[Diy_efi] RE: [SPAM] - Diy_efi Digest, Vol 4, Issue 4 - Email found in subject
Ken
Ken
Fri Jun 3 15:37:27 UTC 2005
-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org
Sent: Friday, June 03, 2005 1:29 AM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: [SPAM] - Diy_efi Digest, Vol 4, Issue 4 - Email found in subject
Send Diy_efi mailing list submissions to
diy_efi at diy-efi.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
diy_efi-owner at diy-efi.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of Diy_efi digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: I remember (Adam Wade)
2. RE: Making a fake O2 (Daniel R. Nicoson)
3. Re: Possible method of partial repair of damaged O2 sensor
(was designed for O2) (Mike V)
4. RE: Making a fake O2 (Mike)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 17:25:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: Adam Wade <espresso_doppio at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] I remember
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Message-ID: <20050603002545.25515.qmail at web32214.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
--- David Cooley <n5xmt at bellsouth.net> wrote:
> If you can't keep it productive, then go away and never return. shoot
> yourself, jump off a building, but stay the hell out of here.
Would that include filling the list with posts calling people "fucking
morons", posts saying nothing but "learn to read", and other similar ad
hominem attack posts with no other content?
*cough*
| 82 Honda CX500 Turbo (Cassandra) 90 Kwak Zephyr 550 (Daphne) | "It
| was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it |
| didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to. |
| They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. |
| The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun |
| had come up again." -Kurt Vonnegut |
| M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com - http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze |
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2005 21:24:25 -0400
From: "Daniel R. Nicoson" <A6intruder at myo-p.com>
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Message-ID: <KMEGIPPMDGHIFFAKGOLEIELMFJAA.A6intruder at myo-p.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I'm saying that if my engine was stock (I've got different heads, cam, MAF
and manifold now) that the stock tune would run very nicely without the 02
sensors. That's not a guess, it's very logical. The Ford EEC pops in and
out of Closed Loop very easily in its stock configuration. The fuel maps
and spark maps are very smooth running and conservative. Of course the
spark maps aren't affected by CL/OL or 02 sensors at all. The fuel maps are
very conservative, around stoich at low LOAD levels, quite rich at high
power levels. The 02 sensor affected operation is actually the exception
when considering the full range of operation. I actually pull fuel out at
high power in my modified usage.
Keep in mind that stock 02 sensors serve one purpose only, to keep the fuel
mixture as close to 14.7 AFR as possible. The MAF meters (more expensive
than MAP) take that chore one step better. The MAF meters do such a nice
job correctly metering the air that the engine is able to nail AFR as
commanded all the time, the 02 sensors merely sweeten the process.
I don't mean to be rude but I'm not sure why you feel the 02 sensors have so
much to do with engine longevity? The actual tune (tables), especially at
high power, is what is important for engine livelihood. O2 sensors only
contribute to the operation in very specific conditions. Thank Gosh the EPA
driving cycle is as limited as it is!
I have posted the fuel and spark tables for a stock 1994 Mustang GT:
BASE_SPARK_TABLE # Base Spark Table.(deg BTDC) (Load vs
RPM)
35 35 35 28 28 28 28 28 28
28 28
35 35 35 32 35 40 40 40 40
40 40
35 35 35 35 35 36 38 39 40
40 40
17 20 21 26 31 34 36 37 38
40 40
14 17 19 25 30 30 30 30 30
32 32
12 14 15 19 21 22 25 27 28
30 30
10 12 12 18 19 20 23 25 26
28 28
9 10 10 11 15 18 21 23 24
26 26
9 9 9 11 13 17 19 21 22
24 25
STABILIZED_FUEL_TABLE # Stabilized open loop air/fuel ratio.
13.9537 13.9537 13.9537 13.9537 13.9537 13.9537 13.9537 13.9537
13.9537 13.9537
14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825
14.1825 14.1825
14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825 14.1825
14.1825 14.1825
14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969
14.2969 14.2969
14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969
14.2969 14.2969
14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969 14.2969
14.2969 12.5812
12.3525 12.3525 12.4669 12.1237 12.1237 12.1237 12.1237 12.0094
12.1237 12.3525
12.3525 12.3525 12.4669 12.1237 12.1237 12.1237 12.1237 12.0094
12.1237 12.3525
I imagine the format will not survive the email re-format.
Units are RPM horizontally, left side low RPM, right side high RPM
Vertically, top row is low LOAD, bottom row is high LOAD.
