EEC IV reprogramming

[tom cloud]

Dan, I decided to send this to ebberbuddy.  I think it's interesting:
(my erudite thoughts are sprinkled here and there).

>On Thu, 26 Sep 1996, tom cloud wrote:
>
>       ............................
>> 
>> >  Q:  are you wanting to know the 8061 opcodes because you would like to 
>> >      change the way the eec handles the information it receives?   ..
>> >  ... or do you just want the eec to 'respond' differently to a set of 
>> >      inputs?     
>> >
>> >      if you answer is 'yes' to the second maybe i can provide a shred of 
>> >      information.
>> >
>> 
>> Probably the first -- but you do the best you can.  I think all of us
>> would like to know enough to completely modify the unit.  I think
>> everything is there: sensors and outputs, just needs a little TLC
>> from the owner to get what he wants.  Then we will get into how
>> to measure and interpret the changes ??
>> 
>> But, it's probably enough (for a while) to be able to change some
>> of the tables.  For one thing, if one could do this, he could
>> use used EEC's from the junk yard on any motor.
>
>if this is your goal you could probably get by with two things
>
>1) right spark at the right time
>2) proper pulsewidth from the injectors
>
>it happens that the eec gets 1 and only 1 timing signal from the tfi 
>unit.  it is called the pip (Profile Ignition Pickup ??).  on a 4 cyl the 
>output of the pip is 45 - 55Hz @ 1000 RPM, on a 6 cyl the output of the 
>pip is 45 - 55Hz @ 1000 RPM, and finally on an 8cyl the output (and 
>you guessed it) is 45 - 55Hz @ 1000RPM (oh: the duty cycle on all of these 
>should be 50%) these numbers are true for all ford engines except the 
>SEFI 8cyl (the SEFI 6 cylinders are the same.  the 8 cyl must need 
>tighter timing indexes)
>
>it also happens that the return (from the eec) to the tfi module (the 
>SPOUT or SPark OUT) that sets the timing from the computer (this is the 
>wire you pull before you set your base timing) has the exact same 
>specifications as the pip.  
>what i gleened from this is that the pip does 2 things:
>1) it lets the eec know how fast the engine is turning (frequency alone)
>2) it gives a base signal to be sent back to the tfi after being delayed 
>   a bit.  this delay or phase change (realitive to the pip) is what lets
>   the eec control timing, but indirectly, the tfi is doing _most_ of the 
>   work.
>
>mike wesley has said ..
>    "you'll see that ford does not use the CPU as it was designed (to be 
>    used?)   . . . they waste so much CPU it's pitiful"
>
>i'm betting he's refering to the fact that the CPU is just looking up a 
>bunch of tables. (remember superchips .. just tables no code)
>the cpu only has to look up injector "on time" and SPOUT "phase shift" 
>for any certain rpm, mass air, and engine temperature and its job is 
>done.  add on a few more bells and whistles and its done.  A real 
>programmer would use the CPU to "compute" these outputs not look them up.
>
>moral is: if you want to make your own controller (and i'm interested) 
>all you have to do is figure out the "TFI secret" and half your job is 
>done.  the injector pulsing is a piece of cake compared to trying to fire 
>a spark at the proper time ... every time. 
>
> oops.  back to your statement:
>
>i think you CAN use any eec with any other engine (all the fuel injectors 
>are in banks of two ... choose the proper size and fuel pressure ... pick 
>the proper TFI ( is there a difference??)  and adjust for wiring 
>differences.. <;-)
>
>i'm planning to 'try' this  my self.  i have a 2.3L merkur and am 
>planning to swap a 2.9 liter ... and add a turbo.  the problem i faced 
>was that the 2.3 had a neat little "boost solenide??" that the eec would 
>deactivate when detonation was encountered.  a very useful output, but 
>nothing of the same on any other eec controller .. not to mention the 2.9 
>doesn't even have a knock sensor.  solution: use the 2.3 computer ... i 
>was stunned when all the "problems" i had imagined weren't actually 
>there.  the only drawback now is that the 2.3 controller has "peak and 
>hold" injectors in banks of 2.  If i was to hook up the injectors (lets 
>say peak and hold) in banks of 3 instead of 2, would the eec still 
>provide the proper current to each injector, or just provide the same old 
>current . . . I don't know)
> 
>
>.........................................
>
>
>
>> 
>> How does Mike Wesley's "calibrator" work?  It supposedly plugs into
>> a "calibration" port on the side of the EEC which allows switching
>> out the program memory and using external memory (I may be wrong
>> on this??).
>> 
>it sounds like a "super chip" fpga mapping to an eeprom that you can 
>program by hooking up you computer com port.  i'm sure it doesn't
>reprogram the 8061, but i don't know :)
>
>later - 
>
>> >-dan "i want control" stokes

What's a TFI ??  I assume it's "tuned fuel injection" not "taco f**t
implosion"?

I'd like to know if Mikes's doo-dad will work with SEFI.  If he's done
what he seems to have done, all I gotta do is fiddle with his deal.
I think there's a market (albeit small) of us wackos that are technical
enough to really be able to play with the controller at the software
level -- given immortality and fort knox.  So, if Mike or someone could
make a box and "open architecture" a'la the IBM-PC, there would surely
grow a humonguous cult following.  I think Ford otta look at the IBM /
MAC debacle and consider making their systems easier to hack.

I'd like to put SEFI in, not 'cause it's good for power, but because
it's there!

Tom