PDA

View Full Version : 2009 colorado 5.3 want to install a 4l80e



MECHAN12
December 19th, 2010, 03:03 PM
i would like to install a 4l80e in my colorado. from what i have read you would need a program from another unit to do this . is there one that would work with my system.
thanks
donald
p.s. i will be buying v2 in feb or march

joecar
December 20th, 2010, 12:18 AM
Hi Donald welcome to the forum :cheers:

Which transmission did your 2009 Colorado come with...?

MECHAN12
December 20th, 2010, 12:54 AM
it comes with a 4l60e

Taz
December 20th, 2010, 01:02 AM
Hello Donald,

The 4L80 came as original equipment in some GM vehicles in 2009 - but these used an E38 ECM. Your 2009 Colorado uses an E67 ECM.

A Gen IV engine and a 4L80 is not a problem in a swap / or Hot Rod configuration, but may come with significant issues in your truck.

Follow the link below and enter your VIN number.

http://tis2web.service.gm.com (http://tis2web.service.gm.com)

Need to know the part numbers of the ECM OS, System, and Slave used in your truck. Also need to know all of the part numbers used by your current TCM.

Will try and determine any possible OEM calibration compatibility with your truck and a 4L80 after you post this information.


Regards,
Taz

MECHAN12
December 20th, 2010, 01:16 AM
the link is not working
thanks
donald

Taz
December 20th, 2010, 01:21 AM
Sorry ... edited link ... should work now.


Regards,
Taz

MECHAN12
December 20th, 2010, 01:29 AM
main op systems is 12628994
and is this what you need
ID Selected# Description
1 12630465 New software for start of production.
2 12630271 New calibration for start of production.
3 12613366 Fuel System
4 12630532 New calibration for start of production.
5 12630769 New calibration for start of production.
6 12631997 New calibration for improved vehicle performance in four wheel drive.
7 12625997 Slave Operating System
8 12626924 Engine

Taz
December 20th, 2010, 01:48 AM
Yes - that is the ECM information. Now need the TCM information - OS and cal will probably begin with 242 .....


Regards,
Taz

MECHAN12
December 20th, 2010, 01:58 AM
Calibration History for: Operating system
Part Number CVN Bulletin # Description
24243356 000073C2 - Operating system
Calibration History for: Transmission diagnostic
Part Number CVN Bulletin # Description
24240514 0000F5F6 - System
Calibration History for: Transmission
Part Number CVN Bulletin # Description
24250653 00009B33 - Corrects issue with garage shift shudder
24249780 0000FF99 - Corrects issue 3-4/4-3 Busyness on grades at highway speeds of 55-65 kph
24240507 00003062 - Transmission
Calibration History for: Transmission diagnostic
Part Number CVN Bulletin # Description
24240512 0000C560 - Transmission diagnostic
here it is i think
hey thanks for your help
donald

Taz
December 20th, 2010, 02:49 AM
OK … as always with these types of questions, there may not be a definitive answer - you may end up with a trial and error scenario.

As a disclaimer, my so called area of expertise is Gen III conversions. Just getting up to speed on Gen IV applications - but am not offering these commercially yet. The focus of my R&D efforts has been with E38 ECMs - and I know very little about E67 applications. There maybe another Forum member who could offer an absolute “Yes” or “No” answer.

The software in your E67 ECM is dissimilar to the E38 - including the Slave OS. On the positive side, the transmission OS and calibration in your TCM (T42) is very similar to TCMs that were paired with E38 ECMs.

Your TCM uses OS 24243356 - which is the same TCM OS used by 2009 GM vehicles originally equipped with the 4L80. Therefore, you MAY be able to reflash your TCM to control a 4L80 while maintaining compatibility with your ECM and all of its functionality.

If not, then you may be faced with running a stand alone TCM controller.

