P051 ecu

[dubmeup]

My 97/98 1.7 has an ecu marked, P051 and part number BPXS6F-12A650-BA
I haven't heard these ecus mentioned before and am failing to find out if this is the correct ecu for the car. Most search results i find are for ebay and refer to these being in 1.4s and 1.6s.
Does anyone know if this ecu is likely to have been swapped into the car and if so what ecu i should have? Cheers.

 

[CherryVimto]

I had an early '98 Puma and that ECU was a 'MUFF'.

Yours possibly should be the same or the ECU before... Hopefully someone will help with what that was....

 

[dubmeup]

Cheers, I see references elsewhere that say it should be a DUDE ecu.
I haven't seen any ref to this P051 ecu being in a 1.7 so i am inclined to think someone stuck this thing in there at some point. The car runs but I don't think it's quite right. It just sounds a bit off, smells a bit rich (though it passed an emissions test) and seems ever so slightly flat.

 

[CherryVimto]

Thinking about it, the PO51 ECU seems to ring a bell..... I think the ECU I had in my 2002 Thunder was something like that... I'll try and find it to see....

If so, you're running a later ECU for 2 lambdas on a car with only one. Don't know if it will make a difference though.....

DUDE sounds familiar, so maybe you're Puma is on the swap over point between DUDE and MUFF...?

 

[dubmeup]

Cheers. Any info would be appreciated as my google skills are letting me down

 

[Ian G]

1094670 (BPXS6F-12A650-BA)

Motor Control Module. eec v LP2 111 (01.06.1997 - 11.12.2001)
Exchange Part (new per old) (01.06.1997 - 11.12.2001)
Without calibration (01.06.1997 - 11.12.2001)

These type are dealer fit as a replacement when the original has failed. Still no clue what it fits, which may also indicate it can be used on a few types having been programmed.

Doesn't look factory - in which case I'd question whether anyone changing it would be able to find one to do the job - you'd more likely thing anyone doing it like for like would find the same as has come out.

My theory is that its dealer fit warranty type of thing and its OK.

Date range is straight though - if its suitable for cars 97 on then you must be able to program in the second lambda input as per the later ones. And the temp sensor pin would be wrong. Not sure.

As a separate issue, can you get the codes read and see what is causing the richness? Choice of ECU wouldn't cause that but lets see the codes before having a guess.

Also see my post in here about fuel smell - http://www.projectpuma.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=26027" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[dubmeup]

Thanks, the ecu does say, "unprogrammed module. programmable all TH FDS-2000" on it so you may well be right that it's a generic item.
The temp senser pin bit is interesting as I am a bit suspect about temperature issues. I changed the stat for a ford one and still the gauge says it's not getting up to temp. Do early pumas have a seperate gauge temp senser?
I don't have the ability to read codes on this car atm. I have a lead but no software. I do have the free vagcom but obviously that isn't for Fords. Is there a free peice of software for fords too?

 

[Ian G]

I just use one of these - got mine on an auction for about a fiver, plug it in and there are your codes -

http://bit.ly/1sWQfE8" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Temp pin issue is because the loom changed on the change from single to twin lambda in Sept 2000 - meaning if you were putting the same ECU on the different looms you'd also need to deal with that.

If you've got a reading on the temp gauge then ignore me. Just wondering how they addressed it listing the same part for all dates.

 

[Ian G]

Although just thought - you only need generic OBD software, have a look at the list in here -

http://bit.ly/1oIOZ0d" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[dubmeup]

Yes, it does seem odd that this could be a one size for all part given the variations over the years.
Im thinking of two routes to go perhaps, swap the ecu for a DUDE, or see if Celtic tuning can remap this one ( I am planning a remap anyway).
Will look into that code reader, cheers for that.

 

[Ian G]

Yeah I like those little ones, just no messing. Although if you already have the lead and a laptop I'd check that software first. You don't need it Ford-specific.

 

[dubmeup]

Ideal. Thanks for the help. I'll get back to you with any codes that come up.
I will ask Celtic Tuning about remapping it. My hunch, given the wording on it, is that they'll be able to but if not, I'll get a regular single lambda one for them to map. Darn good idea to check codes and stuff first though, best to give them a fault free system to build on eh
This has piqued my interest though so there's a nice bit of evening research and learning to do

 

[dubmeup]

Just bought one of those code readers, it's just easier than lugging the laptop about. I'll look into the software later for a more in depth data set. I always wanted to fit a tablet running OBD in my mk2 Golf. I quite like the idea of doing that in my new love tbh. The idea of live data being available on screen appeals to the geek in me haha. Maybe a pipe dream though and certainly a long way off.

The reader should be here by wednesday.

 

[dubmeup]

The reader arrived today and i'm glad to report no stored codes

 

[dubmeup]

Btw, further to the ecu thing, the reader did seem to be reading systems for a second lambda etc. I was only doing a quick check so i didn't note any of them down. But to my mind it would be worth doing because if it said summat like the second lambda isn't ready wouldn't that imply that the ecu was expecting a second lambda reading? Which might mean the map was askew? Or am i barking up the wrong tree?

 

[Ian G]

If its telling you the second lambda isn't ready, I'd tend towards the fact that is the generic message for the data not being available, which it isn't. Which doesn't necessarily cause you problems.

Two things -

If this is in fact a dealer-fit programmed ECU then we can safely assume its been done by someone who knew the correct programming in order to suit the loom and lambda setup. I can see no real case in which someone would take a MUFF car with ECU failure and replace it with something that wasn't also a MUFF ECU. If they've done so, you may assume they knew what they were doing, ie. they're a Ford main dealer. Or they don't know what they're doing so they've sourced the PO51 in the hope that it will work, which I don't buy for two reasons. Firstly MUFF are not rare and secondly PO51 are. If you were looking to replace an ECU its actually more likely you'll find the right one than the wrong one (unless you're looking for later stuff in which case TAPE are not as common on the open market as they sell quicker, but you'd therefore probably wait for another TAPE and not buy a QQP0 which is the later programmable stand-in unit). I'll happily stand corrected but it looks right to me.

Secondly if the ECU wanted a reading and wasn't getting one, you'd probably have a code. I forget the exact P number but I'm quite sure if you got a twin lambda car and unplugged the second one you wouldn't get away with anything not stored.

I'll try it with a twin lambda car if I get a minute to satisfy my curiosity. You may also get a proof of concept by unplugging the first sensor and seeing if you get the same message in the reader about, in conjunction with a fault code. That would tell me the absence of the fault regarding the second one is not a worry.

 

[dubmeup]

Good thoughts thank you. I'll have a more in depth look tonight.