From tsokorai at xperts.cl Tue Aug 1 10:23:34 2006 From: tsokorai at xperts.cl (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 11:23:34 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Which ecm to use In-Reply-To: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> References: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl> On Sunday 30 July 2006 09:26, William Lucke wrote: > KA or SR engine? While the 730 is the obvious choice, which code to use > might depend on what kind of triggering you have. The $8f code from a > Syclone is for a distributor and the $58 code from a Grand Prix is for DIS. Backwards :) , the $58 is Sy-Ty, distributor, and the $8F is TGP, DIS. BTW, the DIS v/s Distributor triggering issue is not a problem, read Shannen Durphey's post that Steve Ravet forwarded to the list on Feb.23 this year. With that posting and help from Bruce Plecan, I'm running DIS on a 1982 I6 BMW engine with $8D code (from a V8 'vette, originally with distributor). -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Thu Aug 3 03:22:01 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 09:22:01 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Injector pins References: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl> Message-ID: <11a801c6b6d5$e98cdcd0$020101c0@gandalf> I've been wondering about injector connections - i.e. why there are two, for each bank of injectors. Can anybody explain? (The background to this is I'm trying to understand if it's possible for _only_ one pin to change when different software is used - as is suggested by the 749-730 mapping on thirdgen.org.) I've looked at Ludis' schematic, but my electronics knowledge is weak, so it doesn't really help. >From looking at $8D and $58 code, it _looks_ like memory location $3FD0 is a PWM output which is used to turn on (all) the injectors in both codes. Can anyone confirm? If this is the case, then I would expect the $58 code to use exactly the same injector pins as $8D does on 727 hardware. Robin From b.shaw at comcast.net Thu Aug 3 08:03:06 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast) Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 09:03:06 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Injector pins In-Reply-To: <11a801c6b6d5$e98cdcd0$020101c0@gandalf> References: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl> <11a801c6b6d5$e98cdcd0$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <44D1F40A.7040901@comcast.net> To handle the current. The '749 has two pins for one bank but only one pin for the other bank. When I retrofitted the injector drivers in the '749 to handle the 8 P&H injectors in my 928 I also commandeered an unused pin for the 2nd injector bank to help carry the current load. http://p-928.home.comcast.net/749mods.html 8 injectors @ 4 amps each running near full on (6500 rpm) is a LOT of current! hth, Bill Robin Handley wrote: > I've been wondering about injector connections - i.e. why there are two, for > each bank of injectors. Can anybody explain? (The background to this is I'm > trying to understand if it's possible for _only_ one pin to change when > different software is used - as is suggested by the 749-730 mapping on > thirdgen.org.) > > I've looked at Ludis' schematic, but my electronics knowledge is weak, so it > doesn't really help. > > >From looking at $8D and $58 code, it _looks_ like memory location $3FD0 is a > PWM output which is used to turn on (all) the injectors in both codes. Can > anyone confirm? If this is the case, then I would expect the $58 code to use > exactly the same injector pins as $8D does on 727 hardware. > > Robin > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From rgmecm at yahoo.com Thu Aug 3 09:37:05 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 07:37:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench Message-ID: <20060803143705.26410.qmail@web35914.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi guys, Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a source for one? I would like to put together a test bench for myself anyways, but obviously the more the merrier. Or if you guys have one already to go (gerber format), I can get a quote for a run of boards... Otherwise, I'd plan on building my own... all the inputs covered, rpm, tps, map, IAT, CTS, etc etc... Maybe an o2 simulator as well. Would be tailored to the 7730, but would work with most computers. Thoughts, comments, suggestions? --------------------------------- Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2?/min or less. From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Thu Aug 3 10:51:38 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 10:51:38 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > > Hi guys, > > Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a > source for one? I would like to put together a test bench > for myself anyways, but obviously the more the merrier. Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you probably already know about this, but those guys designed one some time ago and the plans may still be available. Bruce's original testbench is on the gmecm page but I don't think it used a PCB. --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From mmansur at hotmail.com Thu Aug 3 11:33:59 2006 From: mmansur at hotmail.com (Mark Mansur) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 09:33:59 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench References: Message-ID: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see him make some more. Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? -M ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ravet" To: Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > > Hi guys, > > Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a > source for one? I would like to put together a test bench > for myself anyways, but obviously the more the merrier. Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you probably already know about this, but those guys designed one some time ago and the plans may still be available. Bruce's original testbench is on the gmecm page but I don't think it used a PCB. --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From rgmecm at yahoo.com Thu Aug 3 11:48:19 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 09:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060803164819.30571.qmail@web35911.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I think I'd rather build something from the ground up, considering the costs (time) involved with fixing the apparent problems with the first batch... Although I wouldn't mind taking a look at his design to have a starting point. Ideally I'd like to see the cost get down to $100 with parts and board. How realistic that is is yet to be seen. I'm getting a preliminary budget together as we speak. Cross your fingers ;) Ryan Mark Mansur wrote: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see him make some more. Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? -M ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Ravet" To: Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > > Hi guys, > > Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a > source for one? I would like to put together a test bench > for myself anyways, but obviously the more the merrier. Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you probably already know about this, but those guys designed one some time ago and the plans may still be available. Bruce's original testbench is on the gmecm page but I don't think it used a PCB. --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it out. From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Thu Aug 3 13:20:28 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 19:20:28 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Injector pins References: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl><11a801c6b6d5$e98cdcd0$020101c0@gandalf> <44D1F40A.7040901@comcast.net> Message-ID: <122f01c6b729$82914b20$020101c0@gandalf> Thanks Bill. Why does the 749 have 2 pins for one bank and 1 for the other!? I only need to run 4 high impedance injectors, so plan to just use one ECM pin for the -ve side of all the injectors, and another ECM pin for the ground connection. I'm trying to be sure which pins to use on a 727 when running $58 code. :-) BTW: Should the ECM pin to ground connect to the battery -ve terminal or the engine? Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill - Comcast" To: Sent: 03 August 2006 14:03 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Injector pins > To handle the current. The '749 has two pins for one bank but only one > pin for the other bank. When I retrofitted the injector drivers in the > '749 to handle the 8 P&H injectors in my 928 I also commandeered an > unused pin for the 2nd injector bank to help carry the current load. > http://p-928.home.comcast.net/749mods.html > > 8 injectors @ 4 amps each running near full on (6500 rpm) is a LOT of > current! > > hth, > > Bill From clare at snyder.on.ca Thu Aug 3 20:11:40 2006 From: clare at snyder.on.ca (Clare Snyder) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 21:11:40 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] (no subject) Message-ID: <000c01c6b762$f11aa0d0$6901a8c0@snyderxp> Anyone out there have a good bin for a 1 ton 1995 GMS van, "K" Vin, L05 350 TBI, code BNKM 16213479? I need more power out of this van. Someone who can burn it to a chip would be even better. In Canada? Better yet. I have a spare calpac and chip. Anyone who can help, please reply both to the list and directly, please. Thanks. From rawardsr at ameritech.net Thu Aug 3 20:38:43 2006 From: rawardsr at ameritech.net (rawardsr) Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 21:38:43 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <20060803164819.30571.qmail@web35911.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060803164819.30571.qmail@web35911.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44D2A523.2000500@ameritech.net> What apparent problems? First I've heard of any problems. Bruce Plecan has three of these since day one and is a good freind. Ain't said word one of any issues he has found.. And trust me, he'd tell me. Bob Ryan Hess wrote: > I think I'd rather build something from the ground up, considering the costs (time) involved with fixing the apparent problems with the first batch... Although I wouldn't mind taking a look at his design to have a starting point. Ideally I'd like to see the cost get down to $100 with parts and board. How realistic that is is yet to be seen. I'm getting a preliminary budget together as we speak. Cross your fingers ;) > > Ryan > > Mark Mansur wrote: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice > piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see him make some more. > Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? > > -M > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Ravet" > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM > Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org >>[mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess >>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM >>To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >> >>Hi guys, >> >>Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a >>source for one? I would like to put together a test bench >>for myself anyways, but obviously the more the merrier. > > > Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you probably already know > about this, but those guys designed one some time ago and the plans may > still be available. Bruce's original testbench is on the gmecm page but > I don't think it used a PCB. > > --steve > > > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the > contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the > information in any medium. Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it out. