Has anyone just asked Denso for their tuning tools?

[LGT-3-6]

I suppose someone may have asked and got a six figure number thrown back at them, but they tune these cars from the factory somehow, I would imagine to tools are better than anything we find in the aftermarket or open-source.

Anyone?

[Freon]

I don't see any reason why they would release such software or any specifications for any amount of money.

[LGT-3-6]

Well obviously they do it for some amount of money, i.e. when Mitsubishi or Subaru or Honda buys a denso engine management system.

[RallyImprezive]

ok, I just asked them if they have anything available to the consumer/end user.

Ill let you know how they respond.

- andy

[wrx_aruba]

^ LOL keep us updated....

[Porter]

ok, I just asked them if they have anything available to the consumer/end user.

Ill let you know how they respond.

- andy

Why would you ask them in that way?

We aren't consumers/end-users... that has the wrong implication. What we are technically (in corporate lingo) is third-party solution developers.

They may have an SDK or something available, but you have to put the corporate drones in a position where they can justify giving it to you when the management asks.

[salex]

Put yourself in Denso's position.
Would you give away the software tools that cost you time, money and human resources? Probably not.
Not unless you are dealing with a big manufacturer that can ensure your ECUs will be used in his cars.

If it was easy to get development tools from companies like Denso, Bosch, Delco etc things would have been very different in the tuning world!

[Porter]

Put yourself in Denso's position.
Would you give away the software tools that cost you time, money and human resources? Probably not.
Not unless you are dealing with a big manufacturer that can ensure your ECUs will be used in his cars.

If it was easy to get development tools from companies like Denso, Bosch, Delco etc things would have been very different in the tuning world!

Motorsport teams get access to the factory tuning tools if they need them... it's all in how you approach a company, and whether you're approaching the right people.

[Jon [in CT]]

Motorsport teams get access to the factory tuning tools if they need them... it's all in how you approach a company, and whether you're approaching the right people.

ICY/Phoenix Racing operates the Subaru Road Racing Team for SOA and is campaigning two 2007 Legacy GT spec.Bs this year. They obviously needed to recalibrate the ECUs but, despite Subaru's deep involvement, they had to rely on EcuTeK.

I wouldn't hold my breath hoping for factory tuning tools.

[Porter]

Motorsport teams get access to the factory tuning tools if they need them... it's all in how you approach a company, and whether you're approaching the right people.

ICY/Phoenix Racing operates the Subaru Road Racing Team for SOA and is campaigning two 2007 Legacy GT spec.Bs this year. They obviously needed to recalibrate the ECUs but, despite Subaru's deep involvement, they had to rely on EcuTeK.

I wouldn't hold my breath hoping for factory tuning tools.

I wouldn't say that they "had" to rely on EcuTeK. I'm sure the motivating factor was ease of access to the product and a relationship with a knowledgeable tuner with intimate knowledge of the interface. Why go to the Japanese for tuning tools when it's locally available at a reasonable cost? EcuTeK is a no-brainer.


As far as the Denso issue is concerned, I was talking about an SDK. Hell, for all we know, Denso just supplies the hardware and FHI is the one with the tuning tools, anyway.

Why is there an assumption here that Denso would be able to tune a Subaru ROM? I mean, theoretically you could take a raw (blank) ECU and code a full engine management system on it if you have the full specification of the hardware. I've always assumed that that is the case with these ECUs... that the software is an FHI product. Correct me if I'm wrong?



.

[Freon]

I'm going to guess, considering how much is the same between the Mitsubishi and Subaru models, that you've got something like this:

Hitachi developed the SuperH RISC CPU micro architecture
Renesas bought the rights and manufactures specific instances of the SuperH, i.e. 7055f, 7058, 7054, etc. which are built to handle vehicle control systems by adding tons of A/D convertors, CAN buses, timers, and soforth
Hitachi writes a basic vehicle operating system as a framework, though this really doesn't include much beyond task switching and prioritization tools (you can find info on the web)
Denso writes at least some application code on top of that
Denso delivers a fully developed hardware unit
From there Denso and/or Subaru affix Subaru's patent material and customize this base product to drive a specific application

What isn't clear is how much of the tweaking of the code is handling by Denso and how much by FHI. I'm sure FHI goes back to Denso and asks them to customize it at least somewhat. Probably some sort of COTS type contract with a number of hours of custom programming. Or it could be FHI's contract with Denso affords them access to source which they can modify to their own specs.

It is interesting to note that there are plenty of "dead end" routines, unused CEL checks, etc. in all the ROMs I've looked at. And there is at least a fair modicum of shared codebase between the Mitsu and Subaru ROMs. This all leads me to believe Denso is writing at least a portion, and as much as all, of the application code. I can only speculate how much of that beyond the shared code is written by Denso and how much by Subaru. Same goes for actual tuning. For all we know FHI could ship Denso complete engine sub assemblies to develop the base mapping.

I am an systems/data analyst by day, so I've worked within many different types of software application delivery and support contracts, on both sides of the fence (for the application provider/vendor, in-house support for purchased application solutions). So that's my best guess. I have not worked in a situation where a fully developed hardware piece has been part of the deal, but we do know for a fact Denso produces the physical hardware.

[salex]

I totally agree with Freon. Subaru/Mitsubishi are car makers. Everybody else is their subcontractors.
Engine manufacturers offer the know-how and knowledge base, but somebody else (Denso) has to do the coding.

So I doubt anybody would really be happy to help us. When you are a hard working corporation, you do not give away any of your tools/products for free. Let alone development tools that earn your living.

[hackish]

It's a developer's kit. They get a base ECU design and use virtualization tools to prove the hardware. They produce the hardware and use the same developers kit for the ECU firmware. In one instance I'm aware of they recompile the ECU firmware for every firmware update. I have never used the factory calibration tools but I've been told that some - for example honda are really horrid to use since a pile of engineers develop the calibration for passing emissions and much of it is used with simulations rather than real engines and parts. I am told this is why the Realtime acura cars were all tuned with hondata rather than the honda calibration tools. A modified engine is outside the engineering definition of the engine used in the virtual simulations so they're all useless. Finally most of the performance tuners are familiar with the aftermarket tools. In my experience few of them are computer geeks able to understand or work with the factory tools and tuning strategies.

-Michael