anyone reprogram an EEC-4 OBD-1

[olddog]

I was wondering if we have anyone who has chipped a Ford EEC-4 and tuned or modified the program.

Is this hard to do?

Is it cost affective to do yourself verses paying an expert?

I'm not against paying an expert. I just have had a hard time sorting out the self claimed experts who tinker, from a true expert.

[Mac VABCH]

Olddog,

There are many around that sell piggyback chips. The problem is that most will just give you a standard tune for you injector size and CI. Understand it is best to tune on the dyno you just have to find someone that has access to one and has the experience. I have a guy in Virginia Beach that owns his a dyno and has been tuning FI cars for about 5-6 years now....But still if he doesn't have your car to run on the dyno he can only give you a "tune" for you injector size, CI and a few other items. I would suggest that you find someone in your area that "tunes" FI domestic vehicles and also has the software for EECIV....You may want to check with Dyno Tuned Performance in Chesapeake Va, ask for Brent or Frank http://www.dtpracing.com/...Mac

[Jerry Clayton]

We do several ------for starters---need to know engine specifics---size,type of induction,mass air flow meter,throttle body, fuel pump and pressure, exhaust, gear ratio and tire size--the box has a code on it that is 4 letters----we use Diablo chips that are installed into the ford box---generally do 3 to 6 a week and seems to be picking up--- contact me via PM and I'll give you address info



Jerry

[ByronRACE]

IMHO, you will get a better tune if you are willing to learn and master the art yourself.

Why? Time. It takes a tremendous amount of time to properly tune a custom engine. With or without a dyno. I use both the dyno, and a datalogger on the street, and it still takes me months to perfect a calibration for one of my personal vehicles.

There are two DIY paths that are powerful and cost effective.

The first is the http://www.moates.net path. He can sell you the J3 port adapter, the memory device, and the programmer and you can download the software from Paul Booth's site. Very DIY.

The second is the http://www.tweecer.com path. They have a more commercial product and tuning software that is USB flashable in-car, which is handy.

As far as "how to" tune, it's all the same regardless of the software you're using the punch the parameters in with. The parameters don't change; they were created by Ford back in the early 80's.

Read a lot, use scientific method, and do it yourself. That's my advice. If you want help putting together a baseline calibration to get you started, email me and I'll help you free of charge. I've tuned over 1600 EEC-IV's, and developed a passive datalogger product called SnEEC-IV. I retired from the scene in 2004 to dedicate more time to medical device design. I do this automotive stuff just for fun these days. The system I used back in 86-04 was the Autologic System which is now owned by Diablosport. Actually, Diablosport is now owned by the guys that built the Autologic system...so I guess that's a better way to look at it.

Byron

[olddog]

To all:

I'll explain what I have and my issues and maybe you can give me some pointers.

I have a 347 stroker with a big bump stick in it. The fuel injection is sold by MassFlow. It was on the car, when I bought it, and the previous owner bought the MassFlow system used. It has 36 lb/hr enjectors and I think the throttle body (designed to look like a 4 barrel carb) is about 1200 CFM.

The engine runs very lean when started cold. Exhaust burns your eyes (I originally mistook that to be rich). The idle is low and engine hesitates and wants to stumble. When the O2 sensors heat up and it goes into closed loop, it runs good. However it does not make the power that it should. I have removed power to clear the memory and got the same results.

I have talked with MassFlow, and they have been very helpful. They will chip the EEC and do a tune for my engine at a reasonable price. However I do not like the idea of a tune based on theory. I feel a dyno and exhaust analizers is the only way to know if you have it right or if a sensor is off.

My engine started running rough below 2000 rpm and then it tripped a code for a bad O2 on the left side. I could tell it was running too lean after this. I pulled the O2 sensor out, and it is snow white.