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From rgmecm at yahoo.com Thu Aug 3 20:55:04 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 18:55:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <44D2A523.2000500@ameritech.net> Message-ID: <20060804015504.32784.qmail@web35901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> 1) Parts are expensive. $75 for a few pots and some 555's? 2) I've heard there is crosstalk between the VSS and RPM outputs rawardsr wrote: What apparent problems? First I've heard of any problems. Bruce Plecan has three of these since day one and is a good freind. Ain't said word one of any issues he has found.. And trust me, he'd tell me. Bob Ryan Hess wrote: > I think I'd rather build something from the ground up, considering the costs (time) involved with fixing the apparent problems with the first batch... Although I wouldn't mind taking a look at his design to have a starting point. Ideally I'd like to see the cost get down to $100 with parts and board. How realistic that is is yet to be seen. I'm getting a preliminary budget together as we speak. Cross your fingers ;) > > Ryan > > Mark Mansur wrote: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice > piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see him make some more. > Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? > > -M > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Ravet" > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM > Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org >>[mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess >>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM >>To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >> >>Hi guys, >> >>Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a >>source for one? I would like to put together a test bench >>for myself anyways, but obviously the more the merrier. > > > Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you probably already know > about this, but those guys designed one some time ago and the plans may > still be available. Bruce's original testbench is on the gmecm page but > I don't think it used a PCB. > > --steve > > > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the > contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the > information in any medium. Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it out. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. From rawardsr at ameritech.net Thu Aug 3 21:04:57 2006 From: rawardsr at ameritech.net (rawardsr) Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:04:57 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <20060804015504.32784.qmail@web35901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060804015504.32784.qmail@web35901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44D2AB49.2020607@ameritech.net> Apparantly you haven't looked at how much pots, connectors, and switches cost. Good luck assembling all the bits (quality stuff) for less. Let alone the cost for a low production board run.. hehe. First I've heard about that, and I'd look to the code first. Not is all that is seems. Bob Ryan Hess wrote: > 1) Parts are expensive. $75 for a few pots and some 555's? > > 2) I've heard there is crosstalk between the VSS and RPM outputs > > > > rawardsr wrote: What apparent problems? First I've heard of any problems. Bruce > Plecan has three of these since day one and is a good freind. Ain't > said word one of any issues he has found.. And trust me, he'd tell me. Bob > > Ryan Hess wrote: > >>I think I'd rather build something from the ground up, considering the costs (time) involved with fixing the apparent problems with the first batch... Although I wouldn't mind taking a look at his design to have a starting point. Ideally I'd like to see the cost get down to $100 with parts and board. How realistic that is is yet to be seen. I'm getting a preliminary budget together as we speak. Cross your fingers ;) >> >>Ryan >> >>Mark Mansur wrote: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice >>piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see him make some more. >>Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? >> >>-M >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Steve Ravet" >>To: >>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM >>Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >> >> >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org >>>[mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess >>>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM >>>To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >>>Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >>> >>>Hi guys, >>> >>>Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a >>>source for one? I would like to put together a test bench >>>for myself anyways, but obviously the more the merrier. >> >> >>Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you probably already know >>about this, but those guys designed one some time ago and the plans may >>still be available. Bruce's original testbench is on the gmecm page but >>I don't think it used a PCB. >> >>--steve >> >> >>-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are >>confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended >>recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the >>contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the >>information in any medium. Thank you. >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >>--------------------------------- >>See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it out. >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From b.shaw at comcast.net Thu Aug 3 21:07:46 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast) Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 22:07:46 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Injector pins In-Reply-To: <122f01c6b729$82914b20$020101c0@gandalf> References: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl><11a801c6b6d5$e98cdcd0$020101c0@gandalf> <44D1F40A.7040901@comcast.net> <122f01c6b729$82914b20$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <44D2ABF2.40104@comcast.net> The '749 had 2 applications originally, one TBI application