1992 LH module (fuel injection computer)

[400Eric]

On a day with poorer conditions, my 92 WOT enrichment ECU gave me a .244 reduction in 1/4 mile E/T over my non-enrichment 93 ECU on my 400E. That's OVER 2 car lengths. MANY races are won or lost by margins much smaller than that.

[youtube]PXINN9MpLvM[/youtube]

Regards,
Eric

 

[Taxi Driver]

IF, say we have the 400E '92 WOT LH, can that serve in a 500E, IF the chip/programm is changed to the 500 chip?
Where is that enrichment funktion and is it only noticeable by the LH serial# Roger

 

[400Eric]

Since the 5.0 is only about 15% larger than the 4.2, and since the ECUs have a 15%-25% adaptation ability, I maintain that, yes, a 400E enrichment ECU will work just fine, provided enough adaptation time is provided. I haven't been able to prove it yet though, because the only 500Es that hang out with me are 92s that already have 92 ECUs. The Sauceman and I did run a couple of 400E ECUs in his car back when he still lived at his old location, but only while it was sitting in his driveway. It was fascinating to watch how the ECUs adapted right before our eyes. Every time he gunned the throttle, the response was quicker and crisper than the time before. I'd want it to have at least 10 days of adaptation time though before I took it racing. The problem though is that there wouldn't be much "headroom" available if one was to mod their 036 and give it a better breathing intake and/or exhaust. Dave is going to try a 4.2 enrichment ECU on a 5.0 on the dyno sometime in the future.

It really would be preferable to just get a 5.0 enrichment ECU though. And since we now have a consensus that a 92 W140 5.0 ECU is an acceptable substitute, there is really no reason for using a 92 4.2 ECU, except for scientific curiosity.

Regards,
Eric

 

[Taxi Driver]

Eric, that is true, IF not, you already have one 400 computer and are going to step up a little with your 5 liter, like E50 AMG.
Maybe in that case just reprogramme the 400 comp. and save the 500 comp. also do the V-max.

Another question comes to mind, the 400 NON ASR Vs the 400 ASR LH comp, are they the same, OR? Roger

 

[400Eric]

The presence of ASR causes you to have a different ABS computer, and another different computer as well (which I of course can't remember), but it does NOT affect the LH computer application.

You already know all of this stuff. Are you just testing us?

 

[Taxi Driver]

Right Eric, as we included the 400 computor into this Q and A, I thought it was best having it clearified by an expert as You Roger

 

[Stevester 500E]

GSXR, I think the LH Module 014-545-6232 is from a 1993 S500 not a 400se/400sel ? ? not sure but think it is.

 

[gsxr]

014-545-62-32 is from a W140 with 5.0L 4.2L engine, circa 1993, and does not have WOT enrichment.


Update July 2017: This particular module is indeed for a 4.2L engine, used on 1993-1994 (approximately) W140 chassis. However, the label on the module incorrectly states "5.0L". The EPC is correct, the module label is wrong. I verified the code on the EPROM chip to confirm.

 

[Stevester 500E]

Gerry,
You EPC screen shot of the LH modules shows chassis 124.036.
Can we assume that all the modules listed on the screen shot are 500e/e500 specific OEM?

 

[Stevester 500E]

I have a 012-545-6232, and am hoping I have an OEM 500e module with WOT . . . . .whooo hooo !

 

[gsxr]

I have a 012-545-6232, and am hoping I have an OEM 500e module with WOT . . . . .whooo hooo !

Yep, that module has WOT enrichment and was used in early 1992 500E's. Somewhere in mid-92 (USA model year) they changed to a different WOT module (014-545-17-32) which is extremely rare. I have no clue what the difference is between them.

 

[Roma_500E]

I have a 012-545-6232, and am hoping I have an OEM 500e module with WOT . . . . .whooo hooo !

Have you ever posted photo of your 500E ? I never seen it for some reason ... You are always doing something on it but no photos

 

[Stevester 500E]

Its a work in progress . . . .

 

[Glen]

Its a work in progress . . . .

Steve, you really should start an owner thread so we can see the transformation.

 

[Roma_500E]

Steve, you really should start an owner thread so we can see the transformation.

So that at least we can see a car and how it looks like now ..

 

[gsxr]

Here are some old pics... the exterior paint is pretty rough (not shown in photos), but the interior isn't bad. Fresh paint would do wonders for it.

http://www.500eboard.com/forums/sho...0E-Green-Black-255k-miles-4750-(San-Diego-CA)

 

[Stevester 500E]

Did they ever put in WOT modules in W140 4.2l cars?

My friends 1992 W140 4.2 had a Module in it of 014-545-6232 and we thought it might have a chance of having WOT since it was a 1992, as 1992 400es have WOT LH Modules.

Thanks for clarifying this.

 

[Klink]

Did they ever put in WOT modules in W140 4.2l cars?

My friends 1992 W140 4.2 had a Module in it of 014-545-6232 and we thought it might have a chance of having WOT since it was a 1992, as 1992 400es have WOT LH Modules.

Thanks for clarifying this.

