Page 5 of 9

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 8:08 pm
by Gareth
:lol: :lol: :lol:

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 10:07 pm
by antus
Mode 4 is proprietry diagnostics. Not the same between cars or manufacturers. Also not useful non diagnostic tasks.

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:58 am
by Tazzi
vlad01 wrote:Why are just about all devices named after fruit these days?
:lol:
Might as well make your own box.. Call it the iCherry.. itll tune anything including your push bike.. increasing horsepower by 80% and fuel economy with the essence of cherries.

..I really don't get how anyone blindly trusts things without any proof!

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 12:01 pm
by rolls
antus wrote:Mode 4 is proprietry diagnostics. Not the same between cars or manufacturers. Also not useful non diagnostic tasks.
Any examples or documentation?

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 12:27 pm
by Tazzi
rolls wrote:
antus wrote:Mode 4 is proprietry diagnostics. Not the same between cars or manufacturers. Also not useful non diagnostic tasks.
Any examples or documentation?
Think thats only for the old ALDL language on the Holdens?

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 12:57 pm
by Holden202T
Tazzi wrote:..I really don't get how anyone blindly trusts things without any proof!
probably the people that know nothing about talking to a cars systems and just want a plug and play tuning solution!

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 12:59 pm
by rolls
Well its been a week and no reply from him. Until I see it working in person or get an explanation I'm going to assume like everything else that is too good to be true it is a scam or they haven't realised what they are trying to achieve is not easily achieved.

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 3:21 pm
by rolls
Ok well after reading ISO14230 there is a command called InputOutputControlByCommonIdentifier which says the following:
The InputOutputControlByCommonIdentifier service is used by the client to substitute a value for an input
signal, internal ECU function and/or an control output (actuator) of electronic systems referenced by an
inputOutputCommonIdentifier of the server. The user optional controlOption parameter shall include all
information required by the server's input signal, internal function and/or output signal.
The server(s) shall send a positive response message if the request message was successfully executed. It
is user optional if the positive response message shall include controlStatus information which possibly is
available during or after the control execution. The controlOption parameter can be implemented as a single
ON/OFF parameter or as a more complex sequence of control parameters including a number of cycles, a
duration, etc.
The actions executed by this service may result in permanent changes, or it may be automatically reset by
the ECU at certain conditions (e.g. when leaving diagnostic mode).
This seems to imply you can emulate or simulate instrumentation if the ECU supports this mode. Maybe the Berry tuning tool is building a model of the engine and then emulating certain things to get more spark and lean the fuel out. Or perhaps they are emulating the boost pressure to get more boost.

Even if you could do the above though surely it would cause the system to throw DTCs and go into limp very easily. Sounds like it may be possible to achieve what they are stating so I take back what I said earlier.

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 4:01 pm
by antus
That would be a security protected function, and probably not implemented in all production ecus. As for mode 4, you need to read whatever docs you can from any manufacturer and compare. Some of our ADX files support some basic ALDL functionality, and there is some discussion about it in the ioactive pdf on page 3 of the thread.viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4916&start=20#p70814

Re: Berry tuning tool

Posted: Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:47 pm
by Tazzi
mmm.. so its kinda like what I was explaining previously.. but the same conditions apply with what takes priority first, hardwire or canbus.
How there wouldnt be mass fault codes set is beyond me though as there would be a fight between simulated data and real data.