[piconerd]

Hey guys,
Just wondering if somebody has seen this / knows the solution.
VIN =WMWZC52060WL64605 

This car originally came in with a faulty FRM. The customer wanted to supply his own FRM so i checked ETK for suitable part numbers by VIN. I gave him a list of all numbers including supersessions.
Customer supplied FRM 61353456393 which was on the list of suitable FRM3 modules - according to ETK.
Cool.
I tried to fit and code the module but ISTA/p and Autohex both insisted the module was incorrect number and i needed to install 6827071 or 9813879.
After some digging around i noticed the VO in the CAS was wrong and figured this was why i was having this part number issue. 
I got correct factory VO and successfully imported into CAS/FRM via ISTA/p.
Correct VO is now in the car but if i try to code the second hand FRM, ISTA and Autohex tell me to replace with 6827071 or 9813879.
ISTA/p and AUTOHEX also ask for replacement of several other modules including the DME,IHKA,JBE and CHAMP. The numbers they request to replace with are different to the numbers i come up with in ETK. 

I'm out of ideas at this stage other than thinking ISTA/p is just wrong and AUTOHEX is a copy / uses the same database for its part numbers?

I'd appreciate if somebody has ideas.

Cheers    

[jaramillo]

Hello,

Car needs frm high eks... pn is low eks... istap and autohex are good..then actual pn is bad... need to determine good pn..
Always try to recover frm first...

[Node]

Does ISTA/P see correct VIN (type code) and ex-works iLevel???

To me this sounds like car pretends to be too new iLevel...

6827071 is for cars with 12-11-500 or newer ex works.
6827073 (3456393 too) are CORRECT for 10-08-500 - 12-07-505 ex works.

BMW says this VIN's ex works level is R056-10-11-512. Hence my conclusion that WRONG ex works level is written into your car.

---

Hello,

Car needs frm high eks... pn is low eks... istap and autohex are good..then actual pn is bad... need to determine good pn..
Always try to recover frm first...

HOW did you determine this??? Everything checks out for me!

P.S. ALL of those numbers are FRMR3s with AHL!

---

I'm out of ideas at this stage other than thinking ISTA/p is just wrong and AUTOHEX is a copy / uses the same database for its part numbers?

I'd appreciate if somebody has ideas.

So easy to tell that it's always someone's else fault, isn't it?

---

Also if you are adding photo of the screen, COULD you just make sure it's READABLE?

---

Also other numbers which autohex requires (if I read them correctly) from your screen's crap photo are for TOO NEW car.

[bmchicago]

EDIT; title of post should say ISTA/p not ISTA

Hey guys,
Just wondering if somebody has seen this / knows the solution.
VIN =WMWZC52060WL64605 

This car originally came in with a faulty FRM. The customer wanted to supply his own FRM so i checked ETK for suitable part numbers by VIN. I gave him a list of all numbers including supersessions.
Customer supplied FRM 61353456393 which was on the list of suitable FRM3 modules - according to ETK.
Cool.
I tried to fit and code the module but ISTA/p and Autohex both insisted the module was incorrect number and i needed to install 6827071 or 9813879.
After some digging around i noticed the VO in the CAS was wrong and figured this was why i was having this part number issue. 
I got correct factory VO and successfully imported into CAS/FRM via ISTA/p.
Correct VO is now in the car but if i try to code the second hand FRM, ISTA and Autohex tell me to replace with 6827071 or 9813879.
ISTA/p and AUTOHEX also ask for replacement of several other modules including the DME,IHKA,JBE and CHAMP. The numbers they request to replace with are different to the numbers i come up with in ETK. 

I'm out of ideas at this stage other than thinking ISTA/p is just wrong and AUTOHEX is a copy / uses the same database for its part numbers?

I'd appreciate if somebody has ideas.

Cheers

when you install a used LM or FRM, you must delete i-stufe or restore i-stufe to factory first.

after restoring status, write VO to LM/FRM and write VIN. 

ISTA/p will calculated measures plan based i-stufe first and then vehicle order next.

for example:

Patient: 2008 E60 with CCC. Has a faulty LM. Original I-Stufe is E060-07-03-5xx. Donor is a 2010 E60 with CIC with original I-stufe of E060-09-03-5xx.

If you install the LM and ask ISTA/p to calculate measures plan, it may have the correct vehicle order in CAS including time criterion 03/07 but it reads the i-stufe from LM, it will calculate measures plan and complain of incorrect control units because its looking for a CIC, wrong controller, wrong SDARS etc.

ISTA/p and AUTOHEX are doing its job correctly.

use tool32

open R56.PRG

select job i_stufe_schreiben

paste this into arguments and run job

R056-10-11-512;R056-10-11-512;R056-10-11-512

and check if it saved it correctly by running this job

i_stufe_lesen

[jaramillo]

---

Hello,

Car needs frm high eks... pn is low eks... istap and autohex are good..then actual pn is bad... need to determine good pn..
Always try to recover frm first...

HOW did you determine this??? Everything checks out for me!

P.S. ALL of those numbers are FRMR3s with AHL!

