Installed options matrix table and platform code in the LS1 PCM

[MikeOD]

Would it be possible for us to have access to the installed options matrix table in the LS1 PCM to aid in selecting different hardware options when swapping an LS engine into an older vehicle? It would give us the ability to choose things like electronic throttle, a newer style or older style alternator and so on...plus I think I could even set it to use the low res crank sensor from a vortec on an older small or big block in combination with an electronic throttle from a new car.

I believe the platform code is stored (looking at a raw binary) in the 2002 12212156 OS at 0001 E5C5.

I believe the installed options matrix starts in the same 12212156 OS at 0001 E53C.

I don't have raw binary's of the other OS's, if I did I'd try to find the addresses in those as well.

[MikeOD]

Thank you for adding this feature.

[Fast9C1]

Uh, what'd I miss? Is there something in the newest beta that I just requested?

[PitchblackC3]

Yes, I am celebrating this one as well!!

[PitchblackC3]

So, I am assuming the way to use this is set the binary code the way you want. ie. set DBW to 0 and then load the IAC and stepper data from a DBC tune?

[MikeOD]

I plan to expiriment with doing that now that I'm able to.

[MikeOD]

Another update. I've taken a 2001 8.1 liter truck tune, and switched off the DBW flag. The 8.1 runs the same 0411 PCM hardware, but it is a different OS number from F-Bodies. The 8.1 is the same firing order as the gen 3 and gen 4 small blocks and runs the same style 24x crank signal as a gen 3 as well.

For starters, I looked at the IAC data, and it wasn't empty...so I figured I'd try it, the engine is swapped into a friends much older car, and he wanted it to be drive by cable, and he had a throttle body with a linkage that could work that came off a marine application. The 8.1 uses the same throttle body bolt pattern as the LS1, but it's oil fill is in just the right place to not allow an LS1 or 4.8/5.3/6.0 truck throttle body to work...and the marine 8.1 with the extended linkage was running speed speed density, but with an AS&M MEFI engine computer, not a GM engine computer. We don't have tuning software for that computer (and the software AS&M sells, while I'm sure excellent software, is expensive, and I don't see myself tuning too many boats), so we didn't want to use it (the 8.1 thats in the car is from a truck, not a boat, and has different heads/cam than the marine engine that has a connecting rod sticking out of the side of the block).

Anyways, before I messed with the matrix and the 8.1 program, I loaded up a Camaro program just to see that I had sensor feedback. I know it's a 411 PCM, and I wanted to verify good sensor feedback (since I had also re-built the entire engine harness) before messing with 8.1 code. After verifying good sensor feedback, I loaded the stock 8.1 program back in, and noted I no longer had TPS feedback. I turned off the DBW flag in the options matrix, flashed that new version of the 8.1 code in, and immediately had TPS feedback in VCM scanner, which meant it was time to try to fire the engine.

The engine fires, and runs great, and the IAC is working properly to maintain idle control, throttle response is good too. We're running the engine in speed density as the MAF doesn't really fit, and we haven't had the car out of the garage yet, so we haven't tuned it enough to really have the response be as crisp as I'd like, plus there were a few vacuum leaks and some other issues that we've been ironing out, but I'm very excited to see that the code responds as I'd hoped it would have, to the system options matrix.

Now...does anyone know what the brake torque management (BTM) field is for in there?

[Fast9C1]

Mike,

That is really fantastic information. If only my 24x LT1 conversion project had been delayed 6 months, this would have saved me a lot of the initial aggravation of trying to get it running What a sweet addition to the tool.

[LSxpwrdZ]

So I'm wondering if I could install a pedal position sensor on my Fbody and run an electronic throttle body??? And the only thing I'd have to change I'm guessing obviously adding the wiring for the TB and the Pedal Position and then change the bit in the system options. Did I take that right or is there more to it than that?

[Chris@HPTuners]

So I'm wondering if I could install a pedal position sensor on my Fbody and run an electronic throttle body??? And the only thing I'd have to change I'm guessing obviously adding the wiring for the TB and the Pedal Position and then change the bit in the system options. Did I take that right or is there more to it than that?

i wouldn't try it, you have the added complexity of the missing TAC module and the various PCM calibrations required to interface to it. It's one thing to turn something off, its another to turn it on and make it work and especially with the throttle i wouldn't risk something going wrong. Keep in mind the TAC module can set permanent DTC's in your PCM that essentially fry it.

