Turbo

[97LDough]

I know of a place that can put a turbo on anything. If nobody is interested in my 97 Eldo, I might have to save up a little more money. the guy said I would have to relocate my battery to the trunk, as well buy a fluidyne radiator, as well as a spearco intercooler for a lexus GS400. He can custom bend all the tubing and powdercoat them, and reprogram the ECU and set up the right compression for the N*. It would probably be pretty expensive, but it is like my dream. Also, I think lambo doors on an eldo would be awesome, but those kits are like a grand.

If anyone is in the Chicagoland area, and you are looking for some pretty cool custom stuff, go to Rush Racing. These guys are pretty cool and know what they are doing.

[JasonA]

...and reprogram the ECU and set up the right compression for the N*....

If that guys knows how to reprogram the ECU, I bet X-M-S would love to talk to him. Apparently, programming the Cadillac PCM has elluded X-M-S for YEARS as they try to get their supercharger project off the ground.

[thexboxpiii]

We need some nerds from MIT to crack the ECU.

[danbuc]

My old teacher has some friends who work at Delphi. He said they would be able to reprogram it, but he hasn't been able to get in touch with them, since he's been kind of busy. I'll have to ask him again on monday. If those guys can really get that turbo setup to work right, you better believe I'll come up with the money to get it installed on my car. Let us know how it works out.

[thexboxpiii]

Hope you are close with your teacher to let us in with the goods.

[yenko]

How much would something like this cost? Does anyone know why it is so difficult to reprogram the ECU?

[acklac7]

"Does anyone know why it is so difficult to reprogram the ECU?"

Im not real familiar with computer programming but I belive there is "code" or language that GM engineers wrote for the ECU, similar to how Microsoft writes code for its operating systems to use. In order to edit that the "language" you need to be able to read it....and I believe the language is kept secret by GM. Im sure somone else on here understands it better.

[joeb]

I like to watch the car shows on sunday. horsepower tv, trucks, they are all good for info on tweaking a motor. lately, on trucks, it seems that increasing the power on diesel trucks is hot. they have mentioned a product gale banks shop provides that overrides the stock engine computer. it works in additon to the stock computer. since it increases the boost and monitors the EGT it would seem to me it is fairly sophisticated. how does GB engineer their engine controllers? if they can make 1000 lbs torque they must know something about engine controllers. maybe the caddy supercharger project needs that type of controller add-on.

[JasonA]

Gale Banks probably works with the OEMs somewhat. In addition, turbo gains with chips are much more common than N/A gains with chips. In a naturally-aspirated vehicle (like ours), a chip can do nothing to change the airflow through the engine, so potential gains are pretty small. In a turbo vehicle, the chip can control the wastegate, which affects the turbo pressure, which DOES affect the airflow through the engine, so potential gains can be huge. Dad had a '00 Ford F-550 with the Powerstroke and we put a 4" exhaust and Banks powerpack on it. That thing would boost over 25 psi. when loaded and climbing an incline. I don't know what the horsepower and torque increases were, but it was absolutely noticeable.

[danbuc]

Guru, what about all of the tuning programs out there for all of the LSx engines. They all have to pass the same federal giudlines that Cadillac's do, and I'm sure the engine management software for a car, such as the C6 Corvette, is as closely guarded as the Northstar. If what you say is true, then how do all these companies manage to design programs capable of changin every aspect, of the engines programming. It just doesn't make sense, why GM woudl purposefully make the Cadillac PCM, that much harder to access. Wouldn't it be more cost efective, just to use the same programming language, and simply adjust particular setting, for each application? I just don't get why they would make such an effort, to prevent people from messing around with this one engine, when just about every other V8 they have, can be tuned using a OBDII cable, and a laptop.

[TDK]

Danbuc,

I agree that it is frustrating to have the NorthStar code locked up. Certainly there are some folks who would buy a turbo, etc for their Caddy if it were feasible.

However, I also believe Guru already answered most of your questions.

Its GM's proprietary design data and they believe that it would only hurt their interests to release it.

I can think of any number of possible scenarios where someone cranks up a chip etc, blows the engine and then cries about it to GM (warranty or not).

We live in litigious society and if you allow/encourage changes to your product, then you are inviting a flood of "product liability" actions.

The emissions aspect alone is enough to maintain control.

The changes from the 93/94 OBDI and newer models is commented on this site frequently. Basically, there are fewer ways to peek and poke inside the computer code as time goes on. Try to re-engineer your home PC with XP, compared to diving into much earlier operating systems. There is just too much at stake anymore.

Regarding other GM engines, in particular GM's OHV small-block. There are thousands upon thousands of racing enterprises, hot rod shops and owners who are familiar with every aspect of that power plant.

Maybe the GM OHV engine's OBDII code has been cracked forever or maybe chips are swapped or even entire assemblies created from the board up and and substituted. Since that engine is used in various chassis (and for what 40-years or so?) perhaps its not so integrated into the remainder of the car's computer system.

The "problem" with Caddy is that the engine is still relatively new and the user base can not begin to compare with how many are using the GM OHV. And frankly - there are a lot of easier/cheaper ways to make oodles of horsepower and go faster. But that's not all that a Caddy is about it it?

In any case, Caddy is simply not going to turn out its biggest guns unless the competition demands it. What I mean is they are not driven by the same marketing forces that drive the GM OHV engine.

We have seen a steady increase in NorthStar power output over the last few years - but I doubt that anything will ever be backward-compatible.

But if a tubo becomes reality - send me a note...

