Fiend says avoid '95 at all costs
01-03-2011, 02:17 PM
#136
"5.2 runs at 16Mhz, what does2 and 2.10 run at?"
The '95 993 ECM u-processor runs at 16MHZ and has just the single u-processor (32 bit).
In contrast, the 964 ECM uses three 8 bit u-processors at about 14MHZ.
The '98 993 ECM uses two u-processors (22MHZ), one having flash memory versus three
u-processors in the '96 993 ECM with no flash memory.
The '95 993 ECM u-processor runs at 16MHZ and has just the single u-processor (32 bit).
In contrast, the 964 ECM uses three 8 bit u-processors at about 14MHZ.
The '98 993 ECM uses two u-processors (22MHZ), one having flash memory versus three
u-processors in the '96 993 ECM with no flash memory.
01-03-2011, 03:03 PM
#137
Burning Brakes
Did any one bother to read the factory TSB outlining the changes, it is back on p5 post#60
In addition to that indications due to part #s super-sessions and part inspections are that therehave been some changes to bushing hardness and casting lots. Since the '95s are so old all the original bushings should probably have been or be scheduled to be changed anyway. While there may be some minor differences in forging details, the critical dimensions of the suspension arms have not been changed in any way.
This debate is as bad as the one on the engine undertrays, where no one seems to believe the factory statements that they are for noise containment, some would much rather believe their neighbor or other internet rumor.
In addition to that indications due to part #s super-sessions and part inspections are that therehave been some changes to bushing hardness and casting lots. Since the '95s are so old all the original bushings should probably have been or be scheduled to be changed anyway. While there may be some minor differences in forging details, the critical dimensions of the suspension arms have not been changed in any way.
This debate is as bad as the one on the engine undertrays, where no one seems to believe the factory statements that they are for noise containment, some would much rather believe their neighbor or other internet rumor.
I did finish changing the rest of the suspension arms on my early 95 and compared the 94 date to the 97 date and there is absoluty no difference in dimension on any of the arms. The only difference is the bushing. I can post pictures later tonight of the other arms side by side if anyone wants visual proof.
And FWIW... I couldn't see much degradation in my old bushings but once I indexed the new arms and tightened everything down I was amazed how much less the rear hubs drooped while the car is in the air compared to the old bushings, proof the old ones were much softer from age and design.
These cars are 13 to 17 years old and those bushings will degrade from age and the weight of the car sitting on them no matter how many miles you have.
Last edited by rsr91128; 01-03-2011 at 03:49 PM.
01-03-2011, 03:36 PM
#138
"5.2 runs at 16Mhz, what does2 and 2.10 run at?"
The '95 993 ECM u-processor runs at 16MHZ and has just the single u-processor (32 bit).
In contrast, the 964 ECM uses three 8 bit u-processors at about 14MHZ.
The '98 993 ECM uses two u-processors (22MHZ), one having flash memory versus three
u-processors in the '96 993 ECM with no flash memory.
The '95 993 ECM u-processor runs at 16MHZ and has just the single u-processor (32 bit).
In contrast, the 964 ECM uses three 8 bit u-processors at about 14MHZ.
The '98 993 ECM uses two u-processors (22MHZ), one having flash memory versus three
u-processors in the '96 993 ECM with no flash memory.
on the 993 flash memory, isn't that all dedicated to OBD2 requirements for freeze frame etc.
on the 5.20.2 used on early Boxster and 996 were't the fuel and ign maps added to the flash memory
very curious about this
01-03-2011, 04:00 PM
#139
Thanks Loren, I had been looking for that info for a long time.
on the 993 flash memory, isn't that all dedicated to OBD2 requirements for freeze frame etc.
on the 5.20.2 used on early Boxster and 996 were't the fuel and ign maps added to the flash memory
very curious about this
on the 993 flash memory, isn't that all dedicated to OBD2 requirements for freeze frame etc.
on the 5.20.2 used on early Boxster and 996 were't the fuel and ign maps added to the flash memory
very curious about this
Cheers,
Joe
01-03-2011, 04:20 PM
#141
Pro
01-03-2011, 04:54 PM
#142
RL Technical Advisor
In addition to that indications due to part #s super-sessions and part inspections are that therehave been some changes to bushing hardness and casting lots. Since the '95s are so old all the original bushings should probably have been or be scheduled to be changed anyway. While there may be some minor differences in forging details, the critical dimensions of the suspension arms have not been changed in any way.
This debate is as bad as the one on the engine undertrays, where no one seems to believe the factory statements that they are for noise containment, some would much rather believe their neighbor or other internet rumor.
