2005 DB9 ECM COMMUNICATION problem.
2005 DB9 ECM COMMUNICATION problem.
I'm working on a 2005 DB9 with a missing left ECM communication.
Key is not recognized either.
Anyone with a diagram or previous experience in a similar scenario?
Thanks!!
Key is not recognized either.
Anyone with a diagram or previous experience in a similar scenario?
Thanks!!
I have restored communication with BOTH ECM's... but still have a issue.
ERROR KEY and the temp gauge goes ALL THE WAY UP..
Any ideas??
Error codes are as follows:
BANK 1
B1600 No key code received
P0705 Transmission range sensor circuit malfunction
P1000 System Check not completed (its nothing..)
P1797 CAN transmission control modul to engine control module malfunction. (This one worries me..)
ERROR KEY and the temp gauge goes ALL THE WAY UP..
Any ideas??
Error codes are as follows:
BANK 1
B1600 No key code received
P0705 Transmission range sensor circuit malfunction
P1000 System Check not completed (its nothing..)
P1797 CAN transmission control modul to engine control module malfunction. (This one worries me..)
This looks like I'm talking to myself.. 
I have done some more test on this car.
I disconnected the transmission plug to check CAN lines. I find out that there is NOTHING on pin #2 (CAN L) and pin #6 (CAN H)
No voltage as expected (2.4 + V) or ohms reading..
Checked also pin #13 / 16 for ground Its OK
Checked pin #14 for POSITIVE (perm) its OK
So, my question is..... who's the module before TCM ? I want to check the transceiver output on that module.
Any one with this info?? thanks!

I have done some more test on this car.
I disconnected the transmission plug to check CAN lines. I find out that there is NOTHING on pin #2 (CAN L) and pin #6 (CAN H)
No voltage as expected (2.4 + V) or ohms reading..
Checked also pin #13 / 16 for ground Its OK
Checked pin #14 for POSITIVE (perm) its OK
So, my question is..... who's the module before TCM ? I want to check the transceiver output on that module.
Any one with this info?? thanks!
I don't know exactly the past story... Car was shipped to California from Florida with NO START condition.
I'll check the CAN at the ECM to see what's the readings. I disconnected LEFT (B) ECM, so I'm going to also ceck continuity from ECM to TCM pins.
Any sugestion?? Thanks
I'll check the CAN at the ECM to see what's the readings. I disconnected LEFT (B) ECM, so I'm going to also ceck continuity from ECM to TCM pins.
Any sugestion?? Thanks
Long time of radio silence, guessing it's not running and there's a story we shall never know.
Trending Topics
This is my biggest worry with these cars. As things like ECUs start to fail, in order to pass emissions regulations we would need the same ECU. We couldn't just wire in a Motec or Haltech unit and drive the car legally in many places even if tail pipe emissions still passed.
We had an ECU issue on the Gen 1 Vanquishes. The team tracked the issue back to a failed processor. Long story but the failure was heat related so we froze the ECU (PTEC) then went round warming up chips until we saw which one had failed. Bought all the chips left -(Chip obsolescence is a big issue to worry about) and fitted them and reflashed. Problem solved.
We have managed to do the same on the Convertible Roof Modules and are working on the door modules currently.
In the car mentioned in this thread this is almost certainly a wiring issue. However, we have seen more than one car where an independent or amateur has used probe pins that are too large and have created disconnects that need to be fixed.
We have yet to see a failed DB9 ECU. Not saying they don't exist but the ECMs appear to be robust. CEMs less so.
We have managed to do the same on the Convertible Roof Modules and are working on the door modules currently.
In the car mentioned in this thread this is almost certainly a wiring issue. However, we have seen more than one car where an independent or amateur has used probe pins that are too large and have created disconnects that need to be fixed.
We have yet to see a failed DB9 ECU. Not saying they don't exist but the ECMs appear to be robust. CEMs less so.
We had an ECU issue on the Gen 1 Vanquishes. The team tracked the issue back to a failed processor. Long story but the failure was heat related so we froze the ECU (PTEC) then went round warming up chips until we saw which one had failed. Bought all the chips left -(Chip obsolescence is a big issue to worry about) and fitted them and reflashed. Problem solved.
We have managed to do the same on the Convertible Roof Modules and are working on the door modules currently.
In the car mentioned in this thread this is almost certainly a wiring issue. However, we have seen more than one car where an independent or amateur has used probe pins that are too large and have created disconnects that need to be fixed.
We have yet to see a failed DB9 ECU. Not saying they don't exist but the ECMs appear to be robust. CEMs less so.
We have managed to do the same on the Convertible Roof Modules and are working on the door modules currently.
In the car mentioned in this thread this is almost certainly a wiring issue. However, we have seen more than one car where an independent or amateur has used probe pins that are too large and have created disconnects that need to be fixed.
We have yet to see a failed DB9 ECU. Not saying they don't exist but the ECMs appear to be robust. CEMs less so.
Pretty standard in aerospace to pot the electronics to insulate the electronics from shock and vibration. It's exactly to prevent this type of failure that we pot up boards.
Yeah, the issue you highlight is the difference in expansion rates of the boards/pads/solder. It causes the solder bonds to fail, both inside the chip (harder) and to the pads (easier). Potting it all makes it all work at one temperature and expand/contract together. The downside is that it's a PITA to dig the board out of the epoxy if you need to get back in.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post






