# Coding SIRI press and flashing HU_NBT on F06



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

Okay,

2014 F06 GC. 

Shipping I-step version was F010-13-03-502 - P2.49.1

So, no access to siri via long press.

Brought to dealer and had them flash the car to the latest instead of doing it myself, felt it was less risky and they did it at a reasonable cost.

Today, the car appears to be at F010-14-03-502	-	p2.52.1, checking via VCM.

I've coded 
HU_NBT -> 3003 TELEFON_TELEMATIK_ONLINE -> CE_DEVICE_SPEECH_RECOGNITION
HU_NTB -> 3002 AUDIO_TUNER_TRAFFIC -> VOLUME_POPUP_DISPLAY

However, neither is working. 
I double checked the settings took, they did.
I did find it interesting that my previously coded settings didn't disappear. Like the disclaimer. But other settings on the car did, such as the folding mirrors on lock.

So, either I'm not going to get this to work, or the dealer flash didn't really update the HU_NBT and whole car.

I'm trying to determine if I should just flash my HU_NBT myself and why the dealer process wouldn't have taken care of this either. So strange. 

If I let e-sys, in the KIS/SVT target section calculate what needs to be flashed it looks like several modules need it including the HU_NBT. Take a look at the screen shot.


Looking for suggestions and thoughts, on if I should just process the flash myself.

Thanks.


----------



## TokenMaster (Jul 18, 2013)

HU_NBT probably wasn't updated with new firmware. You should be able to verify this by reading coding data and observe the filename it creates. If it generates same filename as your old ncd file, then it wasn't updated. The last 3 bits is what you need to check, something like CAFD_00000DED_*002_002_008*

I'm sure you know by now that flashing can be risky, especially if you don't have proper equipment like a high-quality, stable, power supply (not charger).

EDIT: I just saw your screenshot and yes, it's not updated and firmware is old. That version does not support Siri.


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

Thanks.

yes my current caf file is called CAFD_00000DED_002_002_008

It looks like it will flash it to CAFD_00000DED_003_009_015

So... It begs the question, when dealer flashes the whole car, why wouldn't if include HU_NBT firmware.

I'm totally capable of flashing, charger ready to go, etc. But I'm trying to understand if the dealer didn't follow a process, or if its not done for a reason. Especially after the discussion at the dealership was all around flashing of the HU_NBT. Ahhhhh dealerships.

Thanks.

J


----------



## milkyway (Jan 28, 2013)

Hello!

Seems that the Dealer had the same problems to flash the ECUs which are on the Most (NBT, KOMBI, AMPT and TV) bus like i had. It's not so easy to flash a car with a NBT. 

With E-Sys it was possible. Don't ask me why. 

CU Oliver


----------



## shawnsheridan (Jan 10, 2009)

JKing3 said:


> Thanks.
> 
> yes my current caf file is called CAFD_00000DED_002_002_008
> 
> ...


What PSdZData version are you using? My guess is you have 52.2 PSdZData and the Dealer's ISTA/P is still at 52.1.


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

I'm pretty sure I'm using 52.1. Lower right 14-03-502 of e-sys.

I'm going to talk with the dealership this week, double check why, maybe it was an oversight and if they won't do it, I'll do it. 

I love digging deep into this stuff, it gives me a great understanding of the build, design and engineering process --- but its just disgusting how BMW blatantly talks about features for 2014 vehicle releases, but won't allow the consumer/end user access to these features without going through hoops. I can understand 2013 vehicles not getting these, but its easily a case of false advertising with 2014+ models.

These are the modules that weren't updated by the dealership.

EMA
FRM
HU_NBT
ICM
IHKA
KAFAS2
KOMBI
RDC
TBX
ZBE3

This according to the TAL_Processing tab after creating the TAL/SVT files from the Tal-Calculating.

Does anyone have anymore definitions on the all of the params you can select on the ECU tab, such as idbackup, cdDeploy etc. I know what to select from other posts, but would like to have an understanding what they all mean/do.

Thanks.

J


----------



## shawnsheridan (Jan 10, 2009)

Well, here is the thing. Both 52.1 and 52.2 are the same F010-14-03-502 I-Level, so in this case, you cannot determine the PSdZData version you are using just from the I-Level.

Search your CAFD folder for cafd_000000f9.caf.007_009_006. If you have it, it is 52.2, if not, it is 52.1.


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

I have cafd_000000f9.caf.007_009_005 and cafd_000000f9.caf.007_009_004, but no 006.


So it sounds like I'm at 52.1. So I'm right that those modules where not flashed by the dealer to 52.1, only about half the modules where?

Thanks.

J


----------



## shawnsheridan (Jan 10, 2009)

That is what it seems like. 