My point is that if the 02 sensors go out of the loop for any reason, the
engine will run off these tables. Data log with a wide band shows that the
engine will consistantly hit the commanded AFR. The process is very
reliable. Not to knock carbs but Mr. Holly would LOVE to have the full
range of control that a modern EFI system provides. Think how many engines
lasted for how many years with factory carburators and no feedback from an
02 sensor?
Loosing an 02 on a stock Ford tune won't ruin your day. If the sensor has
been slowly going bad it could actually have driven the "accumulated tune"
(Ford's adaptive stategy) out of whack. Currently when I use my 02 sensors,
one bank runs more than 1 AFR point more rich than the other. I'm sure one
of my 02 sensors is going bad. Car runs great when I tell the EEC to ignore
the 02's and I have cleared the "accumulated tune".
All of the above is based on my experience with Ford EEC's. Obviously other
brands have different specific strategies. Most of them are similar in the
basic strategy. I find it hard to believe that any manufacturer would allow
a faulty 02 sensor to cause enough havoc to actually damage the engine
itself.
Take care,
Dan Nicoson
> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
> Behalf Of David Cooley
> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 7:08 PM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
>
>
> Forced open loop, but on TUNED maps, not the factory provided maps without
> the benefit of learning trims from an O2??
> Or are you comparing apples to oranges again?
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Daniel R. Nicoson
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 10:08 PM
> > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
> >
> > But even that's a rather sweeping statement. You must have
> > some particular computer's in mind with a specific experience?
> >
> > I run my 1994 Mustang computer Open Loop whenever I want, no
> > problem. I do have the luxury of changing any maps but with
> > stock parts, that computer would run just fine if only forced
> > open loop, all other settings left alone.
> >
> > Dan Nicoson
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
> > > Behalf Of David Cooley
> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 6:18 PM
> > > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
> > >
> > >
> > > I never said that ANY open loop maps would destroy an engine...
> > > My comment was that a computer DESIGNED FOR CLOSED LOOP WITH AN
> > > O2 SENSOR if
> > > run in open loop only with the O2 disabled will cause damage.
> > > Geez people, learn to READ
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > > > [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Marcello A.
> > > > Belloli
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:28 PM
> > > > To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > > Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
> > > >
> > > > Dan,
> > > > Yes, that is exactly where I am. The stock computers
> > mapping is
> > > > in no way set up for the engine that is now connected to it.
> > > > Everything you said is right on. We have a mismatch.
> > The stock ecm
> > > > and its mapping isn't going to work.
> > > > I have kept reading hoping the bickering would stop.
> > I agree
> > > > with both sides of the debate. GM computers are terrible
> > when their
> > > > O2s fail. And run so rich I'm couldn't understand why
> > anyone would
> > > > drive it. Now the ECM I'm running in my Landcruiser is a GM with
> > > > TBI setup out of 1989 C series 5.7l GM truck. And it
> > will actually
> > > > use data gathered during closed loop to effect WOT. And
> > it can do
> > > > damage.
> > > > Now, the Honda/Acura setup we're working on right now will run so
> > > > rich with the o2 disconnected it will barely idle.
> > > > Now these are two cars. I have also seen setups where you could
> > > > remove half the sensors on the car, and the computer will keep it
> > > > running like nothing ever changed. And it won't set a
> > light. Dodge
> > > > Caravan OBDII. And the emissions will be perfect. I
> > believe it is
> > > > smart enough to use other data to make a good guess (kinda like
> > > > Speed-density) at what the sensor should be reading. You
> > would be
> > > > hard pressed to get one of these engines to hurt itself. And if
> > > > there was misfire that could cause damage it will kill
> > cylinders to
> > > > wake the driver up (Thats if they don't see the flashing
> > MIL lamp)
> > > > and protect the engine.
> > > > There are many computers out there, and many different
> > > > approaches used. Now I have never personally seen a
> > motor go boom
> > > > because of a bad o2 sensor, but I have seen a lot of
> > damage done.
> > > > The o2 goes bad. The cat plugs up, the exhuast is
> > restricted, and
> > > > the temps at the engine exhuast go steadily upward.
> > Exhuast valves
> > > > damaged, seals damaged, exhuast manifolds damaged, cylinder heads
> > > > damaged. etc,..
> > > > I believe that it all depends on the computer you are using.
> > > > There are computers that go both ways.... I also don't see the
> > > > problem with an open loop car. The Carburetor analogy is a good
> > > > one. I've run vehicles 100,000 of miles with a
> > carburetor without
> > > > any problem.
