no eka code required ??? wtf

Rick-the-Pick said:

What a load of crap I've just read.

Every becm has an eka code. Some have this feature turned off.
By having this feature turned off will NOT stop the vehicle going into Keycode lockout.
It's not clever having this feature turned off as it's like having the security of the spare key under the mat. When the vehicle goes into Keycode lockout, you'll be f**ked.

The passive immobiliser reqiures an active input from the keyfob to deactivate the immobilser to allow a start. Turn this feature off will require a active input with the key in the door lock before the vehicle will start. So by turning off the passive immobilser just makes the keyfobs redundant, although they will still operate the central locking if used.

Click to expand...

Sorry forgot to ask, what do you mean if the vehicle goes into keycode lock out you'll be f**ked

anorakmark said:

Confused.com
So what your saying is although my immobilizer has been disabled I can still suffer from key code lock out and if so am I going to get the lovely engine disabled message, I don't mean to sound daft but I was lead to believe by having this feature disabled it would over come all the lock out / immobilizer problems:smokin:

Click to expand...

It will make no difference to the loss of sync between the engine ECU and the BECM.

anorakmark said:

Sorry forgot to ask, what do you mean if the vehicle goes into keycode lock out you'll be f**ked

Click to expand...

Cos if the BeCM goes into to lockout....and the EKA is disabled....then there is noway of entering the EKA to unlock the BeCM.....

Disabling the EKA doesn't turn it off, just doesn't allow the BeCM to acknowledge it (I think - could be wrong)

Datatek said:

The info I have states both can be turned off and it does not affect the central locking. EKA is turned off by market selection as you said Tony.

Click to expand...

Basically as i read it, if you turn off the the EKA code without turning off the immobiliser you maybe in trouble. Because with EKA off you have no way of resetting the immobiliser. Both are turned off for some markets. Both are on for the home market. I don't know what the outcome would be if you turned them off on a BECM that had been programmed for the home market, i am not going to experiment to see what would happen. If the hand shake from BECM to ECM is corrupted, that is a totally seperate kettle of fishes. The security code BECM to ECM is not the same as the EKA code.

Rick is on the right track, I've disabled many immobilisers and they have still locked out again, mostly due to a battery change or a loss of battery voltage, as a pc has a back up battery a Becm dose not, so... looses its settings in no decided order, if the Eka is turned off this only stops the code from being seen by the Becm, like turning a light off it can bee turned on again, it dose not stop the Becm from needing an Eka code to enable the immobiliser again. So... leave the Eka on, immobiliser off, just use the key in the door and always carry a syncmate from blackbox solutions to resync the becm to the ecu when it WILL happen again. Land rover wont accept there at fault when it was programed with out a back up battery and an Rf box with very little shelding from stray signals. buying the latest Rf box is a good move (land rover main dealers), if you need any more info contact irishrover (John) he knows Becm's ecu's et'c like the back of his beer glass.

Hey Doug, Do you think John, (Irish Rover) know's more than me with regards to these becm's & ecu's?

:fencing:op2:

Rick-the-Pick said:

Hey Doug, Do you think John, (Irish Rover) know's more than me with regards to these becm's & ecu's?

Click to expand...

Since you're about, could I ask a question?

The photos I've seen of the inside of the BECM look like a whole bunch of old logic ICs and power trannies. I assume that their are a couple of EPROMS. Is it essentially a logic board or is there some form of processor in there as well. I'm probably not using the right terminology but I hope you can glean what I mean.

G~

gencybay said:

Since you're about, could I ask a question?

The photos I've seen of the inside of the BECM look like a whole bunch of old logic ICs and power trannies. I assume that their are a couple of EPROMS. Is it essentially a logic board or is there some form of processor in there as well. I'm probably not using the right terminology but I hope you can glean what I mean.

G~

Click to expand...

There is an Eprom and a CPU chip and what I believe is a programable gate array chip. There are 2 boards, the power board with relays and MOSFETS and the logic board.
I've not been able to I.D. some of the chips.

Datatek said:

There is an Eprom and a CPU chip and what I believe is a programable gate array chip. There are 2 boards, the power board with relays and MOSFETS and the logic board.
I've not been able to I.D. some of the chips.

Click to expand...

Thanks. That's what I really wanted to know. It seems that someone with the knowledge of Rick-the-Pick could expand it's capabilities then. Perhaps using something like these new Raspberry Pis.

I'm not sure what I'm thinking of because there isn't much benefit in being able to have left headlights on only.

It might be useful to be able to disable the ABS in snow. Perhaps getting it to lean over to the left if you have a pair of 88s as passengers. Would the EAS be better if it was infinitely adjustable rather than having its existing presets? I don't know.

The thing was designed when a 486 was the mutt's nuts. I find it quite reassuring that it is theoretically possible that a total and better replacement might be available in the future.

Come on Rick, you know you want to.

G~

EDIT - You could even add a CMOS battery and a hard drive. Imagine the thrill of going back through everything to be able to identify what was going wrong and when.

gencybay said:

Thanks. That's what I really wanted to know. It seems that someone with the knowledge of Rick-the-Pick could expand it's capabilities then. Perhaps using something like these new Raspberry Pis.

I'm not sure what I'm thinking of because there isn't much benefit in being able to have left headlights on only.