For Future, anytime the dealer programs your car, tell them you want a copy of the ISTA/P Measures Plan Final Report. You will see what ISTA/P version they used, and exactly which modules were Programmed, or Encoded, etc.


----------



## gufemur (Jul 14, 2013)

Wow. ISTA-P is very basic dummy software. You ID the vehicle and it determines the control units that need programming. I have seen that it won't automatically choose to encode all control units though. I always select complete encoding when programming with ISTA-P because of that. I'm a shop foreman at a BMW dealer and can tell you there aren't a lot of techs that take pride in what they do and don't appreciate the technology that they're working with like you and many others on the forums do. Most just don't know better. You could go back to the dealer or call and ask for a copy of the measures plan as well as the final report. They have back up copies. They should have selected complete encoding though and that's why you didn't have everything updated


----------



## shawnsheridan (Jan 10, 2009)

But if they selected complete encoding, would that have forced flash on all ECU's. or just VO Coded them?


----------



## gufemur (Jul 14, 2013)

Probably VO coded. If there's no new programming data it won't select programming. When you ID the vehicle ISTA-P automatically searches for updated programming data. I don't believe it looks for updated coding data because that doesn't effect the I-level. At least that's what I've gathered using it all the time. I always select complete encoding because I've had many instances where I just accept what ISTA-P wnts to do and then you lose FM radio or Navigation because something doesn't jive when programming some control units but not encoding all of them. I know it sounds weird but it's a wonder these cars even run with all the stuff that's installed on them


----------



## shawnsheridan (Jan 10, 2009)

Yes, that was my understanding. So in his case, "complete encoding" would not explain why ISTA/P did not flash half his ECU's that E-Sys identifies as targets for Flash. Maybe dealer is still on 52.0?


----------



## gufemur (Jul 14, 2013)

I can't image the dealer is still on 2.52. Maybe 2.51. BMW NA puts stress on getting the newest versions in our systems though as soon as we receive the DVD sets. Not sure what happened here.


----------



## gufemur (Jul 14, 2013)

2.52.1 and 2.52.2 would have automatically updated as soon as the ISIS was off business hours but the major updates have to be handled manually. They must have 2.51 still installed. That guy should definitely request a copy of his final report. I'm curious now


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

Thanks everyone.

I'll ask for the measures plan and final report for sure from the last session, but what specifically should I ask them to be flashing when I bring it back. I'll point out that these modules where not flashed and I would like them to be.

Obviously I want the modules that are important for me, hu_nbt for the features. This is what I specifically asked for last time. But obliviously from my tal calc you can see it wasn't updated.

I should ask for 'complete encoding via ISTA/P', not just VO coded?

Thanks for the insight.

J


----------



## gufemur (Jul 14, 2013)

They won't know what you mean by Vo coded. Ask them what version they're using and tell them to do a complete encoding. If you give them too much info they'll know your modifying things and could void your warranty.


----------



## maszika (Mar 29, 2014)

ISTAP search for updated coding data too.



gufemur said:


> Probably VO coded. If there's no new programming data it won't select programming. When you ID the vehicle ISTA-P automatically searches for updated programming data. I don't believe it looks for updated coding data because that doesn't effect the I-level. At least that's what I've gathered using it all the time. I always select complete encoding because I've had many instances where I just accept what ISTA-P wnts to do and then you lose FM radio or Navigation because something doesn't jive when programming some control units but not encoding all of them. I know it sounds weird but it's a wonder these cars even run with all the stuff that's installed on them


----------



## gufemur (Jul 14, 2013)

maszika said:


> ISTAP search for updated coding data too.


OK. I wasn't sure. There's been a number of times where it appears that it's not looking.


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

The paperwork I received indicates this:

*849 Perform vehicle software update using ISTA-P 2.52.1*

So, I think I need to be more specific and ask for full encoding.

I mean they are going to have an idea that I'm at least reading data when I point out to them they only flashed half the modules.

I'm pretty friendly with the shop foreman here, so I don't think it will be an issue, they just aren't very fluent with the updating. They are more of fix it and get it out the door shop. So I agree with your assessment that its a shame that a lot of techs don't understand the technology or take pride in doing it.

J


----------



## gufemur (Jul 14, 2013)

I can tell you there were significant issues with the ista-p 2.52.1. They can't really control what gets updated and what doesn't if the I level is less than the newest available. They need to update to 2.52.2 and 2.52.3 is coming out soon.


----------



## maszika (Mar 29, 2014)

Your first calculation was wrong, the HWEL was red. Now the calculation ok, HWEL is black, you dont need change hardware.
2.52.1 and 2.52.2 is the same for F10.
You need make a battery reset for 60 min., and after reprogram the car with 2.52.2. This will update your Nbt.