This debate is as bad as the one on the engine undertrays, where no one seems to believe the factory statements that they are for noise containment, some would much rather believe their neighbor or other internet rumor.
01-03-2011, 07:47 PM
#143
Nordschleife Master
"OBD1 964 used Bosch motronic 2.10.0, 55 pin
OBD1 993 used Bosch Motronic 2.10.1 which added 64kB of memory over previous version 2.10.0, 55pin
OBD2 993 used Bosch Motronic 5.2.0 which added extra diagnostic channels mandated by the US gov't for OBD2 compliance, 88 pin
OBD2 996/Boxster used Bosch 5.2.2 which bumped processor speed to 16kHz and bumped memory to 144kB, 88 pin"
I have a early 1995 993 that was built on 8/94 and has the transition setup: the OBD2 plug with the OBD1 software.
The local smog check shop cannot read any of my codes ... What is the best diagnostic tool for my use?
01-03-2011, 10:34 PM
#144
"What is the best diagnostic tool for my use?"
The Durametric should be compatible with the OBDII connector and the
OBDI diagnostic data for the '95 ECM. Give them a call.
"The local smog check shop cannot read any of my codes ."
And they should NOT be trying to read them, as your is a '95
and doesn't have the EPA requirements of the '96. So tell them,
"Don't touch, and just do what's necessary for a '95 vehicle",
i.e. check the CE light and the tail pipe emissions on the dyno.
"on the 993 flash memory, isn't that all dedicated to OBD2 requirements for freeze frame etc."
No, that's what allows easy updating of the maps for the so-called 'performance'
mod versus the '96 which has a mask ROM (fixed at I.C. vendor's manufacturing),
which has resulted in a damaged 993 ECM.
"on the 5.20.2 used on early Boxster and 996 were't the fuel and ign maps added to the flash memory"
Yes, as I've re-flashed both using the PST2, i.e. To the factory stock maps.
The Durametric should be compatible with the OBDII connector and the
OBDI diagnostic data for the '95 ECM. Give them a call.
"The local smog check shop cannot read any of my codes ."
And they should NOT be trying to read them, as your is a '95
and doesn't have the EPA requirements of the '96. So tell them,
"Don't touch, and just do what's necessary for a '95 vehicle",
i.e. check the CE light and the tail pipe emissions on the dyno.
"on the 993 flash memory, isn't that all dedicated to OBD2 requirements for freeze frame etc."
No, that's what allows easy updating of the maps for the so-called 'performance'
mod versus the '96 which has a mask ROM (fixed at I.C. vendor's manufacturing),
which has resulted in a damaged 993 ECM.
"on the 5.20.2 used on early Boxster and 996 were't the fuel and ign maps added to the flash memory"
Yes, as I've re-flashed both using the PST2, i.e. To the factory stock maps.
Last edited by Lorenfb; 01-04-2011 at 01:13 AM.
01-04-2011, 11:26 PM
#145
Advanced
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi All,
I cannot answer all the comments, but just say what I experienced. I did have a four wheel alignment done at the local dealer, before I bought the car, and it had not been in an accident as far as I know. I checked the usual areas on the right and left engine compartment chassis area, and could see no evidence of repair. So yes, I am going on what I read in PCA magazine, and the car I had bought fitted those comments, and many others in Panorama. I do understand that my car might have had problems of which I was unaware when I bought it, but I thought it was worthwhile to share them with you all. The car was perfect on a smooth highway, so it may have been the road I used for going to work. Having said that, the newer car is fine on the same commute. So, I presume that there was likely some issue with the car suspension. But, in my defence, after the fact, I did not know that the newer car would be any better. And from what the buyer has since told me, he is very happy with it. Mea culpa, and I know feel bad about it all, after what has been said.
Philip
I cannot answer all the comments, but just say what I experienced. I did have a four wheel alignment done at the local dealer, before I bought the car, and it had not been in an accident as far as I know. I checked the usual areas on the right and left engine compartment chassis area, and could see no evidence of repair. So yes, I am going on what I read in PCA magazine, and the car I had bought fitted those comments, and many others in Panorama. I do understand that my car might have had problems of which I was unaware when I bought it, but I thought it was worthwhile to share them with you all. The car was perfect on a smooth highway, so it may have been the road I used for going to work. Having said that, the newer car is fine on the same commute. So, I presume that there was likely some issue with the car suspension. But, in my defence, after the fact, I did not know that the newer car would be any better. And from what the buyer has since told me, he is very happy with it. Mea culpa, and I know feel bad about it all, after what has been said.
Philip
