[Gmecm] TPS for diesel

[burntkat at sc.rr.com]

I agree they're OT, and I did try to take it offlist after all...

Sure the computer gets more performance out of the motor-- but with 
the current state of OBD3 <come on-- the vehicle won't run because the 
battery's cold/warm, etc?> and where these vehicles will be taken, I'd 
rather not have a computer running the propulsion systems' show.

I think Land Rover is about to learn the same lesson when the LR3 ends 
up getting taken on expedition somewhere. They've already had a ton of 
problems with the previous model's electronically controlled air 
suspension, can't wait to see the fun that ensuse when some unlucky 
person is stuck in the middle of the Sahara with a vehicle that won't 
run because the fuel cap isn't sealing completely. 

Sure, ECMs have done a lot for cars- but there's some things that 
don't need to be messed with. We're well into "feature bloat" in 
modern vehicles, and it's just not necessary. 

----- Original Message -----
From: Jay Vessels <jay at vessels-clan.com>
Date: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:50 am
Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TPS for diesel

> Hi there!
> 
> > Why not buy new? Noone makes what I want-- midsize SUV with 
> diesel 
> > engine, solid axles, no computer controls. 
> 
> Anyone else think the "no computer controls" thread is off-topic 
> on a GM 
> ECM mailing list?
> 
> Seems to me that electronic engine management (like the diesels in 
> new 
> fullsize trucks) really does the diesel a favor.  I don't know 
> much 
> about the EFI diesel engines, but I can't see it being a backwards 
> step.
> So, has anyone DIY hacked the modern GM diesel controller?  The 
> aftermarket makes "programmers" for them but that's no fun...
> 
> Jay Vessels
> 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI
> 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending)
> _______________________________________________
> Gmecm mailing list
> Gmecm at diy-efi.org
> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm
>