I have verified the TPS is good and the votage is correct at idle. The water temp sensor is at 29.7 K ohms and the manifold air temp is at 29.4 K ohms, with a cold engine at about 80 F. This matchs with a chart I found on the net, so I believe both temp sensors are good. I have turned the fuel pressure up to 46 psi to help with the cold idle issue, but do not want to do this long term. So I figure either the mass flow sensor is not reading correctly or something is not mapped correctly in the tables.

Ok as I try to read and learn more about all this, I have learned that maximum power is made at an air fuel ratio of 12.5:1 and that the O2 sensors cannot read very far from 14.7:1. So at WOT the EEC goes to open loop to richen up the mixture to make maximum power. Since my system is running, lean when in open loop, I think this is what is killing the HP.

There are lots of chassis dyno around me, but so far only one has come across as knowing half of what he says he knows, the rest have not inspired me. I want to at least learn more and at best get it running as good as I can, before wasting time on a dyno.

Am I thinking and doing the right things? More advice is welcome.

[ByronRACE]

The very first thing I'd do is get a wideband oxygen sensor on board and weld bungs into both of your exhaust pipes near the collectors so you can install this sensor and monitor the air/fuel ratio. Without that, you're simply guessing. I can't tell rich from lean in an EFI system because it's dynamic. It might be rich one moment, then due to the inputs...swing off lean. Or, it may fluctuate wildly from one range to the other. It's not like a carb.

Additionally, white plugs and white oxygen sensors aren't unusual because the mixture runs 15.3-14.1 as a matter of normal operation.

I'm not in agreement where MassFlow puts the maf. MAFs operate on the principle of laminar flow. You can't have laminar flow with throttle blades an inch or two away, so I would expect your AFR error to vary with throttle angle as it disrupts laminar flow. A lot of bronco conversion customers try to clamp the MAF on the end of the throttle body in 5.0L conversions and it results in horrible drive behavior that is very difficult to mask with calibration fiddling. I don't know how they get away with that with most cars, and can tell you that I've seen from data logs, it doesn't work as well as the factory maf configuration. I don't know if your problem is maf related, but it sure sounds like it could be.

Once you get a wideband on there, and as long as you can run the engine at WOT, I'd put it on a dyno or go find a long stretch of road and see what the WOT AFR is above 3000rpm. It should be more or less steady. Once you know what that number is, you know how far off your open loop fuel is from where it should be, and massflow can make an adjustment to the entire calibration by that offset amount. That alone may fix your problem.

Without a wideband, you have zero data by which to judge the next move.

The factory 5.0L Mustang box is calibrated at about 12.3:1 AFR at WOT. I don't know where these guys calibrate the box, or whether it's reflashed or what have you. The box I saw looked and behaved like a factory 5.0L Mustang MAF SEFI box, 5spd family, and the AF in there behaved more or less like a factory MAF at WOT. I was able to calibrate it by treating is just like a Mustang. The box itself had no markings; the Ford label was removed and the entire box was spraypainted black.

[olddog]

It is my understanding that my system is one that used a factory EEC, however they had to change the injector size and maf size and maybe some more things.

I agree the maf location is a poor location. In addition to the location, a single plane intake with a big cam is huffing and puffing both directions. My first problem was the intake gaskets were sucking in oil. The oil got on the maf, hp was down bellow 300, by my pants. When I cleaned the oil off the maf there was a huge improvement. Although I have to admit, once in closed loop, driveability is great. The maf does not look like a factory set up. It looks more like multiple hot wire anomometers in one piece. Maybe that is the key.

I checked the web sites, but I didn't find a price for the tweecer. Buy the time I purchase the tweecer, wide band O2, and a good book on tuning, I will be well past the price of a dyno tune, and chip installed. If I was certain I was dealing with someone who really knows their stuff that would be a know brainer for me. Your point on getting it completely set up takes more time than it will see on the dyno, concerns me. What concerns me the most is an agressive tune that is too close to detonation and one warm day or slightly low octain and poof -- time for another engine. Of course learning to tune it myself could cause harm, as well.

Thanks for the info.

[ByronRACE]

You can put a control rod in place with your dyno tuner by setting an absolute maximum commanded spark advance not to exceed.

