Reply With QuoteI have a brand new Nano Evo and it would not talk to my 2012 Puma I have sent it back after expensive smells from the inside. Not sure but I ordered it for a 2012 puma, probably not back there yet. Hope I get a positive outcome.
Lindsay.
Master
G'day folks,
A while back I gave my Evo MK1 to my old man to use in his TD5 130 and all was good.
The lucky bugger has just taken delivery of a shiny new Puma and the troubles have started. First, my Evo was one of the very first ones from Mattia with an interface cable that was not able to talk to the CAN bus of the Puma. $70 later and that problem is apparently fixed.
Now even after a firmware upgrade to the current firmware, he is still unable to get the Evo to talk to the Puma.
I know he is in touch with BBS direct to work through the problem, but I would like to hear if there is anybody out there with a Nanocom Evo MK1 (Plastic body) that has successfully managed to get it to communicate with a Puma?
(Yes, it has a valid Puma unlock code)
Cheers,
Pete
Master
SubscriberI have a brand new Nano Evo and it would not talk to my 2012 Puma I have sent it back after expensive smells from the inside. Not sure but I ordered it for a 2012 puma, probably not back there yet. Hope I get a positive outcome.
Lindsay.
Master
Hiya Pete.
I hear your comments and feel your concern regarding any possible MK1 V MKII EVO hardware difference.
I would therfore like to absolutely inform you totally regarding this aspect.
When Mattia actually initially designed the Evolution 1, his own pesonal vehicle was actually a Puma Defender with it's Single CAN BUS, married with traditional serial systems. It is therefore incredulous to imagine that this did not work on this vehicle type.
His lack of knowledge and experience may well have meant that in his design of the Evo 1, he may well not have correctly implimented all communication requirements for the many communication channels of the P38 Range rover, and i have seen this in other equipment.
But some how or another he managed to impliment everthing required in his design, and although it may well be over engineered by BBS standards, i chose to absolutely and fully replicate every single aspect of his origional hardware design.
I just took it totally as was and shrank it up a bit.
Master
Hmmm, well I got hold of Dad's Mk1 tonight and and had a very quick play with it. It seems to be happy talking to my D2 using a known good cable.
The Puma's OBDII port must have been functional when delivered since the computers need to be configured for the country of sale. I am also pretty sure he took it to the local LR dealer to double check the port was ok.
I will check both his cables tomorrow, but I have a suspicion they are going to test ok.
Is there somebody in the Adelaide northern suburbs with a Puma who wouldn't mind me hooking up the Evo to see if it will talk ?
I understand the Puma changed engines somewhere in the last 18 months or so? Happy to be corrected. It would be handy to know what the differences are in terms of engine computers.
Master
On such a new vehicle, i also doubt there would be a problem with the OBDII port or vehicle wiring
Of course my main area of expertize is in relation to Diagnostic communication only.It would be handy to know what the differences are in terms of engine computers.
But if it helps, I can tell you that diagnostically Ford standards mean that each and every engine management ECU, regardless of if it is fitted in a Defender or a Ford Fiesta will respond absolutely identically to Diagnostic access requests for things like Fault codes. A change in engine CC or even EMS ECU supplier matters not one iota.
In fact Ford even have a testing department and standardized proceedures to ensure any new ECU / Variant it's suppliers inroduce diagnostically conforms to it's stringent and internally documented standards.
Posting Permissions
| Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
|---|
|
|
|
Bookmarks