Not yet, no, my apologies. The holidays sidelined a lot of projects. Hopefully in January I'll be able to get those readings for you. In the meantime I'll check to see if I have a datalog from my dad's car from before the climate control went out but after we replaced the MAF. I think I logged it while tuning the shift points on the transmission, I'll have to see if I can find it. I'll look when I get back from work.

EDIT: I've attached a log from my dad's '94 to this post.

As a note, his car is using the Speedlog hack for faster datalogging, so if you want to graph it, make sure that when you pick your graph variables you click the dropdown at the top that says "Main" and switch it to "Speedlog." You'll know what I mean when you go to graph.

 

I appreciate the datalogging, but now I am even more confused at what is going on. Loading up that data shows the program just happy with MAF readings below 8.0 g/s. But the I reload up my data and it turns red below that like it shouldn't be there. I am very confused at why my car isn't really running right. More frustratingly I have to smog it soon so I am worried this is messing up emissions for me as MPG has been down except when I ran in speed density mode and my MPG when back to where it was before.

I attached a pdf with screen shots just to show you what I mean.

At this point I am thinking of hitting up that LT1 tuner guy to send me a tune as I have looked at tuning it myself and I really do not know what I am doing enough to feel comfortable.

 

So I went and emailed the guy not too long ago, but I was thinking I wonder how my bin file compared to a stock bin file in something like Tuner Pro and my tune is way fuckered. Data in the log missing or just way off. So I am going to load in a factory tune and see if that fixes my issues. If not at least it will be a good base line to start from. Hell somehow the tune didn't even have cylinder size filled out. IDK what happened to the computer on my Vette, but it must have just decided to drop a ton of data some reason.

 

That's incredibly strange, to say the least. Definitely do try a stock BIN--just remember to change the VIN number to match your car in TunerPro before flashing. Also, a stock BIN will wipe out your PKE; I'm not sure why, but at least in my experience, that happened to me when I tried to flash a different tune from the one on the car. No big deal, it's easy enough to re-learn the keyfobs.

I'm afraid I can't say why EEHack thinks your values are wrong when mine are right. I'd wager a guess it's comparing the MAF airflow to some other value (MAP?) and then doing a sanity check, but I'm not the one who programmed it. That's a question you'd have to ask steveo over on Gearhead-EFI.

 

Ah well good news there is I don't have a working PKE anyway. I did buy a broken remote that I have been trying to fix, but that is on the back burner atm as those dash buttons I need to program it don't work any way.

Thanks for the info about the VIN, I wouldn't have thought about that. Do you know where that setting is? I can't find that.

Might be some sort of check. If a base tune bin doesn't fix the issues then I will chat with those people.

 

Which EE file are you using to read your current tune??

There is two, EE, and EEB, one is only for early 1994, and the other is for all other 1994 and all 1995. I can't recall which is which, but i think EEB is the earlier 94 file.

If you use the wrong one it will do exactly what you describe.

It is quite possible (depending on who tuned it) that the file used was not a modification of the original file, in that instance it could've been from anything, i have seen some that have started out from a Camaro file, and even saw one on a 1994 Firebird that came from a 1995 Impala. The way i could tell what they started as was the VIN, which really makes no difference to the way the car runs, obviously looks a lot neater if it is done right though.

If you are going to load a stock file, be sure you have the correct definition loaded first, it will usually run fine, but i have seen the speedo read some outrageous numbers.

Before you do anything, try loading the other definition file and see if loading your .BIN gives correct or at least believable values after that.

 

Don't worry about your VIN yet, it won't matter. Test your downloaded .BIN with the other definition file first.

 

This is a factory LT1 tune from a 1995 Corvette, this one may have been from an auto but you can change that very easily before you upload it. It is a lot more of a problem if it came from a manual and you put it on an auto.