All 1992 LH modules have WOT. No 1993 or later V8 or V12 LH modules have WOT.

 

[Stevester 500E]

My friends W140 4.2 has this module, he is original owner and says he has never swapped out LH Modules.
Confused as to why this 014-545-6232 4.2 LH Module doesn't have WOT ?

 

[400Eric]

What's the date code on that ECU?

I have a 08/92 ECU # 014 545 63 32 and it is most definitely a 93 M.Y. ECU and is NOT WOT enrichment. For whatever reason your friend's car may have a 93 M.Y. ECU.

 

[400Eric]

I also have a 08/92 ECU # 014 545 64 32 from a 93 W140 that is for a 93 5.0 liter. Same deal, no WOT enrichment. Somewhere here I two 07/92 dated ECUs, one's for a 92 with a 92 part number, and one's for a 93, with a 93 part number. So I guess that means that in '92 at least, July was the crossover month, at least when it comes to ECUs anyways.

What's that date code on your's ?!?

 

[Stevester 500E]

I am just recalling from memory, but I think it was date code 92/M10. Can't say for sure. Being that it is a later month of 1992, it may not be WOT, but wish there was a way to find out for sure.
He was convinced it was WOT, I wasn't 100 percent sure.

I do have a 92 400e WOT module that I will sell him at a huge discount, but I don't want to sell it to him if his already has WOT.

I have this 4.2 LH WOT module for sale on the site, but no 400e owning members are interested it seems.
My understanding is that these modules are becoming rarer. I was going to hold onto it because at one point I was pursuing buying a clean 400e/e420. Gotta clean garage out of even small parts.

 

[400Eric]

I wasn't going to say anything, but since you bring it up, your price might be the reason for buyer resistance. 400E owners tend to be more price conscious.

Another way to find out would be bring the car to the dragstrip and make three runs with your ECU, and three runs with his ECU. You'll probably find the results informative to say the least!

 

[Stevester 500E]

Ha !
...informative results for sure.
I agree, maybe priced too high. People buy K&N filters thinking they will get greater HP and they spend well over $100 and get no added HP. With this module, a car's HP can be increased between 13-15HP.
Price has been reduced to $200, includes shipping.

 

[400Eric]

Did they ever put in WOT modules in W140 4.2l cars?

My friends 1992 W140 4.2 had a Module in it of 014-545-6232 and we thought it might have a chance of having WOT since it was a 1992, as 1992 400es have WOT LH Modules.

Thanks for clarifying this.

BTW, gsxr already addressed this on page one on 07/04/14:

014-545-62-32 is from a W140 with 4.2L engine, circa 1993, and does not have WOT enrichment.

In response to this post posted by you on 07/04/14:

GSXR, I think the LH Module 014-545-6232 is from a 1993 S500 not a 400se/400sel ? ? not sure but think it is.

Now on to a related matter:

There is a complete list on GSXR's site.

Dave, did I stick my foot in it? I thought there was an LH ECU list on your site, but now I can't find it.

 

[gsxr]

Dave, did I stick my foot in it? I thought there was an LH ECU list on your site, but now I can't find it.

You may have, Eric... you may have.

I don't think I have a full list of all modules on my site... only the E500E modules, back to the original 010- part numbers used on non-KAT versions in Europe. I wasn't particularly interested in S420's!

 

[400Eric]

Or E420s either?

Is it also because back then you didn't believe there were ANY 4.2 ECUs that had WOT fuel enrichment?

 

[gsxr]

Or E420s either?

At the time, nope. Slightly more, now that I've owned a few.

There were not as many 400E modules to keep track of, only two different "WOT" modules, and I never paid attention to the others since they were of no use to me.

 

[400Eric]

Dave, I was editing my post, adding to it. Please see above.

 

[Stevester 500E]

MB also has a part number 014-545-6252 also with a 5.0 module.
Interesting MB uses the same part number for a 4.2 and a 5.0 module?

014-545-62-32 is from a W140 with 4.2L engine, circa 1993, and does not have WOT enrichment.

 

[gsxr]

Yep, this appears to be an EPC error... 014-545-62-32 shows under the 140.04x chassis (4.2L), but it's a 5.0L module per your photos - still without WOT enrichment though. I'll have to add this to my list of EPC errors!

Update July 2017: This particular module is indeed for a 4.2L engine, used on 1993-1994 (approximately) W140 chassis. However, the label on the module incorrectly states "5.0L". The EPC is correct, the module label is wrong. I verified the code on the EPROM chip to confirm.

 

[Efraim]

Hello,

I found LH box 015 545 36 32 in my Euro version car. According to EPC the box is for R129.067.
Does somebody know what it the difference compared to original box?

 

[jouniu]

Hello,

I found LH box 015 545 36 32 in my Euro version car. According to EPC the box is for R129.067.
Does somebody know what it the difference compared to original box?

http://www.500eboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3705&p=36367&viewfull=1#post36367

 

[lowman]

but it is difficult to notice via most ButtDynos™.

