Info on 2015 ECM used in Caddy CTSV sport please?

[Jim Blackwood]

Hopefully this is the right place. From my research it looks like the one used was P/N 12704477 (2 byte) or the earlier 19432266. Not being familiar with the naming conventions of these ECMs or what vehicles they were used in I can only ask. This is important to me because it is paired with the TCM for an Aisin 8 speed transmission I am using. So does HPtuners by any chance support this ECM?

Thanks a bunch,
Jim

[edcmat-l1]

There's a supported vehicles list.

[Jim Blackwood]

Thank you, where is that please?

[gtstorey]

google "hptuners supported vehicle list".

[Jim Blackwood]

Looks like it *probably* is supported. I do not know for sure but I suspect the difference between the 3.6L NA CTS and the 3.6L CTSV-Sport is the turbocharger but I don't know that for sure. They both use the 12704477. The CTS-V (6.2L blown V8) uses a different ecm. I do not think they both used the Aisin 8 speed but again I do not know for certain. What I HAVE seen is a listing for the 12704477 ECM showing it was used in one of the V8 pickups so it looks like using it in a V8 application wouldn't be a problem. HOWEVER I've been down that road already of buying something only to find I can't use it. Is there a list of the PART NUMBERS of the ECMs that HP Tuners support? Haven't been able to find it on a google search.

Let me be very clear. I do not care what vehicle it goes with. As long as I can use it with the 2015 CTSV-Sport TCM and Aisin 8 speed transmission. It is going to be a custom tune anyway, as it will be running a 346 cu.in suoercharged stroker Buick 300 V8. Currently that engine's stable mate is being run from an '02 Silverado '0411 ECM with a much modified Camaro tune. But, the basic tune for the CTSV-Sport will have the necessary transmission parameters. That is why I am looking specifically at that ECM. I can sector swap the engine parameters I think. Or simply go through the tedious process of changing each one individually if necessary. But before I buy more parts I need to know if the ECM is supported. That would be the 12704477 generally and the 2014-2019 CTSV-Sport tune specifically. I would also like to know the type designation for that ECM, for instance the '0411 is a P-02 IIRC.

Jim

[blindsquirrel]

You are confusing part numbers with service numbers. A part number is a specific service number programmed with a specific calibration for a specific vehicle. A service number can be programmed with any calibration that's compatible, which turns it into whatever it's supposed to be. Part numbers are irrelevant unless you have the exact ECM that came in the car from the factory, any replacement will be done by matching the service number and then programming it.

Generally, you cannot take a calibration meant for one service number and put it into a different service number without at best straight out bricking it, or at worst leaving it kinda-sorta working but with weird unsolvable mystery problems that are impossible to diagnose.

Find the VIN you need to make all the parts work together, find a VIN from one of the vehicles built with that parts combo, find what service number that VIN (calibration) requires. There are cookie-cutter sites with the GM parts lookup database (gmpartsdirect, gmpartsgiant, etc.) where you can put in a VIN and get a parts listing.

[blindsquirrel]

Oh good Lord, the V6 cars of that year range are direct injected (E92) while the same year range V8s were still E67. Nothing V8 ever used the Aisin trans. This is dumb.

[Jim Blackwood]

Thanks, good info to have. Nothing good is ever easy.
Does E92 refer to the ECM type then?
I'll admit I have never yet swapped an ECM from 6 cylinder to 8 or back, that looks like an intriguing possibility. Being as they use the same basic ecm for both applications it is obviously possible, how difficult could be something different.
Then I suppose the 12704477 would be the Service Number of the E92 type ECM which is then loaded with the configuration file for the specific application, in this case the V6 but also if used in a pickup the files for the V8, each then having a different part number. Is this correct?

So I would need to look into the configuration for those settings which affect the firing order. Firing order I've been into. Number of cylinders should be about the same. Anything else there I need to look at? Degrees between injector pulses or something? (redundant)

Then we have a look at the direct injection. The assumption here is that the injectors are still fired by the ECM. Timing is likely to vary (later probably), pulse duration will probably be different, even the output may vary in terms of voltage and amperage but if it is not less I don't see much of an issue, especially if the control is still on the ground side. In terms of the config/tuning files I should be able to use elements of both the V6 and V8 along with possibly some map info and other details from my '411 setup.

So can I confirm now that HPTuners does support this controller? (12704477)

Jim

[edcmat-l1]

You literally have no idea what you're talking about.

[blindsquirrel]

E92 is direct injection only (LT engines), a Gen V. E67 is port injected only (LS engines), Gen IV.

[Jim Blackwood]

Yes I understand that ed. Nobody burst into life fully informed about the intricacies of modern engine control. I could probably make the same criticism about your abilities to prosecute someone else's application through the US patent office but that would be most unfair of me. Thank you for your assistance nonetheless. In either case the hope is that we can find help from the more informed. And thank you blindsquirrel, as always you have been helpful.

