Roland@pcmtec

Its only used if the IMRC is enabled (eg NA). It is not used at any other time afaik.

The strategy conversion wizard is only to be used if you are setting up a multi tune as per the instructions here, there is no reason to change the OS otherwise.

Tuner lock doesn't give that error. Sounds like you may have a wiring or cable issue.

Yes technically the theory of what to do is not complex at all, the issue is implementing it. Eg tapping into the solenoids is quite difficult as you have to remove the TCM and resolder the pads with an intercept that will not fall apart when you go over a bump or get the box hot, then somehow get the wires back out of the box or via the TCM plug. You then need an interlock to make sure it can only be applied when stationary and in first gear. Doing all of this in a repeatable and cost effective manner is difficult which is why only one company to date has done this. https://www.facebook.com/XtremeFordTuning/posts/4306955426053984

Have you successfully used this cable to flash a PCM previously? What is the cable and was it purchased genuine? Non genuine cables or cables without FEPS support can give this error. Canbus wiring issues to the OBD port can also cause issues like this, eg the FEPS (OBD pin 13) not being wired up.

What vehicle is the engine and pcm from? Is it an ecoboost?

It does a "ecu reset" for both the PCM and TCM. This doesn't reset the adaptive learning just does a power reset which clears some adaptive learnt items. As a consequence of the flash and the checksums changing the PCM automatically resets the LTFT data. So this occurs regardless when you do a flash. TCM adaptive can be cleared using the instructions in the tcm kam thread. The TCM only relearn a under specific conditions, as these conditions are not documented it can take up to 1500km as it's kind of pot luck if you have the trans in the right state to readapt. If you have it in the sweet spot it can occur in under 30mins, unfortunately we don't have any documentation on this. You can log all of the adaptive conditions and it could probably be figured out with the right person logging.

We do not have a ZF custom os. There are a few companies working on a hardware solution. All of them will require box out and either an external controller or modifications to the tcm.

We have the multi tune (MFT) where you can effectively load up to 8 tunes into the PCM and switch tunes using the cruise control buttons. We don't support any proprietary flashing devices.

We don't supply tunes however there are various companies that can do it for you. We do supply technical howto guides however. If you have no plans to tune the vehicle yourself then I would recommend a mail order tune or visiting a workshop. https://www.pcmtec.com/workshops

Bill we might have to employ you soon, you are doing a better job than us at replying to these!

Yep fg is very different and it would be quite painful Ba and bf are quite similar though. They are also simpler cars.

Converting the PCM to a BF might be an option also.

Post your file and a datalog showing torque source. Alternatively try someone like custom machine works for a mail order solution. They do lots of conversion vehicles.

Renaming is supported in the beta. Press f2 or right click with show display name and you can rename the short name (what you've highlighted) Renaming the description will be available next beta update. If you have worked out what the horrid German acronyms are and found them useful submit a ticket with the IDs and names and we can get them permanently added. The ZF scalars definitely need some love. Units can be changed in bulk under the menu system. Math parameters are in the schedule, we have a math subsystem we use for the units currently which will be expanded for user input. The most time consuming part for that is building the parser that takes the 50 different ways people might type things and convert it to RPL in a manner that is performant and user friendly. I've seen some good and some terrible math user input so I want to make sure it's done right when we get to it.

The logic is a bit complicated as there is max overlap vs max exhaust cam and also max intake cam. You might have to adjust the intake cam position as well at light load high rpm to get it to do what you want. I believe there are some closed throttle scalars as well with load and tps that decide when it's in closed throttle mode.

It likely affects the VE in a small way which would likely be linear to rpm/load if you plotted it. You could most likely fudge this error in a variety of ways, tuning correction, injector slopes etc. The correct way would be to rescale the speed density offset/slope tables to suit, but that is an extremely time consuming process which requires you lock the cams at each position and datalog each cam/rpm cell in steady state on a dyno. Realistically no one would do this. What is more likely a problem is unbalanced flow across the cylinders, the stock manifold is the best and if you've used a front facing plenum you likely will need individual cylinder air mass trims, the only way to determine this is with individual EGT and lambda probes. edit: Do you mean the new plenum the intake is in the centre? If so its likely its reasonably balanced, but you never know.

The axis is shared across all of those tables. The tables do not reference each other. I'm not sure what you mean by the B series being superior? Can you explain your thought process in some more detail?

I don't believe its possible to cause valve piston interference even if you tried due to the hard stop. I am not an engine builder though so maybe someone else can comment.

The main issue i am seeing is when closed loop boost control is enabled my AFR gauge swings between 13.5:1 and 15/16:1 and will do a full swing once every second or two. You mean closed loop O2 control right? The O2 circuit purposely oscillates rich/lean to keep the cat converter working correctly. If you can show a datalog of the narrowband voltages and wideband overlaid on top this would be interesting to see. Your plot looks pretty good to me, if you don't look at the datalog and the car drives smooth with no stalling I would call it a day. If you ever get a stock car do the same logging and you may be surprised how good yours is. I suspect there are hardly any cell counts at the 0.95 region?

For anyone interested this is the charting library we use. So anything shown on this page could technically be done at some point. They have an interactive demo you can download as well. https://www.arction.com/gallery/

I think we actually started out like this and decided the split was cleaner. But its probably reasonably easy to enable something to let you select Kirby made this in paint, is that what you mean? Or the axis as well? or just the axis?

Support for all 2.3T, 3.7 NA, 3.5T, 5.2NA, 5.0NA and 5.0 Supercharged 2015-2021+ F150 and Mustangs with other Fords coming after release. Approximately 2500 strategies and 350 operating systems across 5 different CPUs we have mapped so far (Falcon was only 165 operating systems over 2 different CPUs). We then plan to offer the Falcon style multi tune on with full mapping support (eg 30k parameters). To do this we have had to spend the last 2 years with 3 new staff writing various tools to automate mapping and naming about 80,000 different parameters. It is incredibly time consuming doing this whilst supporting the existing business but we are almost complete with quite a few shops beta testing it now. The other major project has been the new datalogger and 2.1 Falcon template renaming (new naming, units and descriptions for about 5000 parameters in the datalogger and editor).

Just an FYI if you do this, the equation for NA offset is inverted vs the turbo equation. So if you copy the turbo values to the NA values, you need to invert the offset. Eg as follows. Why Ford did this I have no idea as it makes no sense, it looks like a programmer changed the sign for some reason by mistake.