 

$EEB was never present in the Corvette. While I have my doubts that the code on the OP's computer is actually corrupt, I don't think the culprit is that it's using the $EEB mask. Even if it were, flashing to a BIN that uses the $EE mask would undo it anyway, and the stock BINs are all $EE, so there's that.

No need for this. All stock BINs are available right here, so he can find the exact one for his car's configuration and start there (and just change the VIN in TunerPro): http://fbodytech.com/tutorials/bin-files/

 

EEB was most certainly present in the Corvette.

I went back through all my files from when i tuned my own 1994 Corvette, which had the original untouched factory tune on it when i got it, and it was indeed EEB.

I am very well aware that flashing with an EE tune will fix it, if indeed the definition file is set to EE on Tunercat.

I also know that if his car has a tune put on there using EEB, and he downloads that tune using EE, it will give some very odd numbers in the fields, which is what he describes.

 

Further, if an EE file is used and it is uploaded using the EEB definition, there will be issues. Exactly the same issues will occur if the file is downloaded using the wrong definition file.

Vise versa also applies.

You can take a tune from ANY 94-95 LT1 car and upload it to a Corvette. They all used what is basically the same PCM.

 

This is a little misleading, so I'd like to clarify it for the OP. The whole $EE and $EEB only applies to making changes to the BIN file in TunerPro. It has nothing to do with uploading or downloading the BIN to/from the car using Flashhack. If the BIN you're using is $EEB, and you use an $EE mask XDF file to edit it in TunerPro (such as EEX from steveo), there will be strange values that make no sense all over the place, as Case states. However if you just take a completely unmodified stock BIN from fbodytech (which are all $EE for the 1994 and 1995 Corvette), make changes using the EEX XDF definition (which is also $EE), then flash it to your car, then it will work just fine. Additionally if you were to just flash a stock BIN to the car with zero changes, it would likewise work perfectly.

As Case says at the end, any LT1 or L99 BIN can be flashed to our PCM. The only difference between the Corvette and the other cars is some hardware relating to OBDII testing, and that hardware isn't actually used in operation, so it doesn't matter. But it's still best to start with the correct BIN for your specific car type (Y-body; Corvette) and transmission and rear end. Less things to worry about changing in TunerPro when you feel like doing that.
Sorry, I just had a look at steveo's EEX definition and the VIN number section was missing. I'm used to using the EEXtra definition from Gearhead-EFI so I often forget what things aren't available in his definition. I've gone ahead and added it to a modified version and uploaded it to this post for you.

Also I've added the XDF for the $EEB mask to the attachments. It's nowhere near as feature-complete as EEX 4.1 or EEXtra are, but you're only going to use it to test seeing if it "fixes" the values on your BIN, so no big deal. And again, if you want to be able to use the superior $EE editing tools, you can just grab the stock '95 manual BIN from fbodytech and start with that instead. Obviously keep your stock BIN around as a backup, but yeah. Good luck!

 

The program i used to use back when i tuned these things was Tunercat, i have not used Tunerpro, i don't know what the difference was if there was a difference at all.

When i first started out on all this, i downloaded the file from my 94 using EE and changed ONLY the diff ratio and tyre size, the car was originally a 2.59:1 with 255/285 tyres, i changed to a DANA44 and had changed to 275/275 tyres.

When i uploaded it to the car, it started and run fine, but i did not drive it til the next day. I saw the issue by the time i had reached the end of the street with my speedo showing WAY off.

I uploaded the file again after work that day and got the same result. It was put to me that the likely reason for this was i had used EE, instead of EEB, so i switched the file to EEB and uploaded the same .BIN again, and it worked perfectly.

At some point i did convert over to an EE.

Whether or not that is a Tunercat thing or not i don't know. I do know that the testing i did way back 15 years ago did show that if i had the wrong one of those two definition files selected when i downloaded from the car, the tables would show some very odd random numbers, and switching to graph mode looked like a mess.