and one TPI application. The TBI app used 2 injectors, one per driver. The TPI app used 4 injectors on one driver. The current for the 4 injectors was split across 2 pins. (from memory, so don't shoot me if some details aren't exactly right! :-) Bill Robin Handley wrote: > Thanks Bill. > > Why does the 749 have 2 pins for one bank and 1 for the other!? > > I only need to run 4 high impedance injectors, so plan to just use one ECM > pin for the -ve side of all the injectors, and another ECM pin for the > ground connection. I'm trying to be sure which pins to use on a 727 when > running $58 code. :-) > > BTW: Should the ECM pin to ground connect to the battery -ve terminal or the > engine? > > Robin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill - Comcast" > To: > Sent: 03 August 2006 14:03 > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Injector pins > > > >> To handle the current. The '749 has two pins for one bank but only one >> pin for the other bank. When I retrofitted the injector drivers in the >> '749 to handle the 8 P&H injectors in my 928 I also commandeered an >> unused pin for the 2nd injector bank to help carry the current load. >> http://p-928.home.comcast.net/749mods.html >> >> 8 injectors @ 4 amps each running near full on (6500 rpm) is a LOT of >> current! >> >> hth, >> >> Bill >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From bcroe at juno.com Thu Aug 3 22:04:31 2006 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 22:04:31 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench Message-ID: <20060803.221304.352.2.bcroe@juno.com> I've been running some non GM stuff on the bench, just some wired up signal generators, displays, and access points for your scope, etc. I used a circle of 8 LEDs to show action of the idle air motor, display would rotate one way or the other. I would be interested in how to approach an O2 sensor input, since its part of a loop. You can't just set it rich and let unending adjustments occur. Maybe a short pulse off S whenever you rock a switch off center? Bruce Roe 3 Aug 2006 Ryan Hess writes: > Hi guys, > > Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a source for > one? I would like to put together a test bench for myself anyways, > but obviously the more the merrier. > > Or if you guys have one already to go (gerber format), I can get a > quote for a run of boards... > > Otherwise, I'd plan on building my own... all the inputs covered, > rpm, tps, map, IAT, CTS, etc etc... Maybe an o2 simulator as well. > Would be tailored to the 7730, but would work with most computers. > > Thoughts, comments, suggestions? From aphelion79 at cox.net Thu Aug 3 23:13:34 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 23:13:34 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? In-Reply-To: <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl> References: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl> Message-ID: <44D2C96E.5020203@cox.net> Hey, remember me? The newbie with the 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke and the CJ7? Well anyway, I'm finally able to start working on my Heep again... and am curious as to how to set the timing on this thing... Now, all vehicles have some sort of timing advance... on carburated engines (just spilling out how I understand it... correct me if I'm wrong with anything) you unplug the vacuum advance hose and plug the port as to not cause any vacuum leaks... and set the timing... on a TBI'ed vehicle... there is a special wire that has an in-line coupler that allows you do disconnect the signal sent to the Distributor for the electronic advance... unplug that, set timing.. yadda yadda But here's my problem: On a 88 Chevy S-10 Pickup, "there is a black/red wire under the passenger's side floorboard that you can disconnect and then set the timing"... well... I obviously do NOT have an S-10... nor any wires inside of the firewall as I just spliced most of the wires off that went to the fusebox... and I've followed diagrams of the ECU pins and could not find any mention of this special wire... However... on GM-ECM I found a schematic for the 7747 ECM (ftp://ftp.diy-efi.org/pub/gmecm/manuals/1227747/747ecm6.jpg) -which is NOT the ECM I have... (if this information is current, got this from an old post I made a while back on a different forum:) mine is: SVC# 16198445 Barcode: 866647W643273117 Chip Inside: ACKD 4890 The previous link to the 7747 indicates the TAN/BLK wire right off the distributor controls the timing bypass... now I've disassembled my wonderfuly sexy wiring loom and traced all 4 wires that come off of the distributor...and each one of them goes DIRECTLY into the ECM... none have any splices in them as well or any disconnects in-line... Would splicing into the wire, and creating my own quick connect/disconnect in-line plug right at the 4-pin connector off the distributor be a good way to do this or am I missing something? I could simply "just try it" but I wanted to run this by you all first... you guys seem to know more about this stuff than any of us on JeepForum Thanks again... !! By the way... the Jeep runs... haven't started it up in 2 months and it fired right up... however it idles a bit rough and doesn't have very much power at all... so I figured timing would be the issue! I previously set the timing by luck by putting it at top dead center... unplugging the whole entire 4 pin connector off of the distributor -which doesn't allow the engine to run- and had a helper eyeball it to 0* and plugged it back in... Anyway, enough length on this... any other questions or things I should look at let me know! From rgmecm at yahoo.com Thu Aug 3 23:18:31 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 21:18:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <44D2AB49.2020607@ameritech.net> Message-ID: <20060804041831.27884.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> To the contrary, I have. Pots are $1.50, 12 position terminal blocks are $1.97. That's in quantities of one. If I buy enough for 10 boards, prices drop significantly. Boards will be easy to produce at $50ea. Is this Saturn5 by chance? I see some sarcastic jabs... Ryan rawardsr wrote: Apparantly you haven't looked at how much pots, connectors, and switches cost. Good luck assembling all the bits (quality stuff) for less. Let alone the cost for a low production board run.. hehe. First I've heard about that, and I'd look to the code first. Not is all that is seems. Bob Ryan Hess wrote: > 1) Parts are expensive. $75 for a few pots and some 555's? > > 2) I've heard there is crosstalk between the VSS and RPM outputs > > > > rawardsr wrote: What apparent problems? First I've heard of any problems. Bruce > Plecan has three of these since day one and is a good freind. Ain't > said word one of any issues he has found.. And trust me, he'd tell me. Bob > > Ryan Hess wrote: > >>I think I'd rather build something from the ground up, considering the costs (time) involved with fixing the apparent problems with the first batch... Although I wouldn't mind taking a look at his design to have a starting point. Ideally I'd like to see the cost get down to $100 with parts and board. How realistic that is is yet to be seen. I'm getting a preliminary budget together as we speak. Cross your fingers ;) >> >>Ryan >> >>Mark Mansur wrote: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice >>piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see him make some more. >>Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? >> >>-M >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >>From: "Steve Ravet" >>To: >>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM >>Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >> >> >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org >>>[mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess >>>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM >>>To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >>>Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >>> >>>Hi guys, >>> >>>Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a >>>source for one? I would like to put together a test bench >>>for myself anyways, but obviously the more the merrier. >> >> >>Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you probably already know >>about this, but those guys designed one some time ago and the plans may >>still be available. Bruce's original testbench is on the gmecm page but >>I don't think it used a PCB. >> >>--steve >> >> >>-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are >>confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended >>recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the >>contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the >>information in any medium. Thank you. >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >>--------------------------------- >>See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it out. >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. From rgmecm at yahoo.com Thu Aug 3 23:25:29 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2006 21:25:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <20060803.221304.352.2.bcroe@juno.com> Message-ID: <20060804042529.90012.qmail@web35901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Well, I was thinking about a set frequency 555, output 0-1V, and having a pot adjust the DC "carrier" to shift the signal off a center of 0.5V Ryan bcroe at juno.com wrote: I've been running some non GM stuff on the bench, just some wired up signal generators, displays, and access points for your scope, etc. I used a circle of 8 LEDs to show action of the idle air motor, display would rotate one way or the other. I would be interested in how to approach an O2 sensor input, since its part of a loop. You can't just set it rich and let unending adjustments occur. Maybe a short pulse off S whenever you rock a switch off center? Bruce Roe 3 Aug 2006 Ryan Hess writes: > Hi guys, > > Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a source for > one? I would like to put together a test bench for myself anyways, > but obviously the more the merrier. > > Or if you guys have one already to go (gerber format), I can get a > quote for a run of boards... > > Otherwise, I'd plan on building my own... all the inputs covered, > rpm, tps, map, IAT, CTS, etc etc... Maybe an o2 simulator as well. > Would be tailored to the 7730, but would work with most computers. > > Thoughts, comments, suggestions? _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. From davida1 at hiwaay.net Fri Aug 4 07:12:49 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 07:12:49 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? References: +ADw-44CCB38C.4090809+AEA-highspeedlink.net+AD4APA-200608011123.35684.tsokorai+AEA-xperts.cl+AD4- +ADw-44D2C96E.5020203+AEA-cox.net+AD4- Message-ID: <008a01c6b7bf$517d98e0$cacca5a6@yancey.com> Both my GM-ECM controlled cars have the +ACI-set-timing+ACI- connector you describe. It's simply a break in the +ACI-bypass+ACI- signal wire. Doing exactly what you said (making your own inline connector that can be disconnected) would be what you need to do. David ----- Original Message ----- From: +ACI-Aphelion79+ACI- +ADw-aphelion79+AEA-cox.net+AD4- To: +ADw-gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org+AD4- Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 11:13 PM Subject: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? +AD4- Hey, remember me? The newbie with the 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke and the CJ7? +AD4- Well anyway, I'm finally able to start working on my Heep again... and +AD4- am curious as to how to set the timing on this thing... +AD4- +AD4- Now, all vehicles have some sort of timing advance... on carburated +AD4- engines (just spilling out how I understand it... correct me if I'm +AD4- wrong with anything) you unplug the vacuum advance hose and plug the +AD4- port as to not cause any vacuum leaks... and set the timing... on a +AD4- TBI'ed vehicle... there is a special wire that has an in-line coupler +AD4- that allows you do