[Bluecat]

So I'm wondering if I could install a pedal position sensor on my Fbody and run an electronic throttle body??? And the only thing I'd have to change I'm guessing obviously adding the wiring for the TB and the Pedal Position and then change the bit in the system options. Did I take that right or is there more to it than that?

I've done it before and it worked fine. Several years ago on a ls swap in a 74 vette. Obviously what Chris said is correct, but on the 02 F-body os I tried it on there was no issues. All the etc tables were already populated, just had to import a few tables over that were different because of it starting as iac. I compared them to a vette cal, copied what need to be moved, and flip the switch in the option matrix. Car fired up first try with no issues.

I did run into an issue when I went to drive it. There is a ect speed governor that is not listed in HPT that is maxed on a etc cal, mined on iac. As soon as it moved it and was over 3k it would cut out. Found the parameter in an other venders software and fixed it. If you want to do this James, I'll send you a fbody os prepreped so you can do this.

[LSxpwrdZ]

I've done it before and it worked fine. Several years ago on a ls swap in a 74 vette. Obviously what Chris said is correct, but on the 02 F-body os I tried it on there was no issues. All the etc tables were already populated, just had to import a few tables over that were different because of it starting as iac. I compared them to a vette cal, copied what need to be moved, and flip the switch in the option matrix. Car fired up first try with no issues.

I did run into an issue when I went to drive it. There is a ect speed governor that is not listed in HPT that is maxed on a etc cal, mined on iac. As soon as it moved it and was over 3k it would cut out. Found the parameter in an other venders software and fixed it. If you want to do this James, I'll send you a fbody os prepreped so you can do this.

I may take you up on that just to have the file handy, but in all honesty I would probably be dumb to go to an electronic throttle over a mechanical one. I do love how much more driveable they are though. They have alot more progressive throttle to them than cable TB's do.

[MikeOD]

I've done it before and it worked fine. Several years ago on a ls swap in a 74 vette. Obviously what Chris said is correct, but on the 02 F-body os I tried it on there was no issues. All the etc tables were already populated, just had to import a few tables over that were different because of it starting as iac. I compared them to a vette cal, copied what need to be moved, and flip the switch in the option matrix. Car fired up first try with no issues.

I did run into an issue when I went to drive it. There is a ect speed governor that is not listed in HPT that is maxed on a etc cal, mined on iac. As soon as it moved it and was over 3k it would cut out. Found the parameter in an other venders software and fixed it. If you want to do this James, I'll send you a fbody os prepreped so you can do this.

Bluecat, did you happen to try cruise control with that engine swap? I'm swapping an LS engine into another older car currently, and I want to run drive by wire and cruise control...my plan right now is a TAC module from a 2002 Vette (or Escalade, or anything else with the same TAC) and then a 2002 Vette OS...but the PCM is from a 2002 Camaro, and I'd rather not license a 2002 Vette file (that I don't yet have) if I don't need to...2 credits to license the PCM and the OS thats already in it would be great...plus I'm unsure if the Vette OS affects any of the outputs from the PCM that I will need to run the gauges in the older car...I BELIEVE turning DBW on in the Camaro program will work, and cruise should work as well...the 2002 Camaro runs the same OS as the 2002 Escalade, which is DBW, but not the same as the 2002 Vette...so I guess a different option would be to license a 2002 Escalade tune and start from there...however a 2002 Escalade tune will require a segment swap to truly be a manual transmission tune.

[Bluecat]

No I didn't. Cruise was never hooked up on that swap. I have no idea if it would work or not. If you rather start with a vette calibration and the only thing stopping you is having to burn 4 credits to switch it over, drop your pcm in the mail and I'll switch it over for you. When you get it back you'll only have to use 2 credits.

[kastein]

Would it be possible for us to have access to the installed options matrix table in the LS1 PCM to aid in selecting different hardware options when swapping an LS engine into an older vehicle? It would give us the ability to choose things like electronic throttle, a newer style or older style alternator and so on...plus I think I could even set it to use the low res crank sensor from a vortec on an older small or big block in combination with an electronic throttle from a new car.

I believe the platform code is stored (looking at a raw binary) in the 2002 12212156 OS at 0001 E5C5.

I believe the installed options matrix starts in the same 12212156 OS at 0001 E53C.

I don't have raw binary's of the other OS's, if I did I'd try to find the addresses in those as well.