ButtDynos!...that cracked me up

 

[Efraim]

http://www.500eboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3705&p=36367&viewfull=1#post36367

That thread I have missed. Thanks for linking. So the box is original and not replaced. Great.

 

[usarover]

Having read everything above (I think), it seems then that my M.Y. 93 has a late 92 ECU: 014 545 65 32 with a born on date of 92 M 07. My VIN is WDBEA36E2PB856727. Tis is exciting!!!

 

[gsxr]

Having read everything above (I think), it seems then that my M.Y. 93 has a late 92 ECU: 014 545 65 32 with a born on date of 92 M 07. My VIN is WDBEA36E2PB856727. Tis is exciting!!!

That is an early 1993 module, correct for your early-production 1993 500E. However it does not have the WOT enrichment.

 

[Lynch]

That is an early 1993 module, correct for your early-production 1993 500E. However it does not have the WOT enrichment.

gsxr, I've been trying to PM you but the site won't let me. I'm interested in the 92 LH 500E Modules, could you let me know if you've got any with WOT enrichment available?

Also, I've been looking for some myself, 012 545 62 32 has it right?

Most importantly, is the 012 545 62 32 from the 500E, or is it a S500 module? I don't want to buy the wrong one. The seller says it's from a 500E (could be lying), but the EPC shows it to be from a S500 (could be an EPC error), what do you say?

Would prefer if you happen to have a unit for sale, please PM.

Cheers

 

[Lynch]

If anyone has a WOT enrichment module for sale, I'd appreciate a PM, but please check to see if you have space in your inbox so I can reply your PM.

 

[captruff]

Pm sent

Jeff

 

[gsxr]

Would prefer if you happen to have a unit for sale, please PM.

PM replied to... note that I have PM's disabled, you'll need to contact me via the email address I sent you.

Additional details on the '92 LH module, including dyno graph when installed in 93-94 engine, are at this link:
http://www.500eboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=545

 

[Stevester 500E]

Is it possible that some year 1992 year model 4.2 and 5.0 cars came original from the factory with NON WOT LH Modules?
I have witness "several" 014 545 62 32 on both 1992 4.2 and 5.0 liter cars.
Remember, this is the part number with an EPC error; they used the same part number for non identical parts.
I consider the possibility that the 1992 model year cars had their original parts replaced with non WOT modules.
One of the modules that I personally pulled from a car has a date code of 92M05.
As it has been said, it's no the date code, rather the part number that matters.
Its just a little odd that I have run into several 92 Model year cars with this module part number.

 

[Stevester 500E]

I am not having wishful thinking thoughts on this, as I have modules with WOT.
It is just the facts in post 92 above and the fact that this 014 545 62 32 part number is quite the mystery part number with an error in the EPC as well.

 

[gsxr]

The manufacturing date on the module is typically several months older than when the car was manufactured. A module dated 92M05 would likely have been installed in a chassis built 92M06-92M08, roughly... which would be right when the change to 1993 model year occurred. You'd also need to check the mfg date on the door jamb. If the module is newer than the car, obviously the module is not original.

Regarding conflicts with the EPC, if a 'late' module could be proven as original in a 1992 model year... it's more likely that MB started phasing in the non-WOT modules a month or two early. The 'late' modules will still not have WOT enrichment.

 

[Stevester 500E]

In all cases, this part number was in a 92 model year car.
I have seen several 92 cars with much new modules, in which case it's definitely a replacement.

Only real way to tell is a trip to the dyno shop.....

The manufacturing date on the module is typically several months older than when the car was manufactured. A module dated 92M05 would likely have been installed in a chassis built 92M06-92M08, roughly... which would be right when the change to 1993 model year occurred. You'd also need to check the mfg date on the door jamb. If the module is newer than the car, obviously the module is not original.

Regarding conflicts with the EPC, if a 'late' module could be proven as original in a 1992 model year... it's more likely that MB started phasing in the non-WOT modules a month or two early. The 'late' modules will still not have WOT enrichment.

 

[gsxr]

Next time you find one like that, snap a photo of the date codes on the modules (all of 'em!) and the driver door jamb VIN tag with production date.

 

[Stevester 500E]

Excellent idea !
I wish I would have thought about that earlier!

Next time you find one like that, snap a photo of the date codes on the modules (all of 'em!) and the driver door jamb VIN tag with production date.

 

[JCM1]

Hi GSXR
I need to get a new LH (012 54562 32) for my '92 500E. Do you have one for sale. I'm based here in Vancouver, BC.


All the best,


joe

 

[Stevester 500E]

Thanks for the update. I will have to keep the module with the part number 014 -545-62-32 that is labeled with 5.0.
It might not be an "inverted Jenny" but it is definitely an error made by MB.

014-545-62-32 is from a W140 with 5.0L 4.2L engine, circa 1993, and does not have WOT enrichment.


Update July 2017: This particular module is indeed for a 4.2L engine, used on 1993-1994 (approximately) W140 chassis. However, the label on the module incorrectly states "5.0L". The EPC is correct, the module label is wrong. I verified the code on the EPROM chip to confirm.