Clint was slowing down and Adam was picking up...So I'm left with hardware that's paid for and software that's paid for and registered and nothing to do with it...

While I can empathize with your position, I don't sympathize with it. The onus is on the buyer to be sure what they are buying will work for them BEFORE they invest. All those conversations with Clint and Adam should've happened prior to purchases being made. That's probably stating the obvious at this point. But if it helps any, I've heard murmurings that the Focus EECs are some oddball EECs in the Ford community. What I don't know is what that means and exactly what it is that makes them so odd. But I do know there is something different about them as compared to the mainstream EEC-Vs. I don't know if the difference is in codebase differences or hardware differences.

Is there a chance Adam can suggest a more supported EEC that can be used to work on that vehicle?

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck."

-Robert Heinlein

Very nice quote, even if it isn't relevant to the discussion. I appreciated it. You should put that in your signature.

[IMINHELL]

AFAIK, it's the SVT ECU's that are odd/temperamental. They are the same Black Oak (it is Black Oak isn't it?) as all other EEC-V SVT's. I think where the Focus ECU's get weird is in how many there are. Far as I've heard there are upwards of 80 box codes for just the zetec's and something like 20 strategies (just in the USA) ... but that's to be expected being it's one of the best selling cars Ford makes. (but I've no clue how many box codes there are for Mustangs, can't imagine there's near as many)

... and I don't expect any sympathy, won't do any good at this point anyways . I do thank you for your time though, it doesn't go unnoticed or unappreciated.


Ken,
I'll have to hop on over there and shoot him an email and see what he says ... well, basically your screwed kiddo ... awe shucks :duh: .


Still strikes me as odd that the 'OS' tuning options haven't been more widely spread in the Focus world. Maybe it's that the racer guys don't realize the capabilities of the Ford ECU and go standalone (not Mega-Squirt), I recall Pectal making a plug-and-play some years back.

[cgrey8]

BTW, now that we know more about what you are dealing with, I updated your title to be more meaningful.

[TWINE]

Very nice quote, even if it isn't relevant to the discussion. I appreciated it. You should put that in your signature.

Thanks. It is too long for my signature.

[decipha]

sucks, guess thats how the cookie crumbles, maybe one day it'll have better support

post the .bin for all to see

[POPSRACING]

Have have some support for those vehicles....pm me the specifics.
Regards

[IMINHELL]

How much of the 'definition template' does a guy need to get started finding the rest of the stuff?

I got this:
http://www.filedropper.com/focuskraf4strategy
I used BE -> OBDII -> Get Vehicle Info -> Show only supported PID's, then copy/pasted that to Excel (obvious for you guys, just typing it out for my benefit in case I loose my place/mind)

I then copy/pasted what I could figure from other Strategy's listed in the BIN's folder into the 'definition template':
http://www.filedropper.com/focuskraf4start

Basically, Do I need to know all the things that are in the Calibration files?
rather obviously, I'll have to know Scalars, Functions, Tables ... it's the rest of the stuff I'm wondering about

[cgrey8]

You don't need ALL the scalars, functions, and tables. But you do need the most important ones as well as their size, sign, and conversion. And don't forget about the dataloggable payload info. Being able to adjust the tune is only 1/2 the battle. You need to be able to datalog to see how the tune is behaving in real time.

[IMINHELL]

So then "payload" is concerned with datalogging (only)?
Which would mean if I have that stuff filled in, arranged correct and what not, I should be able to log through QH?
(or is it log through my ELM 327 device via the OBDII port)

[POPSRACING]

pm'd you