So... I know this thread is like 14 years old but it was the most relevant one I could find. I thought I understood this options matrix table, you set a column to 1 for the row for your platform (GMT610 in my case, engine and ECU came from an 03 Savana 3500) if you want to enable that feature. Well, I changed the oil pressure gauge(?) column to a 1 on mine, wrote the changes, and nothing seems to have changed. I'm using an OBD2 dongle and Torque Pro and see no difference in the datastream, I still need to monitor PID 22115C to get the oil pressure ADC input value or alternatively PID 11 w/ header A9 4A F1 to get the SAE 2178 oil pressure off the bus, either way. No real difference with the bit set or unset. What does it actually do? Does it turn the broadcast of class 2 serial message 0xA9 0x4B 0x11 on and off, or change its format from dummy lamp driver to actual value, and I'm using the SAE 2178 command not just monitoring the bus so I'm not seeing the difference because the command responds the same way in either case? What am I missing here?


This is my table post-edit+write, for the record. Under System-General-Vehicle-Platform Type, it's set to GMT610 and always has been, so I believe I'm modifying the correct row of the table.

I'd like to enable cruise control on this thing eventually as well, so while this doesn't immediately affect me as it seems the oil pressure can be read no matter what the flag says, I'm guessing I'll actually care about whether it pays any attention to the Cruise Status column.

[blindsquirrel]

P0522/P0523 are set to...?

Are you looking for an oil pressure value in the PCM, or on the class2 output from the PCM? I believe the setting in system options is only for the output. It should read the pressure PID all the time regardless (afaik the 3-wire sensor wasn't optional on these, though some might have had a cluster without a discrete oil pressure gauge).

Does the sensor work? Does it have +5v at PCM C1 7 and sensor terminal 2? Ground at C1 63 and sensor term 1? What's voltage on the signal return, C2 58 (note that's C2, not C1) & sensor term 2 with the sensor unplugged? Does oil pressure PID read anything if you jumper sensor signal to +5vref at the sensor connector?

[kastein]

Sensor works great, no codes related to the oil pressure sensor set, not worried about any of that. I'm using oil pressure PID 22115C with success, and SAE J2178 request PID 11 w/ header A9 4A F1 also gives me the same data (when both are scaled using the correct formulas, the J2178 data is 4kPag per LSB while the 22115C PID I have to multiply the byte value by 0.65 and then subtract 17.5 to get psig. I've verified that they rise and fall in sync and give values within a couple psig when I convert the J2178 data to that format.

All of this is true whether the oil pressure bit is set to 1 or 0 in the options matrix, which is making me scratch my head a bit.

I'm guessing that the oil pressure bit only controls the J2178 0x4B 0x11 (broadcast status) data stream you don't have to ask for, but not the 0x4A 0x11 (command/request) data response, but all my test equipment capable of verifying this is 3 timezones away right now and I'd like to get started on this project without having to go get it or buy another one, so was hoping someone knew for sure.

If I had the factory IPC for the donor vehicle this would be pretty easy to test, but unfortunately I did not expect to need it and left it in the junkyard 6 years ago...

[blindsquirrel]

So it's only the PCM output over class2 that's the problem. Well.

I can tell you that on my truck, an '06 Envoy (Denali), with all the fancy gauges, that the oil pressure gauge is not a real gauge. It is nothing but a mechanical idiot light, and anything over like 5 PSI registers on the gauge as "40 PSI". The data PID in the ECM displays real numbers. The output from the ECM to the cluster is essentially nothing but yes/no.

[TheMechanic]

So it's only the PCM output over class2 that's the problem. Well.

I can tell you that on my truck, an '06 Envoy (Denali), with all the fancy gauges, that the oil pressure gauge is not a real gauge. It is nothing but a mechanical idiot light, and anything over like 5 PSI registers on the gauge as "40 PSI". The data PID in the ECM displays real numbers. The output from the ECM to the cluster is essentially nothing but yes/no.

Pretty sure there is a software update for oil pressure on these. It would turn the idiot light on during an idle. After the software update the gauge is a little bit more accurate.

[blindsquirrel]

Already has latest calibrations in everything. It's a common/'normal' issue at least on these trucks.

With this weird front sump pan, if the oil level isn't 1/2qt overfilled a hard launch will make it gulp air - I've seen it as low as 20psi in the scanner while the gauge never moved. And cold it's 50psi but gauge still sits rock-solid on 40.