![]() ![]() >01 1 Resend command to ECU for 2nd response >011c 83 F1 18 7F 1 12 1E 2nd response to the request for OBD type >0100 100 to check what PID's are supportedÄifferences in the first time response to PID request >atz ELM327 v1.3 compatible Reset to check for specific PID responses >at h1 OK headers are turned on to see which ecu responding (Pwrtrain/ABS/SRS) >00 BUS INIT: OK able to comm with KWP2000, all other protocol results in error. Somebody can shed light on this, as well as the ECU OBD standard, and if possible, answer the main question - are all ECU's the same in and outside of Korea ? The puzzling fact is the first response to a command, which is always different from a second request. ![]() I have appended some comments to note the intentions. If you need me to further query the ECU other than what is already one below, give a holler. Anyone out there who is an expert in OBD comm. While the Beta II 2.0 (G4GC) OBD connector has pins on 16,14,12 (suggests CAN), neither ELM nor mobydic is able to determine what the OBD standard is. In order to funnel that possibility into fact, I wonder if communication with the ECU over KWP2000 protocol will help. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
May 2023
Categories |