> > > > And I can think of one setup or two aftermarket setups that don't
> > > > use
> > > > o2 sensors unless you add them. Both Eldebrock, and Holley have
> > > > aftermarket EFI setups that don't intially use an O2. I
> > think Accel
> > > > has one two. And these things have been used in many cars, and
> > > > trucks without any problems.
> > > > And this all started with a simple question about
> > faking out the
> > > > o2...
> > > >
> > > > Marcello
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > I've been watching this thread over the last few days.
> > People are
> > > > > debating the safety of the stock maps with 02 faulty but no one
> > > > > has mentioned that the engine in question is no longer stock.
> > > > > Marcello mentioned that his friend "only made a few changes"
> > > > (eye-roll) meaning
> > > > > to me that probably the friend put together a parts combination
> > > > > far from stock. Most likely higher compression and a more
> > > > aggressive cam.
> > > > > Those two possibilities alone probably would make the
> > stock maps
> > > > > irrelevant or at least "not safe".
> > > > > Considering how much $$ most people typically throw at a motor
> > > > > when they "make a few changes" I would proceed slowly and work
> > > > to develop new maps.
> > > > > I
> > > > > think Marcello realizes this and hopes his friend will keep
> > > > his foot
> > > > > out of it until he gets home to work at the problem logically.
> > > > >
> > > > > My experience is with Ford EEC's. I know when I "made a
> > > > few changes"
> > > > > the EEC was totally confused because my parts changes had taken
> > > > > the range of operation well beyond the stock limits of
> > compensation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Good discussion.
> > > > >
> > > > > Dan Nicoson
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > > >> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > > > >> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
> > > > >> Behalf Of Steve Ravet
> > > > >> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 12:36 PM
> > > > >> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > > >> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I was going to refer to the EFI testbench that Bruce
> > built. My
> > > > >> recollection is that he used a 555 type circuit to
> > generate an O2
> > > > >> signal. There's not really any mention of it in the
> > > > article, but I'm
> > > > >> sure the details are in the archive. I think for some
> > > > computers this
> > > > >> worked OK, for others that expected to see more
> > > > correlation between
> > > > >> pulsewidth and O2, it didn't. Anyway, go to the gmecm page,
> > > > >> projects, then ECM testbench for the ascii version of the
> > > > article.
> > > > >> The MS word version is probably gone for good.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --steve
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ________________________________
> > > > >>
> > > > >> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
> > > > >> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bret
> > Levandowski
> > > > >> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 11:16 AM
> > > > >> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > > >> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Actually, it is not 'impossible to fool an ECU with a
> > > > constant or
> > > > >> switching voltage source'. There are two companies I know
> > > > of (in the
> > > > >> states) that have developed a plug-in replacement for the
> > > > O2 sensor
> > > > >> on numerous vehicles (mostly OBD II) that generates a
> > > > 'proper' signal.
> > > > >> These are used in instances where inj size was increased
> > > > or a turbo
> > > > >> or screw-charger was installed. Some also did require a
> > > > flash of the ecu.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > > >> Diy_efi mailing list
> > > > >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > > >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Diy_efi mailing list
> > > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > > > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Diy_efi mailing list
> > > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Diy_efi mailing list
> > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 22:20:54 -0400
From: Mike V <diyefi at enzoco.com>
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Possible method of partial repair of damaged O2
sensor (was designed for O2)
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050602221116.00c3c5a0 at enzoco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
HI Mike,
your general point makes alot of sense, as the
3-wire heated GM sensors tend to last a long time
in the presence of heavily leaded race gas.
I've done it many times.
I'm not sure of the part number, but the heated 3-wire sensor from the
GMC Syclone/Typhoon trucks survives well (not forever) in leaded petrol
situations. Wishing all the best to the motorhead mates down-under.
Mike V. Cleveland, OH USA
At 08:54 PM 6/2/2005 +0800, you wrote:
>Anyway, I toyed with the old O2 sensor and a propane torch in normal
>atmosphere on the bench for about 10 - 15mins, I gave it a bit of a
>hammering with a hot O2 rich flame hoping I'd burn off any lead deposits
>and watched the output wander around, cant recall the exact figures - it
>was about 10yrs back afterall.
>
>About a week after that I had occasion to try it, I let it run for a normal
>tankful of ULP but had the initial AFM cal set to leaner than normal.
