OBD VIN format

**sonicmule** · 07-13-2009, 12:11 PM

Hi there

A quick question about the VIN format returned from PID 0902.
I've decoded the vin ok until the last three bytes which are not ascii codes.

The last 6 numbers in the vin are 623364 and in the response from the ecu, the data also is 62 33 64 so no conversion is needed.

Is there some sort of rule that states take the following bytes as numbers when you find a byte over the ascii value of 'Z' ?

**p2psmurf** · 07-13-2009, 12:57 PM

All 17 bytes of the Vin should have been send as ASCII characters, in your case:
36 32 33 33 36 34. So, the answer is non-compliant.

Just curious: what car is this (make, model, engine, model year) and where are you located (Usa, Europe, somewhere else).

**sonicmule** · 07-13-2009, 02:31 PM

The car is an MG ZS 180 2.5 litre V6 manufactured in 2004 with a Siemens ECU.

The ecu responds with EOBD from a 01 1C request.

It seems very strange why the last few numbers have been coded this way as the the VIN is 17 digits like all other VIN numbers

**p2psmurf** · 07-13-2009, 03:52 PM

Software is written by programmers, who are human and make mistakes.
This is not the first bug and it won't be the last either.

**sonicmule** · 07-13-2009, 04:59 PM

Ha haaaa! After the dealings I have with Siemens at work, why doesn't this surprise me LOL

**Vitaliy** · 07-13-2009, 08:41 PM

Originally Posted by sonicmule

Hi there

A quick question about the VIN format returned from PID 0902.
I've decoded the vin ok until the last three bytes which are not ascii codes.

The last 6 numbers in the vin are 623364 and in the response from the ecu, the data also is 62 33 64 so no conversion is needed.

Is there some sort of rule that states take the following bytes as numbers when you find a byte over the ascii value of 'Z' ?

What scan tool and software do you use to get the VIN? Can you post the complete response?

Vitaliy

**Vitaliy** · 07-13-2009, 08:51 PM

Originally Posted by p2psmurf

Software is written by programmers, who are human and make mistakes.
This is not the first bug and it won't be the last either.

I strongly doubt that this is a bug in the ECU firmware.

Vitaliy

**malcom2073** · 07-13-2009, 09:25 PM

Originally Posted by Vitaliy

I strongly doubt that this is a bug in the ECU firmware.

Vitaliy

But it could very likely be a bug in the scantool, especially if it's an ELM knockoff.

**sonicmule** · 07-14-2009, 03:59 AM

The scantool is a OBKey bluetooth dongle, wasn't a cheepo ebay thing

Here's the response from the VIN enquiry

49 02 01 00 00 00 53 65 48 6B 13 49 02 02 41 52 52 54 4C 48 6B 13 49 02 03 4C 57 4C 46 49 48 6B 13 49 02 04 34 44 62 33 22 48 6B 13 49 02 05 64 00 00 00

**p2psmurf** · 07-14-2009, 05:21 AM

You never know with interfaces, but this looks an ecu problem to me.
Could be a problem in the ecu firmware when sending the Vin-number or the Vin-number was incorrectly programmed by a scanner - with no complaints from the ecu firmware.