Ok so i'm waiting for an rstuner kit for my mk1 172 (CB0M)
Pretty happy on how to use the kit, but one thing i'm not sure on is this:
For the mk1 172 engine (CB0M) henk lists a number of ecu files:
complete (.rst) files
A300_3504.rst - the standard complete ECU (224Kb)
A300_35FF.rst - the group(e) N ECU file (224Kb)
partial (.cal) files
A300_35FF.cal - feb 2008 RON98 (32Kb)
I expect that when I do a read on my ECU it will be software version A300, if not then it might be Axxx but I will do a backup of the original .rst and .cal before I proceed.
Right, here is what i'm confused by, let's say that my existing ECU is at version A300, would I just write the A300-35FF.cal (feb 2008 RON98) as I am already on software version A300, or would I need to write the complete A300_35FF.rst (group(e) N) file first ? What is the difference between doing it these different ways ? Surely the group N complete file is still version A300 so how can it be any different than then standard ecu file ?
Hope someone out there understands what I am getting at
Pretty happy on how to use the kit, but one thing i'm not sure on is this:
For the mk1 172 engine (CB0M) henk lists a number of ecu files:
complete (.rst) files
A300_3504.rst - the standard complete ECU (224Kb)
A300_35FF.rst - the group(e) N ECU file (224Kb)
partial (.cal) files
A300_35FF.cal - feb 2008 RON98 (32Kb)
I expect that when I do a read on my ECU it will be software version A300, if not then it might be Axxx but I will do a backup of the original .rst and .cal before I proceed.
Right, here is what i'm confused by, let's say that my existing ECU is at version A300, would I just write the A300-35FF.cal (feb 2008 RON98) as I am already on software version A300, or would I need to write the complete A300_35FF.rst (group(e) N) file first ? What is the difference between doing it these different ways ? Surely the group N complete file is still version A300 so how can it be any different than then standard ecu file ?
Hope someone out there understands what I am getting at