[Diy_efi] DIY_WB and stand alone ems

[The Punisher]

Bruce,
So are you saying that you like the concept of lookup tables at WOT better 
than C/L via wideband ? I understand the redundancy issue completly, but 
what about 2(or 3) WB's that must be within a certian percentage of each 
other for the uC to accept the reading. And have a "limp" mode if you cannot 
verify the WB readings.
I'm talking about a fresh computer design here, NOT adapting current 
systems.

Punisher


From: "Bruce" <nacelp at bright.net>
>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] DIY_WB and stand alone ems
>Date: Tue, 11 Jul 1995 13:27:57 -0400
>
>
>    First Off, I'm not at all to the stage of supporting any C/L loop WOT
>fuel controls.  So call me what ever names you want on that issue.   But, 
>at
>this stage of the game, I'd want some redundancy in the system.  Using an
>Acoustic Knock sensor at this stage is hardly enough to protect an 
>expensive
>engine.
>    As been said many times before the DIY-WB is designed as a tuning aid.
>Nothing more.  I would much rather see someone error on the side of caution
>then get into a bad situation.   If you're going to run a system, that does
>C/L, then use the entire system.  After all it's all engineered to to work
>together.  Who knows what little (or large) tweaks there are in the way 
>they
>designed their system.
>YMMV
>Bruce
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi




_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com


_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
http://www.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi