your mail

[Jonathan R. Lusky]

> | Is it 8048, 8051, 8086, 80186, 6800, 6500, 68000, or what?
> |  
> 
> Lets keep all the discussions going.  I am personally more interested in
> the control algorithms than the hardware itself, but the hardware issues
> need to be resolved also.  We have two basic choices:
> microcontroller (8052, 6811, etc). and CPU (80x86, 680x0).  I would say
> that in the interests of cheapness and simplicity the microcontroller
> provides the best solution, but that is IMO.  Maybe we should bat ideas
> around for a week or so, then have a vote.  we are probably still picking 
> up new people who have valuable opinions, so no need to rush things.  I'm
> enjoying just reading what has been posted so far.
 
I'm partial to the 6811 just for two reasons, simplicity and popularity.
Maybe this isn't true in other circles, but it seems that everyone uses
the 68HC11 for small custom microcontrollers nowadays, and I believe it
will have more support software available (cross compilers, etc) than
just about anything else for this type of application.  Of course, with
an 80x86 crosscompilers wouldn't really be necessary, but I think
simpler hardware required to use the 68HC11  is more significant.
This is my laymans view (I'm not a EE type, I just had a good
experience with a 68HC11 based telemetry system that someone built for
me).

> also, if anyone has access to things we are likely to need like pcb routing
> and etching, compilers for whatever processor we decide on, etc., they
> should speak up.  Hardly anyone will have all the
> resources to do all this, but between us we should be able to put all the
> pieces together.

Absolutely...  look at some of the great free unix software out there
for inspiration as to what a group of people can do when they put their
heads together.  The thing that excites me the most about a good DIY FI
system is the potential for customization and expansion, something
totally lacking in the current aftermarket FI systems.  For CNG systems
for example, it'd be really nice to have fuel temperature and rail
pressure as inputs to the ECM.  Nitrous, PWM EGR, boost control,
adaptability to a wide range of OEM sensors, torque convertor lockup,
UEGO support, etc.  Lotsa things that the average person may not need,
but being able to write a module and add it to the code to do some of
these thing would be really nice.

-- 
Jonathan R. Lusky  --  lusky at knuth.mtsu.edu
 "Turbos are nice but I'd rather be blown!"
   89 Jeep Wrangler - 258 / pile of junk!
       80 Toyota Celica - 20R / 5spd