MAP Question

[Bruce Plecan]

> the divergence from target AFR's is not impossible to correct for.

Just add alot of expense.  A baro input is alot simpler, then a WB O2

> It is always possible to correlate a previously known manifold
> vacuum vs throttle position and thus infer barometric activity.

Why infer, when a baro sensor is such a simple thing to do?.
Also, seems like we got to just using the baro for fuel, and forgot timing.

> As the only way to produce the same results at sea level would be
> to drop the exhaust or at least some portion of the restriction would
> need to be removed.
> This " operation " is conducted by mainly untrained personnel
> and seems to be the most popular " engine mod " performed.

????
Bring any street car you want over with a 1.5" single exhuast, over, and
we'll compare notes with my single 3" exhuast car (exaggerated to make a
point).

> It appears that the ECU's with only a single absolute sensor are
> able to maintain 51 state emission compliance without any extra
> adjustment.

Is the 51 state an engineers mental state? <g>
emission compliance is a whole different world.
For heavens sake they still aren't really for sure on what an O2 sensor even
senses.

> It would also follow  that 8 bit resolution of the MAP input is indeed
> sufficiently fine for the the job. (approx 85 kPa ((-80 to +5 ))
> resolved to
> 255 steps of approx 0.33 kPa.

Shouldn't the above be, In your opinion?
Bruce

> HTH
> Phil

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes)
in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo at lists.diy-efi.org