Talking with BUA in 8192?

[Craig Moates]

Bruce,

Exactly. I'd prefer to use the 89 code ultimately. I was hoping to get my
hands dirty with the BUA since it is so thoroughly commented. I may be out
of luck though, right? Some of the early '165s (perhaps BUA included here)
had only 160bd. If no one can suggest the likelihood of success here, I'll
step off the BUA as a primary and just use it as an extrapolable reference
code as I had previously intended.

Thanks again & again,
-Craig

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bruce Plecan" <nacelp at bright.net>
To: <gmecm at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu>
Sent: Sunday, November 28, 1999 1:55 PM
Subject: Re: Talking with BUA in 8192?


>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Craig Moates <craigmoates at home.com>
> Subject: Talking with BUA in 8192?
>
> I'm not sure just because it's a 165 it will talk the 8192.  I recall with
> my OTC scanner it would just sometimes do like a freeze frame.
>   Why not work with the later code, ie MY89?.  Or are you hand editing
using
> the ecmguy HAC?.  I'm sure the ARAP table starting points have been posted
> for the main timing/fuel/rad fans...
> Grumpy
>
>
>
>
> | Anyone have insight on how to talk with BUA in 8192? It doesn't appear
to
> be
> | responding to typical '165 queries such as H80,56,01,29. Didn't know if
> | inspection of the code might yield more info. I'd like to start some
> tuning
> | with it as a baseline, but that's hopeless without communication. Any
> | insight appreciated.
> |
> | -Craig
> |
>