The manual files do have kickdown etc values. Post your file

Again.

Just because you think you observed a thing doesn't make it valid for everyone.

10ERHJ (late 06 quality update) for instance or any other P80 project has around 4000..5000 Bytes difference between same engine and same emission standard but different transmission.

50WRHJ Tag has been used for all software projects from some MY05 and all MY06 on, four different layouts exist.
Differences are torque converter stall speed maps, reverse engine / transmission speed plausibility maps, Pedal maps, torque monitoring maps, idle torque reserve maps, fault paths along with replacement values, ...

50GPHJ has less differences, but around 1000 Bytes also.

I wouldn't say those are non existing or not important.

What does this statement have to do with different calibration of manuel and automatic transmission ecu files?

I think you might don't want or can not understand what the point was: because it works for you in a small window of the possible operating range an conditions, it must not do under other circumstances.

See, the B5254T2 has "high" compression, B5254T4 has "low" compression.
What will affect this the most beneath filling calculations?
I will tell you: knock control.

But, if no knock occurs, maybe because you drive 100 octane and in cold conditions, you will not notice any problems.

Now the other guy in Denver in the summer, facing 40 degrees Celsius and above 1000m altitude running 90 octane will blow his engine.


Different example: maybe your approach for whatever will produce problems when kickdown is engaged.
But your customer didn't use kickdown while testing your software?
You will come here, tell everything works. Next day customer uses kickdown because he needed to and gearbox beaks. Will you come here and tell? I guess not.



The reason im arguing with you: I don't want to explain all this every day four or five times in each message i receive. So come here, tell things you observe as this.
Not as fact you have clarified the last twenty years you worked with those Volvos as others here did (including me).

Good luck with all this

I had downloaded them all and never saw a manual identifier in the file names back in August. When i went through it all again I realized one of them was a manual for 99, but it was not labeled in the file name . Ill go back and compare this to mine.

Thanks for the help!

I am working out a deal for a 1999 C70 2.3T ECU. Will use it as the primary one. Im curious though, people have been able to swap the immo chips and even flash them on this forum. If the ETM, ABS, and other modules are non coded (verified through a volvospeed post where someone swapped the DIM, VGLA, Locks, key ring, keys, and ECU), and i am able to reflash the eeprom. Then would the manual ECU itself simply plug into my new system. All the boot loading, program control, etc would be isolated to the ECU itself, and if the immo is reflashed to my setup then would it not act as if it is in its original car?

I would need to verify the ETM and ABS work, but i am unsure if my above understanding is incorrect. Ill probably just test this out in the summer or when it warms up outside.

prometey1982, did you find maps for soft launch control?

I found only NMAX

For most conversions I'd still use the ecu that came in the car, or a clone of it. Compare the closest bins and look at where and what the changes are and do, if the file structure is slightly wrong because you're just swapping from "a" T5a to "a" T5m with slightly different a2l's you could be looking at non starts, comms errors to modules and wiring incompatibilities creating more problems. I haven't done that yet myself so feel free to add or correct anything.