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

Well, just got off the phone with the shop foreman at the dealership. 

He wont do anything more, says according to the report, everything was updated and successful including the HU_NBT. 

He said he is going to email me report.

Said if i brought it in, there is nothing more to be done as its on the latest. I asked if he did a complete flash, he said yes. And is claiming to be 52.2. Perhaps my version of data is not right now.

So, either e-sys is lying, or the version of pzdata I'm using is off, or the dealership system isn't right.

So frustrating. :dunno:

J


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

maszika said:


> Your first calculation was wrong, the HWEL was red. Now the calculation ok, HWEL is black, you dont need change hardware.
> 2.52.1 and 2.52.2 is the same for F10.
> You need make a battery reset for 60 min., and after reprogram the car with 2.52.2. This will update your Nbt.


Thanks - Are you saying I should disconnect the battery for an hour before flashing? Any particular reason?


----------



## maszika (Mar 29, 2014)

Yes.

I think, your NBT at Bootloader flash not accept the process, than ISTA/P cannot flash the NBT, then the PSDZ engine spring the NBT flash process.
In this case the first step the battery reset, and reprogramm the NBT.
I want see your final report, when you received from your dealer. In final report must be error on BTLD flash at NBT.
Your last ( backup ) I-step and current I-step is the same, your dealer programmed your car twice. ( NBT error... )

Maszika



JKing3 said:


> Thanks - Are you saying I should disconnect the battery for an hour before flashing? Any particular reason?


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

Hi Everyone,

Here is the measures plan implementation report.

It's laughable after reading it. Clearly the HU was not flashed, several spots it says it failed. It looks like they tried it again and it failed. 

program bootloader B failed
Program P failed
code C failed


I'm not sure how they can argue to me that it was flashed, when clearly says it wasn't.

Am at the point where I'm going to call them and discuss, and if they don't do it, I'll attempt to flash myself. I have totally lost confidence with the dealership for this process. Sad really.

J


----------



## shawnsheridan (Jan 10, 2009)

There are a lot of HU failures, but this seems to indicate it was flashed:










Does E-Sys match this as far as all the ones marked (new)?


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

I'll check. I was on 52.1 last time I checked and no, they didn't match. I just finished grabbing 52.2 and will check shortly. I wanted to make sure there wasn't a difference.

J


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

This is what its at after a read. see attachment.

The left side of the table you cut/pasted from the report.

The way I read the report, is that what it should have done as a summary, if it was successful, not what it is after all said and done.

But someone else may know better.

J


----------



## shawnsheridan (Jan 10, 2009)

I can't read that. Do the files match the ones identified as (new)?


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

No, they don't. What's listed is a screen shot of esys reading the svt, and that module. It shows the same versions as the left side of the table (not the new)


----------



## shawnsheridan (Jan 10, 2009)

Yep. Looks like a total flash failure, else it would have _002-038_015 files on it now.


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

The car is headed back into dealer on Saturday, they want another chance to flash. 

Should I change my CAF file back to the original prior to coding that I have to avoid any flash issues? I don't think that it should matter. The coding would get over written anyhow after the flash, correct?

Thanks.

J


----------



## shawnsheridan (Jan 10, 2009)

I wouldn't worry about it.

But how did they explain the fact that it failed dealer programming, and they just gave you back the car as if it was successfully programmed? 

I mean, WTF? :tsk:


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

I know. So frustrating. They haven't given a reason. I think they where trying to get it out the door. Most people wouldn't care or know. They shop foreman even called me to say this was nothing more he could do. That's when I asked for the report.

My only hesitation in attempting to flash myself at this point is why did it fail. Worried something else could be wrong and I would end up bricking the hu_nbt. That's why I'm really having the dealer do it again.

J


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

At the dealer. He is hooking up and then going to bring me to show me the measures plan. Says he is going to try just the hu. Also mentioned they are on 52.3 jet stream. 52.2 he mentioned had some issues with the tpms modules. Thought that was interesting.

Will update where it's at after I leave.

J


----------



## gufemur (Jul 14, 2013)

This guy is an idiot. 2.52.1 had the tpms/rdc issues. 2.52.2 was the fix and 2.52.3 hasn't been released yet...........


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

Haha gotta love the credibility factor here. Terrible. Thanks for the info.


----------



## gufemur (Jul 14, 2013)

If he has 2.52.3 I would be extremely surprised. They discussed it's release on the latest roundtable but I haven't received anything with an official release date yet from BMW NA


----------



## JKing3 (Oct 24, 2005)

The shop Forman is just baffled why the boot loader won't work or flash for hu_nbt he seems at a loss and doesn't seem to know what to do next and stares at me.

If he does that again, what's the official escalation path?


----------

