Allpar Forums banner

Looking for an old thread

15K views 64 replies 8 participants last post by  bamman 
#1 ·
Can anyone link me to the old thread detailing the installation of a traveler trip computer in an AA body which didn't originally have one? I can't seem to find it
 
#52 ·
I'm thinking this is the correct CCD 2 traveller. One way to tell for certain is if you can find a chip marked CDP68HC68S1. It should be either a 14 or 20 pin chip.
 
#53 ·
Didn't see anything with that number on it. I had another "no dice" today. I went and retouched both the microprocessor and the other chip last night, and put a little extra solder on the pins just to be safe. My bus wires pulled off of the spade receptacles, so I soldered them back on. Not sure if they pulled loose or not again, but I think I have continuity. I'll verify this later, it's just too blasted hot here now to be mucking around with stuff that isn't necessary. Still no word on any of the codes I'm getting. I do know that the F1-1 means "Not active on bus" from my books, but the tests for the Traveler in the books that I've bought are essentially "verify that the wires are intact and that the bus is working". And to think i paid $30 for that information all told... I must have a bus signal because I'm seeing some voltage across the pins with my multimeter. Any thoughts?
 
#54 ·
Based on all the "90's" in those part numbers, I think that might be the year of manufacture...
I found another one on eBay. Here's the data label:
P/N 439(1)404(-)1 REV K
TMP VENDOR CODE 58172
DATE PRODUCED 07/22/91
I know that the suspension changes for MY '91 came in as a running change. Was this the same case with the bus change? And is that date late enough to correspond to MY '92 or is the hardware on that unit going to be set up for a 89-91 bus?
 
#55 ·
Given that date of manufacture, it almost has to be a 1992 model year part because that's right around change over time. As I understand it these came from an outside vendor so there would be a slight lag between production and the car being built.
 
#57 ·
Well, the "new" unit is different. There are Torx screws on it matching those in other areas in the interior (gauge pod). The PCB's are visibly different, and the main microprocessor has "(C) CHRYCORP '90" on it instead of "86" on it. The blasted thing still doesn't work. As soon as I started the engine, I got the "F1-1". There was some other data on there, too, some number in ET (57:something) and 99.9 MPG. Over 1900 miles DTE. Reset it, and I now have zeroes except the DTE, which is STILL over 1000 miles despite the tank being a quarter full. And of course, F1-1. Interestingly, the unit appears to think that the DTE is correct, as it shows some equivalent number of kilometers. At least the other unit had a DTE that was close (max range 396 miles, which corresponds well to my 25MPG average). I can still access the apparently meaningless trouble codes by holding US/M. These are different, I'm now getting C9 d0.
I just unplugged the ground harness so I don't have the thing taunting me. After over $100 and zero progress all summer, I am in the mood for a little "Estwing diagnosis" right now. If anyone has any idea what's going on, I'm all ears. The only things I can think of are bad solder joints, a borked Traveler, or more bus errors...
 
#58 ·
Update on my progress, installing the 1987-88 EVIC in the 1993 Daytona:

I removed the compartment below the radio, carved the plastic trim edges of the EVIC with a Dremel tool to get it to fit in the cavity, and rigged the existing screws to hold it, albeit at an angle. I tapped into the 12V batt, ignition and ground that runs my fire scanner as well as the car radio, and the EVIC does power up and display the correct day, date and time, and elapsed time. It still shows zero mpg instantaneous and average, as well as distance, because I ran out of time/daylight yesterday. I rigged signal wires from the EVIC which I have to splice to the speed sensor and fuel gauge wires at the BCM, a simple task that will take no more than 1/2 hour.

As for the fuel injector signal, as I said before, it is at the logic module in my 1984, but not at the BCM for my 1993 (because the 1993 had a serial bus that carried the injector data). So I'll have to rig a signal off the fuel injector somehow. In the 1984, I was puzzled that when I put a scope on the EFI signal, it showed an amplitude of only 0.4V, which seems impossible. I'm thinking now that I should have unplugged the signal wire from the EVIC and then probed it with a scope, that the EVIC and scope loads together dragged it down. So I'll recheck the 1984 signal and see what I get. Meantime, I expect that when I connect the speed sensor and fuel gauge, I'll get an average mpg reading.

For mechanical mounting, I have scrap plastic strips that I cut out of one of the console compartments, that I'll custom-cut and drill, and glue with epoxy, to make proper mounting tabs so that the EVIC will line up properly in the console stack. This could take about a week, will post pictures when done.
 