So, since nobody has seen fit to specifically negate any one of my dozen or so assumptions in my last post I have to take it as given that they are correct.

As such I am now aware that the E92 is exclusively a direct injection controller. That implies a number of differences. The overriding question is whether or NOT HPTuners supports that controller. If they do there is at least a *chance* that I may be able to get somewhere with this. If not, I will of course have to look elsewhere. No big deal, I just need to know, but since I have investments in this community I would rather do it here.

Which spurs the followup question and included assumption(s): Are not the direct injectors electrically switched? (Obviously they are, and even use a similar connector.) Do they not fire once each Otto cycle? Do they not have a pulse length that determines the volume of fuel delivery? Assuming this, there are only a limited number of factors that can make them functionally any different from port injectors as far as the ECM is concerned. The most likely of which I have pointed out above. So tell me *specifically* why it can't work please? I'm relying on your comprehensive knowledge here. "IT WON'T WORK!!!" is not going to be an acceptable response I'm afraid, no progress has ever been made on anything without someone saying that. It is almost always ignored.

As some of you are aware, I frequently deviate from the proven path, and usually with a high level of success. I also choose my excursions quite carefully. Three points of contact at all times is advised, but is not always possible.

Kindest Regards,
Jim

[gtstorey]

Compare the injector data fields in the tunes between the two ecm's. If you can't characterize the injectors correctly you can't make it work with a GM ecm.

Even most of the aftermarket stuff won't work with direct injection and they don't rely on injector characteristics.

[blindsquirrel]

OK, so get both a port injected engine and a direct injected engine, set up an oscilloscope, and study the injector control waveforms until you figure out for yourself that it won't work. They are just different animals and you can't put either one in place of the other. Either do the work to prove it to yourself, or listen to the people telling you "IT WON'T WORK!!!"

edit: Not to mention all the other ways everything the two ECMs do literally everything else different, to suit the type of engine they are designed for. I'm out. This is even dumber than I thought it was.

[edcmat-l1]

Yes I understand that ed. Nobody burst into life fully informed about the intricacies of modern engine control. I could probably make the same criticism about your abilities to prosecute someone else's application through the US patent office but that would be most unfair of me. Thank you for your assistance nonetheless. In either case the hope is that we can find help from the more informed. And thank you blindsquirrel, as always you have been helpful.

Kindest Regards,
Jim

Yes you could Jim. The difference is I'm not on a patent law board trying to reinvent the process.

The biggest problem with trying to run a direct injector off an ECU that's designed for port injection is the resistance of the injector. I've never checked the resistance of a DI injector but just knowing what it has to open against will tell you it takes quite a bit more amperage than a port injector. Which would mean the port injector ECU would not be able to open the DI injector and/or it would burn up the drivers trying to. Electrically it simply will not work. Not without redesigning the hardware.

Add in that they're 2 completely different systems complicates things further.

[blindsquirrel]

No this is the reverse of that - he wants to use a E92 to control port injection on an LS. Because that's the ECM that is already in the V6 car. It's another one of these "I got a killer deal on this V6 car with a blown up 3.6 and wanna convert it to a tire-smokin' quad turbo supercharged monster! For cheap!" deals.

----------

Yes, the 12704477 E92 is supported, though HP Tuners supports by year/make/model, not controllers. Just because a module is supported in one application with one OS doesn't always mean it will be supported in ALL applications that use that module. They work with the software that's inside, not the hardware, because the end user edits the software, not the hardware it runs on.

Yes the ECM is supported, no, you cannot run a port injected LS engine with a direct injection ECM.

screenshot.26-11-2024 11.50.34.png screenshot.26-11-2024 11.08.39.png

[edcmat-l1]

No this is the reverse of that - he wants to use a E92 to control port injection on an LS. Because that's the ECM that is already in the V6 car. It's another one of these "I got a killer deal on this V6 car with a blown up 3.6 and wanna convert it to a tire-smokin' quad turbo supercharged monster! For cheap!" deals.

Yes the ECM is supported, no, you cannot run a port injected LS engine with a direct injection ECM.

screenshot.26-11-2024 11.50.34.png screenshot.26-11-2024 11.08.39.png

Ah, ok well, my bad, but the problem is still the same just opposite. So instead of it burning up the drivers the ECU will melt down the injectors LOL

[blindsquirrel]

Now if he wanted to use a LT engine and convert the car that way, that might just be feasible. Although '15-down the V8 CTS was port injected and the V6 was D.I., the '16-up V8 CTS was D.I. And the '16 V8 CTS carries over the same E92 service number as the '15-down V6.

...but remember, we're the dumb ones and he's the very very smart one.

