Multiecuscan

I am repeating a message I posted in Q and A as I didn't see this thread. Note I don't consider this issue as a Multiecuscan bug but a chinese ELM327 clone bug !

ECU accessed: Bosch EDC16C39 CAN bus SX4 aka Fiat Sedici

Using FES, a USB chinese ELM327 clone with the CAN input modified as per yani instructions (see other thread), when I scan for device (F11) I get error U 1601 CAN bus.

I connect directly the ELM to the OBD plug, no special cable.

As I understand, FES communicates via the K line to the EDC, a point to point RS232 serial interface, which works in my case.
The EDC has also a CAN interface, which is a two wire twisted pair LAN bus accessed via ODB pin 6 and 14.

Does FES also try to communicate via this CAN bus to the EDC when a scan for device is asked and may I assume that the errors is still due to the ELM interface or do I have to wire the CAN lines to the different pins in the ODB interface as per cables specs to access other devices like airbag, dahsboard ... that uses only the CAN protocol ?

Note I also get CAN latency too high. I wonder if the issue is not simply that these CAN errors are simply due to lack of processing power, poor code in the ELM making it unable to handle the task. The RC circuits added on the CAN line are just high frequency noise and spike protection.

Note that the resistor across the CAN+ and CAN- is a gross error as it affects the CAN bus impedance.
So may be for some ELM327 clone this hardware fix is enough as errors can also be caused by spikes and network impedance mismatch.

These ELM clones rank definitively from acceptable to almost junk, like they are copying copies and accumulating errors while they claim ridiculous version like 1.4+ and even 1.5 !!!!!

Problem is that when you buy from Internet as they all look the same, hard to find out which one is OK.

MKSA wrote:I am repeating a message I posted in Q and A as I didn't see this thread. Note I don't consider this issue as a Multiecuscan bug but a chinese ELM327 clone bug !

ECU accessed: Bosch EDC16C39 CAN bus SX4 aka Fiat Sedici

Using FES, a USB chinese ELM327 clone with the CAN input modified as per yani instructions (see other thread), when I scan for device (F11) I get error U 1601 CAN bus.

I connect directly the ELM to the OBD plug, no special cable.

As I understand, FES communicates via the K line to the EDC, a point to point RS232 serial interface, which works in my case.
The EDC has also a CAN interface, which is a two wire twisted pair LAN bus accessed via ODB pin 6 and 14.

Does FES also try to communicate via this CAN bus to the EDC when a scan for device is asked and may I assume that the errors is still due to the ELM interface or do I have to wire the CAN lines to the different pins in the ODB interface as per cables specs to access other devices like airbag, dahsboard ... that uses only the CAN protocol ?

Note I also get CAN latency too high. I wonder if the issue is not simply that these CAN errors are simply due to lack of processing power, poor code in the ELM making it unable to handle the task. The RC circuits added on the CAN line are just high frequency noise and spike protection.

Note that the resistor across the CAN+ and CAN- is a gross error as it affects the CAN bus impedance.
So may be for some ELM327 clone this hardware fix is enough as errors can also be caused by spikes and network impedance mismatch.

These ELM clones rank definitively from acceptable to almost junk, like they are copying copies and accumulating errors while they claim ridiculous version like 1.4+ and even 1.5 !!!!!

Problem is that when you buy from Internet as they all look the same, hard to find out which one is OK.

Actually, I think that this is probably a problem with the SCAN function.
Multiecuscan tries to scan the CAN network of the vehicle for known control modules. However, Fiat Sedici (and Suzuki SX4) do not have the same CAN network as the rest of Fiat family - it is using different speed. So, when Multiecuscan tries to connect to CAN using normal Fiat CAN protocols the car shows errors.
I will try to improve the Scan function for Sedici in next release.

yani wrote: Actually, I think that this is probably a problem with the SCAN function.
Multiecuscan tries to scan the CAN network of the vehicle for known control modules. However, Fiat Sedici (and Suzuki SX4) do not have the same CAN network as the rest of Fiat family - it is using different speed. So, when Multiecuscan tries to connect to CAN using normal Fiat CAN protocols the car shows errors.
I will try to improve the Scan function for Sedici in next release.

Now that you mention it it makes sense because I realized that the U 1601 error is in fact logged in the ECU, so it is the ECU that detects the protocol error from Multiecuscan and logs it. I cleared it.
Do you exercise the lower communication levels in your program ?

So far I have no need to access the CAN devices so I will wait.

yani wrote: Actually, I think that this is probably a problem with the SCAN function.
Multiecuscan tries to scan the CAN network of the vehicle for known control modules. However, Fiat Sedici (and Suzuki SX4) do not have the same CAN network as the rest of Fiat family - it is using different speed. So, when Multiecuscan tries to connect to CAN using normal Fiat CAN protocols the car shows errors.
I will try to improve the Scan function for Sedici in next release.

Any idea when this fix is coming ?

There are no news about this yet.
Simply do not use the SCAN function on a Sedici car for now.

Hello Yani.

I'm getting a C-Can Line error also on my alfa 159 1.9 JDTM seen here:

http://i.imgur.com/ScyJ00X.jpg

When I clear the error it comes back straight away.

I'm wondering if this is a genuine error, or whether this is a bug (as possibly mentioned here) from multiecuscan?

Do you have any ideas if its a bug or if the error is genuine?

Thanks ahead. Awesome software by the way, you have saved me many hundreds of pounds of garage fees!