disconnect the signal sent to the Distributor for the +AD4- electronic advance... unplug that, set timing.. yadda yadda +AD4- +AD4- But here's my problem: +AD4- On a 88 Chevy S-10 Pickup, +ACI-there is a black/red wire under the +AD4- passenger's side floorboard that you can disconnect and then set the +AD4- timing+ACI-... well... I obviously do NOT have an S-10... nor any wires +AD4- inside of the firewall as I just spliced most of the wires off that went +AD4- to the fusebox... and I've followed diagrams of the ECU pins and could +AD4- not find any mention of this special wire... However... on GM-ECM I +AD4- found a schematic for the 7747 ECM +AD4- +ADw-ftp://ftp.diy-efi.org/pub/gmecm/manuals/1227747/747ecm6.jpg+AD4- +AD4- (ftp://ftp.diy-efi.org/pub/gmecm/manuals/1227747/747ecm6.jpg) -which is +AD4- NOT the ECM I have... (if this information is current, got this from an +AD4- old post I made a while back on a different forum:) mine is: +AD4- +AD4- SVC+ACM- 16198445 +AD4- Barcode: +AD4- 866647W643273117 +AD4- Chip Inside: +AD4- ACKD 4890 +AD4- +AD4- The previous link to the 7747 indicates the TAN/BLK wire right off the +AD4- distributor controls the timing bypass... now I've disassembled my +AD4- wonderfuly sexy wiring loom and traced all 4 wires that come off of the +AD4- distributor...and each one of them goes DIRECTLY into the ECM... none +AD4- have any splices in them as well or any disconnects in-line... Would +AD4- splicing into the wire, and creating my own quick connect/disconnect +AD4- in-line plug right at the 4-pin connector off the distributor be a good +AD4- way to do this or am I missing something? I could simply +ACI-just try it+ACI- +AD4- but I wanted to run this by you all first... you guys seem to know more +AD4- about this stuff than any of us on JeepForum +AD4- +AD4- Thanks again... +ACEAIQ- By the way... the Jeep runs... haven't started it up +AD4- in 2 months and it fired right up... however it idles a bit rough and +AD4- doesn't have very much power at all... so I figured timing would be the +AD4- issue+ACE- I previously set the timing by luck by putting it at top dead +AD4- center... unplugging the whole entire 4 pin connector off of the +AD4- distributor -which doesn't allow the engine to run- and had a helper +AD4- eyeball it to 0+ACo- and plugged it back in... +AD4- +AD4- Anyway, enough length on this... any other questions or things I should +AD4- look at let me know+ACE- +AD4- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4- Gmecm mailing list +AD4- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4- From rawardsr at ameritech.net Fri Aug 4 08:05:15 2006 From: rawardsr at ameritech.net (rawardsr at ameritech.net) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 06:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <20060804041831.27884.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060804130515.24054.qmail@web35407.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Really? Vertical position, board mounted? What terminal block? C&K SPST switches are $3.00 min. Sure LED's, 555's, and resistors are cheap, even at Rat Shack's inflated prices, it is everything else that costs a bit. Hell, some of the instrumentation amplifiers I buy (INA101AM) run $25 each. Whats your time to develop a circuit and layout? You can get board costs down to ~$25 each provided your willing to spend $500 bucks and order 25 boards. Set up fees alone are over $200. Sure you can get the price down in volume. The bugger is when you go to sell one, all those that wanted one, evaporate into thin air. Yes it is. And yes they are.. Bob --- Ryan Hess wrote: > To the contrary, I have. Pots are $1.50, 12 > position terminal blocks are $1.97. That's in > quantities of one. If I buy enough for 10 boards, > prices drop significantly. Boards will be easy to > produce at $50ea. > > Is this Saturn5 by chance? I see some sarcastic > jabs... > > Ryan > > rawardsr wrote: Apparantly > you haven't looked at how much pots, connectors, and > switches > cost. Good luck assembling all the bits (quality > stuff) for less. > > Let alone the cost for a low production board run.. > hehe. > > First I've heard about that, and I'd look to the > code first. Not is all > that is seems. Bob > > Ryan Hess wrote: > > 1) Parts are expensive. $75 for a few pots and > some 555's? > > > > 2) I've heard there is crosstalk between the VSS > and RPM outputs > > > > > > > > rawardsr wrote: What apparent problems? First > I've heard of any problems. Bruce > > Plecan has three of these since day one and is a > good freind. Ain't > > said word one of any issues he has found.. And > trust me, he'd tell me. Bob > > > > Ryan Hess wrote: > > > >>I think I'd rather build something from the ground > up, considering the costs (time) involved with > fixing the apparent problems with the first batch... > Although I wouldn't mind taking a look at his > design to have a starting point. Ideally I'd like > to see the cost get down to $100 with parts and > board. How realistic that is is yet to be seen. > I'm getting a preliminary budget together as we > speak. Cross your fingers ;) > >> > >>Ryan > >> > >>Mark Mansur wrote: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any > more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice > >>piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see > him make some more. > >>Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? > >> > >>-M > >> > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: "Steve Ravet" > >>To: > >>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM > >>Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > >>>[mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of > Ryan Hess > >>>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM > >>>To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > >>>Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > >>> > >>>Hi guys, > >>> > >>>Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or > have a > >>>source for one? I would like to put together a > test bench > >>>for myself anyways, but