[Jim Blackwood]

Sorry, I guess I've offended you guys and I really didn't mean to. I'm very far from trying to say that I'm any smarter than you and especially to say that I understand these systems as well. But I do understand electronics, hydraulics, and a few other things and I get your point about the impedance. I haven't measured it either. However, I do not think the ECM has any more than 14 volts or so to drive those DI injectors unless they have done some very fancy things with the power supply. By logic, over-voltage really should not be an issue. Regardless of how much amperage is available to use, 14 volts is not going to burn out a port injector. You probably can hook it across a car battery and go away until the battery runs down and most likely the injector will still be just fine, though I can't say I've done that. It shouldn't even be a concern unless they have somehow doubled or tripled the voltage being delivered to the coils in the injectors.

Now Squirrel, this is interesting. I'm not blindly tied to the 2015 CTSV-Sport if something else will work better, and as near as I have been able to discover, the Sport used the Aisin 8 speed between 2014 and 2017 and was the only GM to do so. (Hopefully that is correct but I don't know how I can verify it.) If that means that the Sport and the V both used the E92 perhaps the config for the V's V8 could be used with the config for the Sport's TCM and work it that way. Still have the DI issue to solve but it tidies up a few things otherwise. Alternatively, if perchance the Sport began using DI in 2015 but had the Aisin 8 speed in 2014 the obvious solution becomes clear. Use the 2014 ecm. But no, it looks like RockAuto lists the same number as the 2015 so I guess that option is out.

So back to the DI. Possibly a good question at this point would be to ask if the DI injectors operate in the usual saturation mode, or if they function in the peak-and-hold mode? I recall as we went to ever larger injectors that there came a point where the only way to get enough fuel was either to fit each cylinder with dual injectors or to use the peak-and-hold- method to open the injectors more quickly, thereby increasing their flow by reducing opening delay. And then of course they began making better injectors. The ECM should have more than adequate current capacity to run the port injectors in either case I would think, although I am not aware of anybody trying to run the old injectors off a P&H driver. Because why would they, right?

And yes, most likely the parameters will be majorly whacked. But let's not lose sight of the fact that what the ECM does in a very complicated way is turn a set of injectors on and off. We used to feed a more or less steady stream of gas into the engine and that was purely mechanical. The job hasn't changed all that much, we've just made the controls a lot more complicated. As a result it can do a lot more things but it really does not have to do all of it, or do it perfectly. And when you get into it a lot of what the ECM does can simply be turned off using the switches that HPT has access to. I'm not trying in any way to imply all this would be easy, just that it should not be impossible. It seems to me that the chore with EFI is not so much to get the injector to deliver fuel so that the engine will start and run, as it is to bring all of the configuration and tuning parameters into such a state of harmony relative to each other that there is adequate range for tuning for all the different engine conditions. But at the same time here's a hypothetical. Suppose the injector flow is off a little. It's still possible to raise or lower the fuel map to compensate. That'll probably also throw off other functions like enrichment or warmup, but you see my point? Just because it isn't exactly "right" doesn't necessarily mean it won't work. There are a whole host of ways to influence fuel delivery and the ECM has no real clue what any of them are. It just sees numbers. The main thing is to not fall into a GIGO trap.

Jim

[gtstorey]

HPT tuners doesn't access tables to turn injectors on and off. The ECM calculates the desired fuel load based upon the and then calculates the injector on/off time to get there. If the ECM can't take the characteristics of the injector, then it can't accurately calculate any of this.

You can play with the fuel maps and get it correct in some areas but that is likely to screw up others. If you object is to get it to "run" then maybe. If you want it to drive well, then not really. People have trouble getting port injectors with incorrect data to run well on ECM designed for them. Can't imagine the ECM can handle the calcs for a totally different type. Will it have any clue what to do when set up for cylinder pressures and seeing atmospheric pressures? I doubt it. The tables probably won't even accept the data.

This is totally separate from whether the ECM for DI can actually fire port injectors.

[blindsquirrel]

But they are all engines with pistons that go up and down, I don't understand why it wouldn't work.

Only the V6 cars used the Aisin trans. That was never used with any of the V8s in any year.

If you want to use a LS-based port injected engine then you need an E67 and wiring harness from one of those cars that was built that way. If you are dead-set on keeping the existing E92 then you need a direct injected engine and the V8 harness.

DI and port have totally completely different injection timing and strategies, which is another reason why it can't be done aside from how all the hardware is electrically incompatible. They are not just different engines they are different engine types, as different from each other as diesel is from gas. We aren't telling you it can't be done because we don't want you to have fun, or because we are stuck in the old ways and lack the Beginner's Mind. It just won't work.

edit: In fact, a GDI engine is more closely related to a diesel than it is to a port injected gas engine.