MSS54 DS2 Tool: FREE - DME tune, program, flash counter, codes, adaptions, etc

[Cubieman]

With the caveat that I haven't experienced it myself, if you watch YouTube videos of the flap test running that electrical arcing noise seems to be a normal part of the process as far as I can tell.

Re shadow codes 99 and 89, they are normal/expected. To check that the error reporting system is working correctly the DME intentionally triggers those two codes on a regular basis as a test. You can disregard them. I've included them for completeness, but you're the second person that's brought this up, I wonder if maybe better for the app to suppress these two codes (or at least note that they are expected/nothing to be concerned about)

https://youtu.be/lpym484t4uc?si=PVZiA_qP5HYYo60N

This is the noise, that makes me feel better as does your explanation of the shadow codes.

I will try the flap/ebox tests again with tool32 tomorrow using the different prg file, thanks for all the feedback and all this work you have done, this is fantastic.

[terra]

Re shadow codes 99 and 89, they are normal/expected. To check that the error reporting system is working correctly the DME intentionally triggers those two codes on a regular basis as a test. You can disregard them. I've included them for completeness, but you're the second person that's brought this up, I wonder if maybe better for the app to suppress these two codes (or at least note that they are expected/nothing to be concerned about)

IMO it would be best to suppress when the counter is zero. Which I believe is basically what INPA and DIS/ISTA would do

[karter16]

I tried once more and had the same type of almost electrical arcing noise for a moment and incomplete test.

These shadow errors are indeed now hard faults.

I'll explore further tomorrow, I'd sure love to get this test working, must be something with my wiring, odd.

With the caveat that I haven't experienced it myself, if you watch YouTube videos of the flap test running that electrical arcing noise seems to be a normal part of the process as far as I can tell.

Re shadow codes 99 and 89, they are normal/expected. To check that the error reporting system is working correctly the DME intentionally triggers those two codes on a regular basis as a test. You can disregard them. I've included them for completeness, but you're the second person that's brought this up, I wonder if maybe better for the app to suppress these two codes (or at least note that they are expected/nothing to be concerned about)

[Cubieman]

I tried once more and had the same type of almost electrical arcing noise for a moment and incomplete test.

These shadow errors are indeed now hard faults.

I'll explore further tomorrow, I'd sure love to get this test working, must be something with my wiring, odd.

[karter16]

This I do not know, the tune was a standard CSL then HTE did some work latter on, that would seem to be an odd DTC to suppress, but I definitely cannot say one way or another.

yeah agreed that it would be super odd, just thought I'd note it just in case!!

[Cubieman]

attached is 12MSS54.PRG. I don't have MSS54HP.PRG.

Don't suppose you happen to have the DTC for the ebox fan disabled? That could also cause what you're seeing with the test not being able to run.

This I do not know, the tune was a standard CSL then HTE did some work latter on, that would seem to be an odd DTC to suppress, but I definitely cannot say one way or another.

[karter16]

Interesting, I did have these codes, but cleared them before doing the test, and none were hard faults. I'll give it another shot just to be certain.

A few months ago I had cracks in my strut tower welded, I removed the DME and also de-pinned all wiring associated with the CSL snorkel as to have the wiring out of the way.

I have since driven the car and all seems well with the flap but this indeed could be a contributing factor as to why the test didn't run.

I'll try to sort this out and report back.

Ah interesting. I'm pretty sure that if you'd cleared them first and they weren't hard faults then it shouldn't have blocked the running of the test, I am fairly sure that the bit 6 in GKS_ED will only be set if the code is active/hard.

[Cubieman]

Okay so you got that error because the conditions for the test were not met. The conditions that must be met are:



b_diag is definitely !=0 because the app is responsible for setting diagnostic mode over DS2 and the app would have errored out earlier if it couldn't set this.

N (engine speed) must be less that 1000rpm.

bit 6 of gks_ed must be 0. Bit 6 identifies whether there are any current (active) CSL flap errors in error memory.