obviously the more the > merrier. > >> > >> > >>Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you > probably already know > >>about this, but those guys designed one some time > ago and the plans may > >>still be available. Bruce's original testbench is > on the gmecm page but > >>I don't think it used a PCB. > >> > >>--steve > >> > >> > >>-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email > and any attachments are > >>confidential and may also be privileged. If you > are not the intended > >>recipient, please notify the sender immediately > and do not disclose the > >>contents to any other person, use it for any > purpose, or store or copy the > >>information in any medium. Thank you. > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Gmecm mailing list > >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org > >>Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Gmecm mailing list > >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org > >>Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >> > >> > >> > >>--------------------------------- > >>See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it > out. > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Gmecm mailing list > >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org > >>Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new > Yahoo! Mail Beta. > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low > PC-to-Phone call rates. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From aphelion79 at cox.net Fri Aug 4 08:17:23 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 08:17:23 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? In-Reply-To: <008a01c6b7bf$517d98e0$cacca5a6@yancey.com> References: +ADw-44CCB38C.4090809+AEA-highspeedlink.net+AD4APA-200608011123.35684.tsokorai+AEA-xperts.cl+AD4- +ADw-44D2C96E.5020203+AEA-cox.net+AD4- <008a01c6b7bf$517d98e0$cacca5a6@yancey.com> Message-ID: <44D348E3.8010805@cox.net> Thanks... however, are all the GM-ECMs similar in their wire colors on the distributor? On mine the four wires are the same colors... but do they do the same things as the diagram for the 7747 indicates? Thanks again to all on this list! -Matt David Allen wrote: > Both my GM-ECM controlled cars have the "set-timing" connector you describe. It's simply a break in the "bypass" signal wire. Doing exactly what you said (making your own inline connector that can be disconnected) would be what you need to do. > David > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Aphelion79" > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 11:13 PM > Subject: [Gmecm] How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? > > > >> Hey, remember me? The newbie with the 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke and the CJ7? >> Well anyway, I'm finally able to start working on my Heep again... and >> am curious as to how to set the timing on this thing... >> >> Now, all vehicles have some sort of timing advance... on carburated >> engines (just spilling out how I understand it... correct me if I'm >> wrong with anything) you unplug the vacuum advance hose and plug the >> port as to not cause any vacuum leaks... and set the timing... on a >> TBI'ed vehicle... there is a special wire that has an in-line coupler >> that allows you do disconnect the signal sent to the Distributor for the >> electronic advance... unplug that, set timing.. yadda yadda >> >> But here's my problem: >> On a 88 Chevy S-10 Pickup, "there is a black/red wire under the >> passenger's side floorboard that you can disconnect and then set the >> timing"... well... I obviously do NOT have an S-10... nor any wires >> inside of the firewall as I just spliced most of the wires off that went >> to the fusebox... and I've followed diagrams of the ECU pins and could >> not find any mention of this special wire... However... on GM-ECM I >> found a schematic for the 7747 ECM >> >> (ftp://ftp.diy-efi.org/pub/gmecm/manuals/1227747/747ecm6.jpg) -which is >> NOT the ECM I have... (if this information is current, got this from an >> old post I made a while back on a different forum:) mine is: >> >> SVC+ACM- 16198445 >> Barcode: >> 866647W643273117 >> Chip Inside: >> ACKD 4890 >> >> The previous link to the 7747 indicates the TAN/BLK wire right off the >> distributor controls the timing bypass... now I've disassembled my >> wonderfuly sexy wiring loom and traced all 4 wires that come off of the >> distributor...and each one of them goes DIRECTLY into the ECM... none >> have any splices in them as well or any disconnects in-line... Would >> splicing into the wire, and creating my own quick connect/disconnect >> in-line plug right at the 4-pin connector off the distributor be a good >> way to do this or am I missing something? I could simply "just try it" >> but I wanted to run this by you all first... you guys seem to know more >> about this stuff than any of us on JeepForum >> >> Thanks again... !! By the way... the Jeep runs... haven't started it up >> in 2 months and it fired right up... however it idles a bit rough and >> doesn't have very much power at all... so I figured timing would be the >> issue! I previously set the timing by luck by putting it at top dead >> center... unplugging the whole entire 4 pin connector off of the >> distributor -which doesn't allow the engine to run- and had a helper >> eyeball it to 0+ACo- and plugged it back in... >> >> Anyway, enough length on this... any other questions or things I should >> look at let me know! >> +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From andrewsharyn at yahoo.com Fri Aug 4 08:22:16 2006 From: andrewsharyn at yahoo.com (Andrew Gibson) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 06:22:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Re: How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? Message-ID: <20060804132216.83154.qmail@web60822.mail.yahoo.com> You should be able to splice a connector into the tan with black wire. This is the est bypass which changes the module over for ecm control. I would reccomend solder and heat shrink and a weatherpack connector if doing it in the engine compartment. Other than that put it wherever you find convenient. Good to know it runs! --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. From aphelion79 at cox.net Fri Aug 4 08:40:17 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 08:40:17 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? In-Reply-To: <20060804132216.83154.qmail@web60822.