Roland@pcmtec

There was a thread on ford forums about it. It was quite a bit of work for little return from what I could see. Be a good intro to reverse engineering if your are keen though.

In the multi tune wizard search for auF0164 in the middle pane. Then press the right arrow button to add it to the tune you have selected for the ghost cam. Then in the editor set it it 0 for that tune slot.

Make sure you have tuned your map at zero table as well. It doesn't use just the slope table.

Could you send the file and log into support@pcmtec.com and we will check the file out for you.

It's absolute pressure. You should start at 0kpa, 101kpa for approx 1.0 load and 202 for approx 2.0 for 14.7psi of boost. Log your map pressure to map trace against the table and you'll be able to confirm.

You have to recreate the table and axis yourself. It won't do it for you.

Can you take a video showing a map trace stuck on the 0inhg row?

Looks good! If we ever get a spare minute we would supply a plugin standard so you could write your own data stream inputs. Is it working reliably?

Yes you definitely can

You need workshop and to modify the spark feedback gain vs load table discussed in the ghost cam thread, everything else is not applicable for a v8.

Don't use a clone. They are garbage and most are either DOA, FEPS is DOA or they die within a week. The symptom of FEPs dying is SERVICE NOT SUPPORTED when flashing. You can test this by probing OBD pin13 when flashing, it should show 18v. Also Tactrix are one of the cheapest and most reliable cables you can buy, please support them as a company. If you are really cash strapped the VCX Nano (the Ford version with FEPS, the toyota cables do not have FEPS) is cheaper, but it flashes about 25% slower than a Tactrix.

Without a box to test on I'm not confident enough to give advice on that. Im pretty sure the numbers are meant to be multiplied by a factor to give a real number, but the units are unknown. If you went over 100 it would still clip at 100 but it would get there faster. Same with how they request negative torque values in the ZF, it can't actually go negative but it makes the ramp/slope harder so it gets there faster.

For anyone searching this other thread might be helpful

I did some good old assembly reading so this could be completely wrong and muddy the waters, but I'm reasonably confident its on the right track. The best way to confirm it would be to datalog the solenoid current and the trans temp and see if the values match. Without a BTR to confirm this on I'm not confident enough to define the axis in case they are wrong. So the X Axis is "Solenoid 5 Current Input". Units and breakpoints are unknown. The Y Axis is "Transmission Temperature for solenoid 5 compensation". The equation I believe is native units of °C but I can't figure out the multiplier. It should be top to bottom, cold to hot though. From the assembly I could see it looking at the following scalars to help determine the current when in certain modes and are passed into the lookup for the X axis. This might be a bum steer though as there are so many layers of indirection its easy to get lost. I think these three currents determine the lock/unlock/shift determination for some of the columns. All of the BTR code was written by someone other than Ford it appears, it doesn't follow any of the standard Ford table definitions (a struct which includes a xaxis, yaxis and table data in the binary) the calls to these are always preceded by the X and Y DMR which makes it very easy to do table definitions. This table appears to be more of an array and a bunch of horrible optimised switch statements which is why most people give up defining them. Not sure if this helps you guys or not. I'm on maternity leave for the next 4 weeks so I have some fun down time to go digging like this. If you've got any other requests hit me up now as I don't have time when I'm in the office these days.

I will see if I can confirm the axis used for that table.

Can you smoke test the intake? An air leak will trigger the IPC shutdown if it thinks the throttle is running away.

You'll need to find someone who has tuned one of these tbs befoe. The Tb airflow and ipc airflow tables will need tuning to suit.

Did it have this problem before fitting and tuning for the new throttle bodies?

They don't have a fuel pump output. It's driven via canbus from the pcm to the the cluster output which you don't have.

This should sort you guys out.

One is a rom value, one is a dmr. Even if you could write to it it would be overwritten. I'm sure there is a way to make them reset but we have no way to test it without a car and a week of spare time. Flashing an ar29 to an 8r29 osid then back again to ar29 (or vice versa) should reset them as it changes the os checksums. Same as how changing the pcm osid resets the kam.

Not that I'm aware of.

Honestly I have no idea. We have never had a ZF to test with and relied on customer feedback which has been very polarising and not consistent. Personally I don't think it works but some people swear it does.

Closed loop is blended with a delay timer. If you set the blend timer to 0 it should be instant.

Should work except for the lack of boost control.