If you're able to validate you were doing the test with the engine not running, or with it at warm idle less than 1000rpm, and also check error memory and see if you have any CSL flap (GKS) errors would be the next step I think.

Interesting, I did have these codes, but cleared them before doing the test, and none were hard faults. I'll give it another shot just to be certain.

A few months ago I had cracks in my strut tower welded, I removed the DME and also de-pinned all wiring associated with the CSL snorkel as to have the wiring out of the way.

I have since driven the car and all seems well with the flap but this indeed could be a contributing factor as to why the test didn't run.

I'll try to sort this out and report back.

[karter16]

Sorry to take this thread a bit off-topic, but could anyone send me MSS54.prg and/or MSS54HP.prg?

Now I am genuinely wanting to test my ebox fan and can't as I only have MSS54DSO.prg which apparently does not allow for these tests.

Seeing as Karter's tool won't engage the fan yet seems to work fine for others I'm sure its not his program, yet I would still like to try tool32, but can't w/o the correct prg.

attached is 12MSS54.PRG. I don't have MSS54HP.PRG.

Don't suppose you happen to have the DTC for the ebox fan disabled? That could also cause what you're seeing with the test not being able to run.

[karter16]

I tried the CSL flap test with and without the engine running.

Makes a somewhat loud buzzing sound for less than a second and produces this error message.

Okay so you got that error because the conditions for the test were not met. The conditions that must be met are:



b_diag is definitely !=0 because the app is responsible for setting diagnostic mode over DS2 and the app would have errored out earlier if it couldn't set this.

N (engine speed) must be less that 1000rpm.

bit 6 of gks_ed must be 0. Bit 6 identifies whether there are any current (active) CSL flap errors in error memory.

If you're able to validate you were doing the test with the engine not running, or with it at warm idle less than 1000rpm, and also check error memory and see if you have any CSL flap (GKS) errors would be the next step I think.

[Cubieman]

Sorry to take this thread a bit off-topic, but could anyone send me MSS54.prg and/or MSS54HP.prg?

Now I am genuinely wanting to test my ebox fan and can't as I only have MSS54DSO.prg which apparently does not allow for these tests.

Seeing as Karter's tool won't engage the fan yet seems to work fine for others I'm sure its not his program, yet I would still like to try tool32, but can't w/o the correct prg.

[ac427]

nice one! I don't know where I got 80 degrees from then!? could have sworn that's what it was for ISTA when I checked, but checked again and it's 75 there too. Will amend. Yeah I decided the no errors in the DME condition wasn't worth doing, especially given people are probably running these tests when diagnosing an issue, it didn't seem like a realistic condition. I get what they're saying in that if there's an issue with the module being tested the test won't be successful, but that's kinda the point haha.

All good. The E-Box fan test worked ok for me too.

Would it be possible to display the DME temperature in the that test also?

[karter16]

Stop the presses. The DIS VANOS test prerequisites are:

Engine running at idle
Coolant temp > 75°C
Oil temp > 40°C.
No errors in the DME - I don't think that is very useful. Perhaps an override for that, for those of us who do not want to clear the fault memory to run the VANOS test?

nice one! I don't know where I got 80 degrees from then!? could have sworn that's what it was for ISTA when I checked, but checked again and it's 75 there too. Will amend. Yeah I decided the no errors in the DME condition wasn't worth doing, especially given people are probably running these tests when diagnosing an issue, it didn't seem like a realistic condition. I get what they're saying in that if there's an issue with the module being tested the test won't be successful, but that's kinda the point haha.

[Cubieman]

huh interesting. works fine for me. although that's the error message I get if I try the DMTL test (which is not installed on my car). I wonder if not all cars handle the e-box fan in the same way?

I'll see if there if maybe ISTA can activate it, I may have some type of fan or wiring issue as well for all I know.

Nice program though, very streamlined!

[karter16]

Also tried the ebox fan and got this:

huh interesting. works fine for me. although that's the error message I get if I try the DMTL test (which is not installed on my car). I wonder if not all cars handle the e-box fan in the same way?