It might be useful to be able to disable the ABS in snow. Perhaps getting it to lean over to the left if you have a pair of 88s as passengers. Would the EAS be better if it was infinitely adjustable rather than having its existing presets? I don't know.

The thing was designed when a 486 was the mutt's nuts. I find it quite reassuring that it is theoretically possible that a total and better replacement might be available in the future.

Come on Rick, you know you want to.

G~

EDIT - You could even add a CMOS battery and a hard drive. Imagine the thrill of going back through everything to be able to identify what was going wrong and when.

Click to expand...

The BECM has nothing directly to do with the EAS, auto box ECU, engine ECU, ABS or SRS, in effect it is just a message relay station to the message centre for those ECU's. It's only direct control functions are lights, windows, locking, alarm/immobilser and the engine ECU handshake.
I can't imagine why anyone would want to try to extend it's functionality, far better to bin the bloody thing entirely, something which has been done.
It does not log any faults.

It would be easy enough to replace the BECM with a number of micro processor types, expensive but possible and entirely pointless IMO. I even have an industrial micro controller that could be programmed to do the job, it uses a pretty obsolete 8086.

Datatek said:

The BECM has nothing directly to do with the EAS, auto box ECU, engine ECU, ABS or SRS, in effect it is just a message relay station to the message centre for those ECU's. It's only direct control functions are lights, windows, locking, alarm/immobilser and the engine ECU handshake.
I can't imagine why anyone would want to try to extend it's functionality, far better to bin the bloody thing entirely, something which has been done.
It does not log any faults.

It would be easy enough to replace the BECM with a number of micro processor types, expensive but possible and entirely pointless IMO. I even have an industrial micro controller that could be programmed to do the job, it uses a pretty obsolete 8086.

Click to expand...

That seems to reinforce my thinking rather than negating it. EAS, auto box ECU, engine ECU, ABS or SRS are not unique to the P38. The BECM is and, judging by the number of posts slagging it off, it doesn't seem to be the finest piece of kit in the world. (Probably due to where it is located although I can't see that as any more hostile than the other ECUs it services)

The power side of it might not have dropped much in price but I would have thought that what the logic board does is about a fiver's worth now.

G~

gencybay said:

That seems to reinforce my thinking rather than negating it. EAS, auto box ECU, engine ECU, ABS or SRS are not unique to the P38. The BECM is and, judging by the number of posts slagging it off, it doesn't seem to be the finest piece of kit in the world. (Probably due to where it is located although I can't see that as any more hostile than the other ECUs it services)

The power side of it might not have dropped much in price but I would have thought that what the logic board does is about a fiver's worth now.

G~

Click to expand...

It's not the hardware that costs the money, but the time and effort developing the software. I could design and manufacture a replacement, but what's the point? P38's are so unreliable and short lived that there would be no market for a replacement soon.
In any case the BECM is not that unreliable, it just gets the blame for a lot of faults caused by other parts like the fuse box, RF receiver etc.
Setting up a decent power supply that could maintain 12.5 volts even when the battery voltage dropped to 8 or 9 volts when cranking would eliminate a lot of other problems.

IMO all cars with electronics should have 2 batteries, one for cranking and the other for the electronic systems.

wammers said:

Basically as i read it, if you turn off the the EKA code without turning off the immobiliser you maybe in trouble. Because with EKA off you have no way of resetting the immobiliser. Both are turned off for some markets. Both are on for the home market. I don't know what the outcome would be if you turned them off on a BECM that had been programmed for the home market, i am not going to experiment to see what would happen. If the hand shake from BECM to ECM is corrupted, that is a totally seperate kettle of fishes. The security code BECM to ECM is not the same as the EKA code.

Click to expand...

As I understand it you cant disable the immobiliser completely only the immobiliser passive function.

Datatek said:

It's not the hardware that costs the money, but the time and effort developing the software. I could design and manufacture a replacement, but what's the point? P38's are so unreliable and short lived that there would be no market for a replacement soon.
In any case the BECM is not that unreliable, it just gets the blame for a lot of faults caused by other parts like the fuse box, RF receiver etc.
Setting up a decent power supply that could maintain 12.5 volts even when the battery voltage dropped to 8 or 9 volts when cranking would eliminate a lot of other problems.

IMO all cars with electronics should have 2 batteries, one for cranking and the other for the electronic systems.

Click to expand...

Somewhere in my distant memory I recall fitting a cold start coil that took power to the cold start winding from a live on the starter motor that was switched by the solenoid. It is a long time ago so I don't know whether starter motors are still the same. If so, could that be used to flick a relay and isolate the electronics and second battery during cranking.
Have to say, I've not had problems so I will probably leave it until it is too late.

G~

gencybay said:

Somewhere in my distant memory I recall fitting a cold start coil that took power to the cold start winding from a live on the starter motor that was switched by the solenoid. It is a long time ago so I don't know whether starter motors are still the same. If so, could that be used to flick a relay and isolate the electronics and second battery during cranking.
Have to say, I've not had problems so I will probably leave it until it is too late.

G~

Click to expand...

If a second battery is correctly designed in, the charging circuits for the 2 batteries are totaly separate, either using a dual output alternator, or with isolating diodes. The starter/glowplug circuits are kept completely separate from all other circuits.

I'm drooling. Have you done this to yours?

G~

gencybay said:

I'm drooling. Have you done this to yours?

G~

Click to expand...

No, done it on lots of boats and my Pajero was so equiped