[danbuc]

No, Guru hasn't answered all of my questions. If the engine management software for GM's engines is so top secret, how come I can go out and buy LT1/LS1 edit, and change any setting I want. There's absolutely no secrecy with the progamming for the OHV V8's, so why the Northstar. When somebody blows up their Corvette, GM doesn't say, "well, I guess we'll have to lock people out of the ECM for their own good." They let people do what ever they want. They didn't completely lock people out of the LS6 in the CTS-V. I've heard of quite a few now, with superchargers, and all kinds of crazy mods. I just find it a bit puzzling, why GM would only keep people out of the Northstar, when they let people do what ever they want with their other engines.

edit: The Northstar has also been out for 12 years now, I think it's time somebody figured out how to tune it. People started working on the LS2, before it was even out.

[danbuc]

In any case, Caddy is simply not going to turn out its biggest guns unless the competition demands it

I hardly think the Northstar in my STS, is Cadillac's biggest gun. There is no reason that they keep it's programming a secret any more, especially since they no longer use it. It's an older design, and outdated, in regards to the current Northstar.

[acklac7]

why GM would only keep people out of the Northstar, when they let people do what ever they want with their other engines.

It might have something to do with there Marketing Mix ( cough cough Corvette). As well as Cadillac's image..which is changing fast....sooner or later GM will produce a super-Cadi that will make the Vette look like a Fiero....Something to compete with the GT40, hopefully by then I'll have the money to buy it!.

[acklac7]

TDK @ Mar 17 2005, 04:14 AM

Caddy is simply not going to turn out its biggest guns unless the competition demands it. What I mean is they are not driven by the same marketing forces that drive the GM OHV engine.

I belive there is a demand for a "Big gun" Cadillac, however the XLR is far from it. Cadillac has made alot of smart moves and is heading straight up (IMO), soon they will feel the pressure to compete in the $100,000+ market with Ford, Bentely,Aston Martin,Porsce etc....but you bring up a good point TDK....

there are a lot of easier/cheaper ways to make oodles of horsepower and go faster. But that's not all that a Caddy is about it it?

[OynxSTS]

Danbuc,

I agree that it is frustrating to have the NorthStar code locked up.  Certainly there are some folks who would buy a turbo, etc for their Caddy if it were feasible.

Its GM's proprietary design data and they believe that it would only hurt their interests to release it.

But if a tubo becomes reality - send me a note...

Over 50 years ago Z. Arkus-Duntov wrote a wonderful memo

"THOUGHTS PERTAINING TO YOUTH, HOT RODDERS, AND CHEVROLET"

If you like you can read it here

In this letter Zora urged GM management to encourage the "hop-up" industry in order to catch up with the popularity of the flat head fords of the day, this included manufacturing hot rod parts if no one else will!

I know it’s a different world, full of emissions issues and long term warrantees. It’s also a different world in that “hopped-up” high end cars sell and everyone wants overhead cam engines. I believe that Zora's memo is as relevant today as it was 50+ years ago. The "hop-up" industry builds excitement and excitement sells cars. GM needs to re-apply these principles to its N* and other overhead cam motors.

We all know that almost every other “high end” manufacture “supports” its “Tuner” following:

AMG, BRABUS, Hamaan, AC Shnitzer, etc.. etc.. crap, even lowly Toyota has its TuRD group…

Come on GM help us out!

Personally, I dream of a supercharger that fits under a stock hood.

[danbuc]

Hehe...TuRD...

[OynxSTS]

Hehe...TuRD...

Ya, each time I see a TRD logo on the side of a Corolla/4Runner/Tacoma...

I say "Hey, look kids, there goes a turd" they love it...

My wife just gives me one of these

[JoeM]

Companies pretty much have to reverse engineer the data stored in the chips to figure out what does what. Decompiling the binary into some basic low level assembly code is accomplished once one understand the nature of how the CPU works (and this probably is documented somewhere unless GM is fabing their own secret processors... doubtful). The problem still is that you pretty much have to go by trial and error editing variables/constants and then seeing what they effect on the car/car simulator.

It would be nice if GM released some manuals or the actual development tools/source code for older vehicles that are in no way under warranty. My guess is they dont because they either dont own it or dont want to give away tools other companies could slightly modify for their own future applications.

[n0dih]

Buy a code scanner that works on your car and build a databus sniffer to start watching the commands. Map out each and ever command you "see". Then tear the ECM down and examine the chips. Contact each and ever supplier of chips to get datasheets on them and find out which ones do the commands and such. Likely you will run in to proprietary chips and will not find anything. Maybe if you have some friends at GM that can get you the specs you can go

from there, but likely it won't be easy at all.

Start with the basics and work your way up.

It won't be easy and it won't be fast....

But rest assured, you will be able to do it faster than they guys with the Hemi's. ChryCo encrypted the databus. Now it re encrypts it everytime the ignition is cycled.

So, at least you don't have to worry about that "problem".

Tom

[danbuc]

There's no way in hell I'm ever going to do any of that stuff . All I'm trying to understand, is why it's so easy for companies to develop a tuner for any of the LSx engines, and nobody can touch the Northstar. That's all I'm saying. If people can reprogram the LS2, why not the Northstar. The programming language is probably very similar, so I imagine the only real difference between the two would be different setting for each engine. I think the real problem, is that all thses companies that develop these tuning program, just don't give a crap about the Northstar. I'm sure if the makers of LT1/LS1 edit wanted to, they could probably get into the Northstar's ECM. The last time I spoke with them, they said they were working on the LS2. I'm sure that many aspects of that engines programming by now, are probably more advanced than the Northstar's anyway. They told me they had no plan's to develop a program for the Northstar, because they thought no one would buy it. That's the problem.