#59 ·
OK, so I was only able to hook up the fuel gauge input last night. Interestingly, I get the following results, mostly understandable without the speed sensor input:

Instaneous mpg: 99.9
Average mpg: 0.0
Fuel consumed: 0.0 (and stayed this way over a 37 mile trip)
Range: started at 322 miles when I first powered the unit, then dropped to 144 miles when I connected the fuel gauge - which was at 1/2 tank). Over a 37 mile trip it dropped to 125 miles.
ETA: 0
Dest: 0
Speed: 0
Trip: Trip completed
E/T: Continuously counted time from when I powered up the EVIC

So I expected that the gas mileage would not read without the speed sensor input. Average 0 mpg makes sense, because it divides 0 miles by gallons used, but 99.9 mpg instantaneous suggests that the reading is based on the fuel consumed, which constantly shows zero - so it's dividing by zero.

It's odd that the fuel consumed will not register without a speed sensor input. Idling should be counted. Must be the way the logic is set up.

On my 84, the speed sensor signal is at the logic module, making it a breeze to connect. On my 93, the BCM does not have a speed sensor pin, only the SBEC (a.k.a., PCM or ECM). So I'm going to grab the signal behind the instrument cluster.
 
#60 ·
OK, I connected the speed sensor input, and I still do not have instantaneous or average mpg readings. Apparently the fuel injector signal is also required by the logic design of these computers. Interestingly, when I connected the speed sensor, the mpg readings inverted:

Instaneous mpg: 0.0
Average mpg: 99.0

This confirms that a logic state toggled. So I'll have to figure out how to connect the fuel injector signal and scale it.
I do now have the Speed and Trip functions.
 
#61 ·
Well, I've got some more part numbers for consideration:
The ECU that came with the car is marked "CHRYSLER P/N 04686886 MODULE S/N TEH-300414387". I also have an ECU from a relative's '93 Spirit marked "4639557 2A 0038-01 2662/20:33". Are either of these modules definitely compatible with a Traveler and, if so, which Traveler part number?
 
#62 ·
After further research, I think that perhaps the problem here is that the transmission controller is the only source for data to the traveler in this vehicle. Looking at my 1991 Vehicle Communication book, all AA Body Bus Tests start off by asking if the vehicle has a traveler, to which if you answer yes the next step is to inspect the connector at the A-604 Transmission Controller. Really the best way to test this is to connect a DRB II to the CCD connector and see if information is actually being transmitted. Otherwise you may continually spend money on travelers and SBECs that may not work.
 
#63 ·
I too have been tring to do this mod for my newly aquired 1992 dodge spirt. I have a traveler/message center laying around from the last time I had an AA body (1994 plymouth acclaim) From what I can remember the following holds true:

1) Both cars (a 2.5l/a413) and (3.0l a670) did not have the wiring in the back of the cubby hole.
2) both cars are do not have any of the fancy bells and whistles.

I dont feel that there is any special ECU since my 1989 lebaron had the message center and traveler trip computer with the same engine combo. (a 2.5l a413) . Now I know the computer was replaced in the lebaron before I got it so that rules that out. I do know that chrysler changed the ECU in 1990 to a different configuration. When I look at rock auto they offer two different ECU.. one for federal and one for california emmissions. Other then fuel curves I doubt there is any difference.

I believe the problem here is the bus wiring. I am by no means any specialist in this, but from the fact that it is "serial" and requires "twisted pair" makes me wonder if it is shielded, non shielded kind of like cat 5E network cable. I think the best way to test that is to take a cat5E cable (Twisted pair, shielded) cut both ends off, take two of the wires and hook them up on both ends. The power feeds, illumination, and fuel data should all be working fine if you get the F1-1. I have not tried that since unfortunately, do not have a wafer connection for the traveller
 
#64 ·
bamman--
How about an oscilloscope or something else that tracks fluctuating voltages? I probed my data wires a long time ago with my multimeter and was getting a voltage, which I assumed was due to the digital circuits in the meter showing the average of the pulses-- is it possible that I have a signal, but the signal does not conform to either the pre-'91 or post '91 standards? The only reason I haven't given up is that there were some posts earlier in this thread to the effect that this could be done with the A413. Would I get anywhere using an ECU from a different vehicle, maybe a Daytona?
chrisgen--
I'm not using shielded Cat5, but I do have a twisted pair from some old telephone cable for my signal feed. To my understanding, this is similar to the setup Chrysler used.
 
#65 ·
Doing more research, my 91 Vehicle Communications Diagnostic book shows that there is continuity between the SBEC and the CCD diagnostic connector, so yes there is still hope that you can do this. However, I don't know why you are still getting errors on your traveler.

Another SBEC will not really help. At the very most you can verify which bus your traveler uses if it is indeed not communicating because of a bus protocol mismatch but there is no telling if it will run your car correctly.

As far as using an oscilloscope, you can potentially use one to discern which bus your vehicle is using. The difference between the two buses is simply one has a faster baud rate than the other.

As far as using twisted pair wiring, as long as you twist your wiring at least once every six inches you'll be good to go. Doesn't really matter what wiring you are using.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top