The thread below is from a Forum member who began with a 6.2 L and 6L80, then changed to a 4L65 transmission. If memory serves, he ended up running a stand alone type setup. Obviously this thread is not directly applicable to your proposed swap, but should give you an idea of some of the potential obstacles.

http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?14538-E38-OS-with-T42-TCM

Good luck …

Regards,
Taz

MECHAN12
December 20th, 2010, 05:01 AM
well thanks for the help i guess i will change my plans for now. i was going to get the trans, then the turbo but now i will get the turbo. then after i blow up my trans i will put a 4l80e in then try to get it to work
and again thanks a lot for the help . you fellows are the best.
donald

joecar
December 20th, 2010, 06:17 AM
If you can't find a suitable 4L80E calibration to flash into your TCM, you could make a minor wiring mod (change 2 or 3 pinouts and add a relay) and run the 4L80E trans from the 4L60E calibration.

Taz
December 20th, 2010, 06:36 AM
There are plenty of well built aftermarket 4L60/65/70 transmissions that will handle just about anything you can reasonably throw at them. The cost is comparable to a similarly built 4L80.

The 4L60/65/70 would physically be a direct “bolt in” and is compatible with your current wiring harness, TCM, and tune.

If you had been thinking of saving a little cash on the project by installing a used or stock replacement 4L80 - these won’t stand up behind a turbo application for very long - without some upgrades.

In the end, the costs will probably work out very similarly with either transmission, but the 4L80 would “cost” more in time and frustration.


Regards,
Taz

MECHAN12
December 20th, 2010, 08:37 AM
If you can't find a suitable 4L80E calibration to flash into your TCM, you could make a minor wiring mod (change 2 or 3 pinouts and add a relay) and run the 4L80E trans from the 4L60E calibration.
That sounds great do you know of a link to this info
Thanks
Donald

joecar
December 20th, 2010, 11:20 AM
4L80E Swap:
showthread.php?13090-4l80e-4th-gear-and-tcc-problem (http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?13090-4l80e-4th-gear-and-tcc-problem)
[/URL]showthread.php?13722-Stop-TCC-unlock-when-coasting (http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?13449-06-gmc-truck-os-swap)
showthread.php?13891-4L80-E-3-2-shift-solenoid (http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?13891-4L80-E-3-2-shift-solenoid)
[URL="http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?13644-4L80E-swap-into-2006-6.0L-truck-with-4L60E"]
(http://forum.efilive.com/showthread.php?13644-4L80E-swap-into-2006-6.0L-truck-with-4L60E)

MECHAN12
December 20th, 2010, 01:38 PM
hey thanks a lot , that should do it. it will be awhile before it gets done.
but i will make sure and post on here how it goes so you will have the info encase someone wants to do it latter
donald

joecar
December 20th, 2010, 03:31 PM
Ok, thanks :cheers:

slow67
December 21st, 2010, 09:19 AM
There are plenty of well built aftermarket 4L60/65/70 transmissions that will handle just about anything you can reasonably throw at them. The cost is comparable to a similarly built 4L80.

The 4L60/65/70 would physically be a direct “bolt in” and is compatible with your current wiring harness, TCM, and tune.

If you had been thinking of saving a little cash on the project by installing a used or stock replacement 4L80 - these won’t stand up behind a turbo application for very long - without some upgrades.

In the end, the costs will probably work out very similarly with either transmission, but the 4L80 would “cost” more in time and frustration.


Regards,
Taz


Very correct, the (completely) stock 4L80 3rd gear clutches will burn up around 500hp. If you simply add a Transgo-HD2 shift kit, it fixes this issue. Next hurdle is at about 750hp breaking the input shaft.

Taz
December 21st, 2010, 10:52 AM
Hello slow67,

An engine equipped with a turbo / supercharger produces significantly more torque than a naturally aspirated engine in the lower RPM range. In a boosted application a stock 4L80 will probably expire before the 500 HP level.

I agree with your opinion on the TransGo kit - these work very well. An additional (often overlooked) expense is an aftermarket torque converter - the OEM converter is not sufficiently durable in a turbo application.

In the end, it’s a coin toss as to which would be the more cost effective avenue. One of the options creates less complication.


Regards,
Taz