>Anyway, after about half a tank of use mostly city it seemed to settle
>down. Another week or so later I swapped back the good one and couldnt
>notice much difference overall. Swapping back and forth twice
>more if i recall showed minimal difference. I ended up leaving it out as I
>couldnt be sure it would last the long term, I still have it for reference.
>
>Does anyway think the propane torch trick really works longer term,
>did seem to make quite a difference for me though it may not have been
>damaged so much in the first place - who knows ?
>
>I wonder if a more efficient 'repair' would be to heat it with a torch and
>play some pure gaseous O2 over it for a few seconds and repeat this
>cycle a few times,
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 13:26:15 +0800
From: "Mike" <niche at iinet.net.au>
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.0.20050603132230.02c1e230 at 203.0.178.192>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 07:09 AM 3/06/05, you wrote:
>That is called "Limp" mode in a GM computer.
>The original poster was talking about faking an O2 signal, so there would
be
>no forced 5% enrichment, only the BARE raw fuel maps in the factory cal.
>Again, learn to read.
>
>Fucking morons
I think you need some anger management.
I was responding only to *your* comment below, not having to recall the
whole
thread, you said we should read your post and kindly pasted it for reference
so
there would be no misunderstanding, here is your comment and my response
was relevant to it:-
> >I never said that ANY open loop maps would destroy an engine...
> >My comment was that a computer DESIGNED FOR CLOSED LOOP WITH AN O2
> >SENSOR if run in open loop only with the O2 disabled will
> cause damage.
> >Geez people, learn to READ
Now - you are saying I should also have read some other post and mostly
ignored your re-interation above ?
What gives ?
Mike
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
>> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Mike
>> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 1:30 AM
>> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
>>
>> At 06:17 AM 2/06/05, you wrote:
>> >I never said that ANY open loop maps would destroy an engine...
>> >My comment was that a computer DESIGNED FOR CLOSED LOOP WITH AN O2
>> >SENSOR if run in open loop only with the O2 disabled will
>> cause damage.
>> >Geez people, learn to READ
>>
>> Having looked closely at the Hitachi/Bosch ECU for the NIssan
>> RB30E and RB30ET for some 10 years or so - I really doubt
>> the efficacy of your wild generalisation. This ECU is
>> designed specifically for use with a classic O2 sensor and
>> has many modes that allow it to operate reliably without
>> input from some sensors, in that respect:-
>>
>> If the O2 sensor is faulty or missing the ECU runs open loop
>> *plus* makes the mixture about 5% richer overall. ie It still
>> uses the primary inputs of AFM and engine speed to provide
>> open loop fueling but cannot close the loop, therefore it
>> must be open loop - yes ?
>>
>> How can this cause damage when it averages 5% or so enrichment ?
>>
>> Provide some earnest rationalisation to support your
>> generalisation please ?
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
>> >> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Marcello
>> A. Belloli
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:28 PM
>> >> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> >> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
>> >>
>> >> Dan,
>> >> Yes, that is exactly where I am. The stock computers
>> mapping is
>> >> in no way set up for the engine that is now connected to it.
>> >> Everything you said is right on. We have a mismatch. The
>> stock ecm
>> >> and its mapping isn't going to work.
>> >> I have kept reading hoping the bickering would stop. I agree
>> >> with both sides of the debate. GM computers are terrible
>> when their
>> >> O2s fail. And run so rich I'm couldn't understand why
>> anyone would
>> >> drive it. Now the ECM I'm running in my Landcruiser is a
>> GM with TBI
>> >> setup out of 1989 C series 5.7l GM truck. And it will
>> actually use
>> >> data gathered during closed loop to effect WOT. And it can do
>> >> damage.
>> >> Now, the Honda/Acura setup we're working on right now will run so
>> >> rich with the o2 disconnected it will barely idle.
>> >> Now these are two cars. I have also seen setups where you could
>> >> remove half the sensors on the car, and the computer will keep it
>> >> running like nothing ever changed. And it won't set a
>> light. Dodge
>> >> Caravan OBDII. And the emissions will be perfect. I
>> believe it is
>> >> smart enough to use other data to make a good guess (kinda like
>> >> Speed-density) at what the sensor should be reading. You would be
>> >> hard pressed to get one of these engines to hurt itself. And if
>> >> there was misfire that could cause damage it will kill
>> cylinders to
>> >> wake the driver up (Thats if they don't see the flashing MIL lamp)
>> >> and protect the engine.