 

Tunercat is something of an all-in-one thing, and nowadays it's woefully obsolete for the 94-95 cars. TunerPro is free software that lets you make changes to your BIN, and it uses XDF definition files in order to correctly interpret what BIN it is and what changes can be made. This is where the $EE and $EEB masks come in, because an XDF can only support one mask at a time, and the best XDFs are all for $EE, not $EEB.

The actual flashing and reading from the car, that is now done using a tool called Flashhack. It's faster than Tunercat, it's infinitely more reliable than Tunercat, and it can't brick PCMs like Tunercat has. It also doesn't care what mask your BIN is. So if all you're doing is flashing without making any changes, it will work perfectly regardless of which mask the BIN is using.

 

That'll be why there is differences between what you're saying and what my experience has been.

I bought Tunercat 17 years or so ago, i used it quite successfully for at least 8 years, but no doubt there were some minor things that were not ideal.

I used VE Master and DataMaster as well. Even though the 94 used a MAF, i used to always tune in speed-density mode first and then re-enable the MAF once i had it right. Ran significantly smoother when done that way.

I never had a failed flash, but the laptop i used had an RS-232 port on it. I have seen a fair few failed firmware flashes on other equipment when using an RS-232 to USB adaptor.

My 93 is a Callaway so chances of ever needing to touch the tune on it are pretty much zero. It runs absolutely perfect. At some point i will dump the tune from it incase the EPROM ever fails, but that'll be all i will do.

 

Maybe I am doing this wrong then as I do not think I actually had a bin file. I had misunderstood the files I was working with. As I had been calling the eeHack data files a bin in the earlier conversation that is what I put through TunerPro in order to check my values. I think what I needed to do if I have this right is to use Flash Hack to pull the bin that is on my car and then I can compare it to the factory bin I got off of fbodytech. Then if I want I can change values as I see fit or load the factory bin onto my car if mine truly is very broken again using Flash Hack.

So yeah I think i was just feeding Tuner pro bad information to begin with. Sorry for the confusion, still learning here.
I will attache a ZIP with the XDF file, factory tune bin, and the eedata file I was feeding tuner pro just in case you wanted to see

 

Oh wow, yeah, no, that'll definitely do it. EEDATA is just a proprietary datalogging format that EEHack uses. It's not used for any other purpose.

TunerPro is for editing BIN files that are flashed to the computer (or in the case of earlier cars, burned to an EPROM). It's not used for any other purpose (though TunerPro RT does have other uses, we will ignore it for now since EEHack is a better datalogging program for the 94-95).

So you are correct--in order to inspect your BIN and compare against a stock one, you would need to read the BIN from your car using Flashhack. I think you'll find that it's completely and utterly stock in every single way.

As for your XDF, yep, that's steveo's. It's great for general use, but it's missing the ability to edit VIN number. Not a big deal if you're only working with your own car's BIN, which now that you know better, you will be.

And your stock BIN, since it's been renamed, no clue where you got it. I'll just point out that all the factory BIN files are hosted on fbodytech which was linked earlier, so if that's indeed where you got it, no worries. But like I said, I'll bet dollars to doughnuts your car's BIN is stockity-stock once you read it.

 

I got the stock bin off Fbody tech, just renamed it for keeping things straight on my end

 

Wait, why'd yall stop posting, I was learning so much. Why is it 2022 and I am buying $80 outdated cable adapters and downloading ancient programs to read why my car is doing whack crazy **** like CaptDDale's? I downloaded tuner pro today and need to get flash hack. When i got the V5 download off tuner pro, it was wigging out all the readings on the tuner pro analyzer live feed. when I put the V1 definition from the Red River (ALDL cable company) download, my numbers read ok and gave no codes. That doesn't mean I know what any of the numbers should be but they didn't look bad from the little time I had to tinker and do searches. Where is the best location to learn all of this tuning software and scan/analyzer data which I can see if I am within proper parameters?

Mike