Additionally, after the tune is complete, you can always back down the base advance; which has a broad-spectrum effect. If your tuner dials in 36deg total advance and it rattles on the street, you can always move the base to 6 and get back to 32deg total.

If you don't care about the last 5% of economy, you could instruct your tuner to build you a full open loop calibration that never uses the closed loop functionality. Do that, and you can have some control over your air fuel ratio by simply twiddling with your fuel pressure because the EEC won't learn around those changes if it never runs closed loop. This also gives you the option of removing the oxygen sensors entirely...so you can install your wideband where they used to be in order to keep an eye on the AFR without having to weld to your existing side pipes.

Or, you can of course do all this yourself. As far as being fearful; sure...there's some reason to be. But, I'd argue that the fear is largely unfounded if you do careful work. You can do more damage by doing something simple and careless like setting base advance to 20deg BTDC than you can by making most calibration errors. On the flip side, there is no better tuner than the owner...they are motivated to do a perfect job.

I did a lot of tuning for others, and although I did the best job in the time allowed, the calibrations I built for my own personal cars were always better. Nobody is going to pay you to drive around their car for weeks on end until you've dialed in every last behavior...crank fuel, start-up cold, start-up hot, etc etc etc... Some of this stuff changes with weather. It's not always 40deg F when your tuner starts the car, but one day when you hop in to drive, it will be...and the startup fuel won't be the same as when he drove it. There's a lot of little characteristic things like that you can tweak with, and reap the reward from.

A few examples. My 93 Lightning pickup runs a 95 Bronco processor, has been converted to mass air, is supercharged, and all that stuff... It suffered from cold start flooding, hot start flooding, crank fuel problems, lean backfire, shifting problems due to the level10 transmission, and so on... I set the baseline fuel on the dyno in an hour, but it took me several months of daily driving and careful notes to figure out what the hell it needed to fix all the weird behavior. The truck now drives like a factory truck, makes tremendous power, and gets 17mpg fwy unloaded and averaged 14mpg towing my cobra in a 24ft enclosed trailer to and from the cobra bash!

Know any bone stock 03 Mercury Marauders getting 26-27mpg freeway consistently in California commute traffic? Mine does. I consistently get over 380 miles to a tank (usually over 400, record is 422) and a fill up is usually just over 15 gallons. My constant messing around over the past 2 years has improved economy almost 4mpg. A tune shop isn't going to take the time to do this kind of work.

My Cobra is still a tune project. I keep changing things so it keeps needing work. I went from 160lb/hr injectors to 83's, and had to start over completely. I'm sure you'll do that too at some point...change something big and make it require tuning. Do you want to pay someone to do that work again or would you rather have control?

To each their own, but I find tuning the vehicle and messing with the EFI one of the most enjoyable and cleanest tweaks you can do to a car. Lots of change with very little effort.

Anyway, I'm off my soap box. Whichever direction you go, I wish you well and hope you get the problem resolved.

[olddog]

The paper work I got with the car has a chart for the mass flow meter's voltage output verses flow. Can a mass flow meter be calibrated? Or is it tested on a flow bench and the values recorded and these numbers entered into a table in the EEC? This is the area that I seem to be the most in the dark.

[ByronRACE]

A MAF can be calibrated.

A MAF can be flowed with or without being calibrated and a resulting curve plotted/charted.

And, the PCM can be calibrated with any massflow vs voltage function, or left stock.

This whole business of "calibrated mafs" started when someone realized they could divide down the maf voltage output of a maf in order to stick a 24lb injector on a 19lb/hr mustang and make it still run without messing with the PCM. Basically, they lie to the PCM about how much air mass is entering the engine, and this lie causes the PCM to reduce injector pulsewidth just enough to make the wrong injector run correctly. You can do this trick up to about 30lb/hr injectors without too many side effects. Bigger than that, and other side effects begin to occur (minimum maf voltage below .4V at idle flags a code, etc).

