MEMCAL Stuff

[Bruce Plecan]

----- Original Message -----
From: Andrew K. Mattei <amattei at mindspring.com>
To: <gmecm at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 1999 10:00 AM
Subject: Re: MEMCAL Stuff

I'd suggest finding out first if there is a VATS for sure.  Does the key
have a "resistor" built in?.  If so then get a wiring diagram and see if the
is a remote module for the VATS, and if it is a starter interupt, vs ecm
controlled injector disable.  Then armed with that info figure things out..
Like on some gm's a scotch lock connector will defeat a VATS for like 25
cents.

At one time I cornered the market on aftermarket chips for the 84 LG4
engine.
All manufacturers.  The only differences were when I changed the thermostat,
and then it didn't matter what brand of chip there was in it.  It was the
enrichment due to the operating temp that made the difference.

Then what got me doing EFI chips was being ripped off, by another clown..
Two rewrites were possible at $25 after spending $300.   First rewrite was
to get a chip for an automatic, rather than a manual tranny.  He said I told
him my car was a manual, ya right, I Forgot what tranny was in my
car,,,,,,,,,,
Bruce


> "David A. Cooley" wrote:
> > Track times before the ADS chip and after the ADS chip (same day at the
> > track) were within  .1 sec of each other with identical MPH.
> Good to know (in this one and only instance) that their chip is not far
> off from the stock tuning. <G> Would suck if you bought it for
> performance, though... That's what I was thinking that I'd heard about
> them as well... Not much happenin' inside...
> "Guenther,Max" wrote:
> > Try searching the archives with vats as a subject word.  There is a post
> > on a 91 iroc L98(730 ECM), but then again that may not help.
> Yes, I found that one (did a search on VATS, and after an hour of back
> and forth, did a search on "VATS and Camaro") <G>. Since this car is
> non-TPI, uses a 746 ECM (which I haven't found much info on, other than
> 13 posts in the DIY-EFI archive, and none of those were "technical"
> towards this ECM specifically), info is a bit sparse on it... Reading a
> bunch of those posts, seems that GM likes to move their flags around -
> so, one address in one MEMCAL probably won't apply to another MEMCAL...
> I'd hate to burn this guy a new EPROM and get it wrong (he's not local
> to me - he'd have to mail it here, I'd mail it back, etc...).
> Thanks!
> -Andrew