>> >> There are many computers out there, and many different
>> >> approaches used. Now I have never personally seen a motor go boom
>> >> because of a bad o2 sensor, but I have seen a lot of damage done.
>> >> The o2 goes bad. The cat plugs up, the exhuast is restricted, and
>> >> the temps at the engine exhuast go steadily upward.
>> Exhuast valves
>> >> damaged, seals damaged, exhuast manifolds damaged, cylinder heads
>> >> damaged. etc,..
>> >> I believe that it all depends on the computer you are using.
>> >> There are computers that go both ways.... I also don't see the
>> >> problem with an open loop car. The Carburetor analogy is
>> a good one.
>> >> I've run vehicles 100,000 of miles with a carburetor without any
>> >> problem.
>> >> And I can think of one setup or two aftermarket setups
>> that don't use
>> >> o2 sensors unless you add them. Both Eldebrock, and Holley have
>> >> aftermarket EFI setups that don't intially use an O2. I
>> think Accel
>> >> has one two. And these things have been used in many cars, and
>> >> trucks without any problems.
>> >> And this all started with a simple question about
>> faking out the
>> >> o2...
>> >>
>> >> Marcello
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > I've been watching this thread over the last few days.
>> People are
>> >> > debating the safety of the stock maps with 02 faulty but
>> no one has
>> >> > mentioned that the engine in question is no longer
>> stock. Marcello
>> >> > mentioned that his friend "only made a few changes"
>> >> (eye-roll) meaning
>> >> > to me that probably the friend put together a parts
>> combination far
>> >> > from stock. Most likely higher compression and a more
>> >> aggressive cam.
>> >> > Those two possibilities alone probably would make the stock maps
>> >> > irrelevant or at least "not safe".
>> >> > Considering how much $$ most people typically throw at a
>> motor when
>> >> > they "make a few changes" I would proceed slowly and work
>> >> to develop new maps.
>> >> > I
>> >> > think Marcello realizes this and hopes his friend will keep
>> >> his foot
>> >> > out of it until he gets home to work at the problem logically.
>> >> >
>> >> > My experience is with Ford EEC's. I know when I "made a
>> >> few changes"
>> >> > the EEC was totally confused because my parts changes
>> had taken the
>> >> > range of operation well beyond the stock limits of compensation.
>> >> >
>> >> > Good discussion.
>> >> >
>> >> > Dan Nicoson
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> >> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
>> >> >> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
>> >> >> Behalf Of Steve Ravet
>> >> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 12:36 PM
>> >> >> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> >> >> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I was going to refer to the EFI testbench that Bruce built. My
>> >> >> recollection is that he used a 555 type circuit to
>> generate an O2
>> >> >> signal. There's not really any mention of it in the
>> >> article, but I'm
>> >> >> sure the details are in the archive. I think for some
>> >> computers this
>> >> >> worked OK, for others that expected to see more
>> >> correlation between
>> >> >> pulsewidth and O2, it didn't. Anyway, go to the gmecm page,
>> >> >> projects, then ECM testbench for the ascii version of the
>> >> article.
>> >> >> The MS word version is probably gone for good.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> --steve
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ________________________________
>> >> >>
>> >> >> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org
>> >> >> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bret
>> Levandowski
>> >> >> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 11:16 AM
>> >> >> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> >> >> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Making a fake O2
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Actually, it is not 'impossible to fool an ECU with a
>> >> constant or
>> >> >> switching voltage source'. There are two companies I know
>> >> of (in the
>> >> >> states) that have developed a plug-in replacement for the
>> >> O2 sensor
>> >> >> on numerous vehicles (mostly OBD II) that generates a
>> >> 'proper' signal.
>> >> >> These are used in instances where inj size was increased
>> >> or a turbo
>> >> >> or screw-charger was installed. Some also did require a
>> >> flash of the ecu.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> >> Diy_efi mailing list
>> >> >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> >> >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > Diy_efi mailing list
>> >> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> >> > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Diy_efi mailing list
>> >> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>> >>
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Diy_efi mailing list
>> >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> >http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>
>> Regards from
>>
>>
>> Mike Massen
>> Perth, Western Australia
>> VL Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt !
>> http://niche.iinet.net.au
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Diy_efi mailing list
>> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Regards from
Mike Massen
Perth, Western Australia
VL Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt !
http://niche.iinet.net.au
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
End of Diy_efi Digest, Vol 4, Issue 4
*************************************
More information about the Diy_efi
mailing list