PCM Hammer 2 Preview

[darkman5001]

I tested all of the compatible PCMs that I have at the moment with the new PCM Hammer 2.0 preview, and I have organized all of the results according to PCM model. All PCMs for one model are zipped into the folder named according to the model and then organized further individually. Download each file and unzip each and the rest should make sense. I did a full read of each PCM that I tested, then used Universal Patcher to make a small calibration change and then wrote the changed file to the PCM. All full reads as well as my modified bins are also included along with all logs and also a picture of the cover of each PCM that I tested.

Most results were good; however, I repeatedly tested the P12 2mb (Also known as P12b) and each test resulted in brick. I was able to restore it, so I was able to try new things to test. If you do decide to try a P12 2mb, be prepared for it to brick and have a way to restore it if it happens. I am sure that some changes to the code will be needed in order to get the P12b working successfully.

Let me know if you have any questions about my tests. I hope this will help with development of this great program.

[NSFW]

Thanks for doing all of that testing!

[darkman5001]

Thanks for doing all of that testing!

No problem at all. I am happy to contribute in any way that I can.

[antus]

Thanks for help testing. To summarise currently know problems:

1) P12b is not writing and triggering recovery boot (fixable with sps or 3rd party software)
2) E54 is not working for recovery flash. (Requires BDM which is not yet available/working or possibly sps or other 3rd party software).
3) P04 is allowing cross flash between AMD and Intel operating systems which unlike P59 can cause brick. This needs more investigation and additional checks to prevent.Requires BDM to recover.

[henderyeht]

Hey there, Long time car guy and DIYER - Complete newb when it comes to tuning. But Ive done my research. And in an attempt to be frugal I am ignoring HPT, JST, and LSDroid and trying to use free software compatible with the tools I have. So here we are.

Tried running PCMHammer 2.0 Preview today "in-car"

2004 Monte Carlo - 3.8L SuperCharged
P04B PCM
VxDIAG VCX Mini J2534 Pass-Thru

Was able to get VIN and OSInfo

When trying to pull .bin file using Read Entire PCM it got 100%.
Then showed 2 lines of Hex and Failed.

It left the car in a pretty confused State. All warning lights were on, would NOT start or even attempt to.
A security relearn using Tech2Win I was able to relearn the keys, but still no start.
Now every light EXCEPT security is on.

Pulled Battery. Waited 60 seconds. Replace Battery. Warning Lights Gone. Car Starts.

In my frustration and panic I did not save the logs. And now I am a little bit gun shy as I need the car this week. Daily is down repairs.

I understand that 2.0 is not "cleared" for in-car tuning. But do you think I will have better results on the bench?

Thanks in Adavance.

[antus]

I would expect a better result on the bench. Cars using the P04 generation of computer are generally older and I believe some of the modules mis-behave and do not go quiet when they should. This confuses PCM Hammer. Eventually I plan to change the comms functions to use a state machine so that its easier to ignore erroneous output. I think the security re-learn was not required from what you described. A read does not change anything. Just something was in a bad state and cutting power to the pcm or the module in a bad state fixed it. Its a pitty you didnt save the logs, it would be good to know what happened at the end. It could have been an unknown OSID which we can add to PCM Hammer, or could have been some other more obscure fault. If this is your only PCM I would not recommend helping test the preview version. If you want to contribute try to find another PCM of the same service number and then read your current PCM on the bench and clone the bin to the new PCM on the bench so that you have a backup, and are testing the write process on a PCM that is not critical. Do you know the OSID and the Service number?

[henderyeht]

I was able to get the VIN and OSID during a basic Read. Unfortunately I didn't record them anywhere, I will do that this weekend.

Currently waiting on parts for a bench harness. And got my hands on a spare PCM for bench testing.

Will keep you posted

[antus]

Awesome! osid and service number from the label on the pcm are the numbers to check. Service number groups compatible hardware types together and if pcmhammer does not allready have your osid in it then I can add it under whichever service number it is. From that we know security algo, flash size and type.Though types are an open question on P04 and we might need to add something to stop cross flash between intel and amd chips/service numbers.

[henderyeht]

So I got a donor PCM from a 2003 Malibu that matches HW and Service Numbers from my Monte Carlo.

Serv No. 12583827
HDW No. 12582720

I rigged up a bench harness as follows:
OBD Side:
Pin 16: +12v
Pin 4/5: Ground
Pin 2: Pin 58 on PCM (SAE1850+)

PCM Side:
Pin 19: 12v Ignition (Switched)
Pin 20: 12v Constant
Pin 58: Pin 2 on OBD
Pin 60: Ground

Made Bench top connections Opened up PCM Hammer.
Basic Read info:
[06:43:21:878] PCM Hammer 2.00-Preview
[06:43:21:881] Thursday, May 22 2025 @06:43:21:88
[06:43:21:884] Initializing J2534 Device
[06:43:21:901] Loaded DLL
[06:43:35:202] Connected to the device.
[06:43:35:207] Battery Voltage is: 11.994
[06:43:35:965] Thanks for using PCM Hammer.
[06:43:42:468] VIN: 1G1NE52J53M703075
[06:43:42:503] OSID: 12583342
[06:43:42:526] Description: P04 Service No 12583827
[06:43:42:553] Calibration ID: 12583336
[06:43:42:578] Hardware ID: 12582720
[06:43:42:673] Serial Number: 0W2U4W3083
[06:43:42:713] MEC: 0
[06:43:42:752] Voltage: 12.2

Then I attempted a Full Read. It wasnt even able to start. I got further with the in-car attempt than I did on the bench.

Here is a link for the user/debug log. Im not really sure what I am looking at. Though, I did notice during the basic read, it didnt tell me if it was an AMD chip or not.

PcmHammer_userLog_20250522@185144.txt

(1.35 KiB) Downloaded 33 times

PcmHammer_debugLog_20250522@185144.txt

(10.22 KiB) Downloaded 38 times

EDIT: Is my Donor PCM DOA? Or is this just maybe not a supported OSID?
Should I be using Pin 59 instead of 58? Should there be a resistor somewhere on SAE1850?

[antus]

Neither. It looks to be working properly, but the PCM is refusing the request to upload the kernel to the address we are using on other PCMs. It likely would be able to work, if we can figure out what memory range that PCM needs. If you can provide the service number for our records, that will be useful. We can see if any of us have the same type, and if it is working for us, then it is something particular about your pcm. If we can get one and get the same results we can compare to other tools and maybe change the load address to solve it.

Code: Select all

[06:44:29:988]  TX: 6C 10 F0 34 00 02 55 FF 98 90
[06:44:30:039]  RX: 6C F0 10 7F 34 00 02 55 FF 98 33
[06:44:30:042]  Received: 6C F0 10 7F 34 00 02 55 FF 98 33
[06:44:30:045]  Received an unexpected response. Attempt #1, status Refused.

TX with 34 00 02 55 FF 98 90 means 34/00 permission to upload? 02/55 =255(hex)=1024(decimal) bytes to address FF9890?
Rx with "7F 34" means no, PCM is not going to allow that (and then repeats the request).

Its an annoying one because we cant see why the PCM says no. It could be the address itself, it could be because there is a stored error code or similar. During development I did see this on mine a couple of times, and I read it with other commerical software and then it started working normally again. If other software can read it, then there is something we can approve by using different RAM or some other minor change to how we operate.