---

 You are right Node... I was wrong, used that pn and got an image of a low eks frm...
AHL is correct for Xenon.

Sorry for that

[user0086]

Just disconnect the FRM, let ISTA/p identify the car, then when it asks to reanimate the FRM, connect it and enter the ZB-nrs. It will then code the used FRM to the car including i_stuffe.

[____ANGEL___]

EDIT; title of post should say ISTA/p not ISTA

Hey guys,
Just wondering if somebody has seen this / knows the solution.
VIN =WMWZC52060WL64605 

This car originally came in with a faulty FRM. The customer wanted to supply his own FRM so i checked ETK for suitable part numbers by VIN. I gave him a list of all numbers including supersessions.
Customer supplied FRM 61353456393 which was on the list of suitable FRM3 modules - according to ETK.
Cool.
I tried to fit and code the module but ISTA/p and Autohex both insisted the module was incorrect number and i needed to install 6827071 or 9813879.
After some digging around i noticed the VO in the CAS was wrong and figured this was why i was having this part number issue. 
I got correct factory VO and successfully imported into CAS/FRM via ISTA/p.
Correct VO is now in the car but if i try to code the second hand FRM, ISTA and Autohex tell me to replace with 6827071 or 9813879.
ISTA/p and AUTOHEX also ask for replacement of several other modules including the DME,IHKA,JBE and CHAMP. The numbers they request to replace with are different to the numbers i come up with in ETK. 

I'm out of ideas at this stage other than thinking ISTA/p is just wrong and AUTOHEX is a copy / uses the same database for its part numbers?

I'd appreciate if somebody has ideas.

Cheers

i step shipment R056-10-11-512

salapa elements
210
230
249
255
258
325
382
386
423
431
450
473
481
493
507
520
521
522
524
534
548
550
563
606
674
736
785
810
818
825
845
853
864
872
876
880
925
2GT
2P9
2PA
4AA
4BD
4C1
4CU
4DF
4UF
4UK
5AA
5DT
6ND
8SM
8TG
8V1
%0B11
&T6GW
*ZC52
#1010

compatible modules

61 35 6827073
61 35 3457597
61 35 3457588
61 35 3457529
61 35 3457430
61 35 3457404
61 35 3457391
61 35 3457033
61 35 3456988
61 35 3456953
61 35 3456586
61 35 3456393

if i-step or salapa stored in the car are not ok, you will get a wrong programming and a wrong part number requested. Ista p/ista D does what you tell to do (i mean, what tells i step and salapa), if you're telling wrong things, the result will be a mess.

[Spirit5676]

Why would you use ISTA-P for replacing FRM in the first place? Just use winkfp and ncs. ISTA-P is soo slow and probably wants to update I-level. A lot of these (at least in my area are tuned, so the tune is lost when updating the i-level (assuming there is a new software for the DME). If there are lets say a cruise control retrofit, it will tell you to replace cluster, if that wasn't replaced when cruise was retrofitted (assuming the car was avaible without cruise) etc. Basically it's a mess with ISTA-P on car that is 10+ years old. I pretty much only use it if I'm updating the I-level on the car for some reason. I'm assuming the customer just wants the FRM to coded to the car, so ista-p is just too much hassle since there is way easier way to do it IMHO.

[____ANGEL___]

Why would you use ISTA-P for replacing FRM in the first place? Just use winkfp and ncs. ISTA-P is soo slow and probably wants to update I-level.  A lot of these (at least in my area are tuned, so the tune is lost when updating the i-level (assuming there is a new software for the DME). If there are lets say a cruise control retrofit, it will tell you to replace cluster, if that wasn't replaced when cruise was retrofitted (assuming the car was avaible without cruise) etc. Basically it's a mess with ISTA-P on car that is 10+ years old. I pretty much only use it if I'm updating the I-level on the car for some reason. I'm assuming the customer just wants the FRM to coded to the car, so ista-p is just too much hassle since there is way easier way to do it IMHO.

Using ista p to determine correct zb number is ok, not everyone can inteprete kmmdata and determine a zb number to flash, update function in winkfp has no control in this and you will flash an incorrect zb. That's why i posted all car datas for correct determination of zb and pn. Once you have the number, you can flash it with winkfp or nfs or whatever... So calculate the plan, take the numbers, and flash with what do you want, or use kmmdatas and get the numbers yourself if you can. Ps. If you hate ista p learn how to use nfs and his multichannel programming, you will flash a car like esys with fa and istep verified software.

[piconerd]

Thank you to all for your input. I appreciate all feedback / ideas.
I clearly have a lot to learn and i have learned a lot from this.

I wasn't aware ISTA/P looked at the I stage to determine part numbers. I incorrectly assumed the Production date was the only thing it needed.
Just one question:
is the i stage correction only needed if replacing CAS or LM/FRM? )because I stage is stored in these modules.
I have replaced many other modules with second hand parts using Autohex and never come up against this issue before.
I currently dont have Tool32 (It is on my list of things i need) so i will likely try the trick suggested by USER0086.
Apologies for picture quality in the attachment. I Didn't realize the image was poor when i attached it.

Thanks again to all those taking time to share knowledge.