The right way to do things (the OEM way) is to size a mass-air transfer curve with a measurement range that best fits the engine so you use the entire voltage range of the output, then program the PCM with the appropriate curve. This way you end up with the best possible resolution.

For example, if you were to take a MAF that is capable of measuring 4500kg/hr of airflow and put it on an engine that only flows 1000kg/hr at max rpm wot, you are only using less than 1/4 of the available 0-4.8V range and your resolution is 1/4 of what it should be, and resolution suffers.

Assuming the maf is appropriately sized, measures the proper range, and has been flow mapped...the way to calibrate the PCM is to put that curve in there with the actual injector size and true engine displacement and work forward from there. This is true for anything up to about 90lb/hr. Beyond that, you have to start playing games to make the ol EEC-IV work.

[olddog]

Thanks Byron. At least that will help me ask the right questions to see if I trust this guy to do the work. If I don't find someone I'm comfortable with, I will likely go the self tune route. Then I will have even more questions.

[Mac VABCH]

Olddog,

I have the same motor and MassFlo system in my car. Except that I have 24lb injectors. It has been tuned on a dyno making 338 HP with a very flat torque curve at 12.4 A/F. I am the original owner, a few months ago I droke the Mass air meter and needed a replacement. My engine alway stumbled when cold but cleared up very quickly, Then ran beautifully. With the new meter I have had a few glitches. I had to buy the "new" Frequency to Voltage converter with the new meter. Check the elements of the meter as mine had some gunk on it, be very carful as the filament are very fragile. I had MassFlo clean mine and check the meter for proper size. I agree to run in open loop... I think that you may injector to big for you motor, As my motor run very good with 24lb injectors. Mac

[olddog]

Mac,

I have been wanting to hear from other people who have Mass Flow systems. Interesting the you too have a cold start issue. Mine idles at 900 hot and about 600 cold. Cold it is running lean. Did you solve this problem and if so how?

You lost me a little on the frequency to voltage converter. I take it you installed a MAF meter that outputs a frequency instead of voltage. Would you elaborate on what you have?

My engine should be between 400 and 450 hp based on desk top dyno software. I think it should ideally have 30 lb/hr injectors, but since it idles very well hot, I think they should be ok.

I did clean the daylights out of my MAF, I am sure it is clean now.

Thanks

[ByronRACE]

The hot wire mafs use ceramic elements. Once oil gets into the pores of the ceramic and the meter is powered, it turns to carbon and those deposits are almost impossible to remove from the pourous ceramic. My guess is that if your meter has suffered from a lot of oil contamination, the calibration has shifted significantly.

Example. An over oiled K&N filter on a 5.0L mustang will do this...and the result is a meter that reads about 10-15% lean, even after cleaning. Seen this more than once; and just wrote code to compensate after using the dyno and afr to tell me what the offset was.

The frequency to voltage conversion stuff is how Massflow uses the GM/Delphi style meter on a Ford system. The native output from that style maf is frequency, and they use a conversion box to convert the signal back to analog so the Ford processor can read it.

Byron

[olddog]

Interesting, I have to say I suspect my MAF is off (reading less flow than actual).

So, if there is carbonized oil on it, is shifting the tuning wise? Will its error remain stable over time or will its error keep changing over time?

It definately had oil on it when I cleaned it. I cleaned it with carb cleaner and Q-tips. Should I try a tiny, fine, wire brush and stronger cleaner like brake cleaner? I have access to a blaster that uses very fine glass beads. I could turn the pressure down, but even that worries me. The idea of a few beads rattling around in my engine makes my head twitch a little too. Although I know this would polish off any carbon, the wires may not survive.

[ByronRACE]

When I'd recalibrate a customers PCM to match a shifted maf curve, I do not ever recall seeing that shift continue in the same direction.

I can make some guesses as to why this is...but they're just that...guesses.

The pores in the ceramic, once plugged, are probably hard to fill with more "gunk" so I'd guess it more or less is a one-way transaction.

I use ether based starter fluid to clean mafs...and I never rub the elements, only spray them. I would not introduce any abrasive of any kind into an engine; no matter how small. That's a very bad idea, IMHO.

What I'd do is get a tweecer and I'll help you with a baseline calibration for the parts on your engine if you want the help. Then, see how it runs. It should be the same. Once that baseline is in there, then using an AFR meter, go out and WOT the car and see what the AFR is above 3000. After you have that, compare it to what the commanded AFR is and then perform a trim adjustment. (it's a multipler...if it's 10% lean, the "global open loop multipler" will be .90 to correct it. Then, see how it runs at WOT again and repeat until commanded = actual. Finally, once you're close enough, apply what you just learned to the maf curve. Scale it, and set the global multipler back to 1.0. Now, any weird idle business should go away because the MAF has just been trimmed by the proper amount.

If that doesn't fix the behavior and you're sure you have no vacuum leaks, the next thing I'd do is plumb up another known good maf in series and see what it's reading at idle, 2000rpm, 3000rpm, etc...you can DIY your own maf curve that way if you can take voltage readings off of both MAFs and have the known-good curve.

[olddog]

I didn't intend to blast the MAF on the engine. I just worry if you did blast it (off of the car) that you wouldn't get every last piece cleaned off. Anyway blasting at even low pressures looks like a bad idea all the way around. We use it to clean metal parts that have had plastic burned off of them. So there is cabon on the parts that is very thick. Glass bead blasting brings them to a polished shine. We have been blasting the same parts over and over for 30+ years with no apparent wear.

I was under the impression that the EEC would have to have a chip added to tune it. You make it sound as though I could tune it as it is with the Tweecer. Is this correct?

Can you actually get an accurate reading of a 12.5:1 AFR with a wide band O2? Some charts I saw looks like the O2 gasses drop to near zero just bellow 14:1. It looks like it is impossible to acurately measure the differance between zilch point zero, zero, and almost zero. If what I saw is true, it looks like wide band alone is not going to give you good information, when the AFR is this rich.

[ByronRACE]

Think of a tweecer as a chip with a usb port on it. You plug the tweecer into the Ford PCM, then plug your laptop into the tweecer's usb port. Now you run the tweecer software, and can modify anything you desire. When you're done, you remove the cable and leave the tweecer installed. If your PCM has no chip at all in the J3 port, either Massflow has figured out how to reflash the ford proprietary EPROM/EEPROM in the EEC-IV, or your PCM is a bone stock mustang box; which would explain why you're having problems. Open the box and look at the big dual inline package chips...if one of them is ceramic with a sticker on top covering a glass window, and if the sticker has Ford jargon all over it...you've got a factory PCM. That's an EPROM and the sticker has to be removed and the chip exposed to strong UV to erase it. Replace the sticker once you take a peek; or replace it with black tape.

Modern wideband sensors, even across brands, are accurate to about .2 AFR in the range of 15:1 to 10:1...some even wider, and even more accurate. Innovate makes very nice stuff that exceeds those specs.

Glad to hear you're not firing a bead blaster into the intake...I thought maybe the particulate was so small you were actually considering it. My bad.

Byron

ps, the external chip/tweecer like devices disable the onboard chip (there is a control line on the port for this purpose) and substitute off-board memory (their own chip that is interfaced to look like Fords original). The process is temporary....remove the external chip from the socket and the control line is no longer activated and the internal memory is enabled.

[olddog]

Byron,

Do you know what GM engine and year would be the same as the MAF meter in my MassFlow system?

I'm considering just tossing another one on it and seeing what happens. Or is this silly to try because its calibration curve would have to be figured out as well?

[ByronRACE]

I'm pretty confident the guys are using a GM/Delphi maf because I've seen it before in datasheets, on the web, or in boneyards...but I can't tell you what exactly they are using. My guess is they didn't have a special calibration made just for their relatively low volume purposes..that would be cost prohibitive. But what exactly they are using and how to obtain one is beyond the scope of my knowledge, sorry.