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060804132216.83154.qmail@web60822.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44D34E41.5070205@cox.net> Yeah, finally it runs :) I'll keep you all updated & will probably perform the surgery next Wednesday! Andrew Gibson wrote: > You should be able to splice a connector into the tan with black wire. This is the est bypass which changes the module over for ecm control. I would reccomend solder and heat shrink and a weatherpack connector if doing it in the engine compartment. Other than that put it wherever you find convenient. Good to know it runs! > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From lwester at lincsat.com Fri Aug 4 09:09:52 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 08:09:52 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI Message-ID: <002701c6b7cf$af2ef000$4250050a@WESTER2> Just a heads up for you guys... Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 with 8 injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that the client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it can't be done. Anyway...he's presently blowing away LS1 Camaros with this combo at the track...and everyone is looking for the supercharger or the Nitrous. Best part is that he's also getting 26 MPG ! Lyndon ; ) Westers Garage 1-888-937-8371 403-377-CARS From mrcad472 at iowatelecom.net Fri Aug 4 09:26:40 2006 From: mrcad472 at iowatelecom.net (Scott Pearson) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 09:26:40 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI References: <002701c6b7cf$af2ef000$4250050a@WESTER2> Message-ID: <066401c6b7d2$031f83d0$6501a8c0@DELL3G> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Programmer" > Just a heads up for you guys... > > Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 with > 8 injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that the > client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it can't > be done. Hot Rod Magazine is pretty much a subscribed sales catalog. If you don't have their advertiser's parts, it won't make the rag. Maybe some salvage yards should start advertising in there... Scott From squelch at ix.netcom.com Fri Aug 4 09:38:23 2006 From: squelch at ix.netcom.com (squelch at ix.netcom.com) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 09:38:23 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench Message-ID: <26696302.1154702303582.JavaMail.root@elwamui-darkeyed.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I've got to throw my $0.02 in here.. I found out late about the ECM test bench boards made by Saturn5 and got one of the few left from the first run.. Built it using the spec parts and it works great, upgraded some switches to locking lever ones to prevent accidental turn offs, I'm not even using it on the ECM it was designed for, and I'm using it it with a dual coil pack/ignition module setup. I have a dedicated PC with Freescan and tuner pro wired up with an ERPOM emulator right next to the o'scope.. This emulator is one the best bench tools I've ever used for tuning/code changes Works great... So great in fact that when a second run of boards was done I purchased another one, it's now mounted into a pelican case with connectors for the ECM and some switches to swap between the board generated signals, and actual sensors. (I do track support and engine tuning for a race team, comes in handy to test sensors and calibration changes) This along with a IBM T-20 laptop an EPROM burner, and a solid state logger bolted into the race car connected to the ALDL stream has made my tuning at the track or on a dyno a breeze... Logical and neat terminal connections, fused power, clean design... Cross talk on the RPM and VSS?? I haven't seen it... and I've done a ton of stuff with interfacing different VSS sensors and playing with the RPM signals to deal with the dual coil ignition pack. There is a difference between "inexpensive" and "cheap" Personally I think the original was inexpensive, and was worth the money... Could it be made "cheaper"? perhaps.. If another one was offered. would I buy it? possibly.. since I'd like to dedicate another one for an upcoming project.. If saturn5 made more of the his original boards.. I buy two more... in a heart beat.. or perhaps with saturn5's permission he would let me do a run of boards for myself..... John Welch PS: sorry if it came off as a rant.. back to lurking... -----Original Message----- >From: rawardsr at ameritech.net >Sent: Aug 4, 2006 8:05 AM >To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > >Really? Vertical position, board mounted? What >terminal block? C&K SPST switches are $3.00 min. > >Sure LED's, 555's, and resistors are cheap, even at >Rat Shack's inflated prices, it is everything else >that costs a bit. Hell, some of the instrumentation >amplifiers I buy (INA101AM) run $25 each. > >Whats your time to develop a circuit and layout? > >You can get board costs down to ~$25 each provided >your willing to spend $500 bucks and order 25 boards. >Set up fees alone are over $200. > >Sure you can get the price down in volume. The bugger >is when you go to sell one, all those that wanted one, >evaporate into thin air. > >Yes it is. And yes they are.. Bob > >--- Ryan Hess wrote: > >> To the contrary, I have. Pots are $1.50, 12 >> position terminal blocks are $1.97. That's in >> quantities of one. If I buy enough for 10 boards, >> prices drop significantly. Boards will be easy to >> produce at $50ea. >> >> Is this Saturn5 by chance? I see some sarcastic >> jabs... >> >> Ryan >> >> rawardsr wrote: Apparantly >> you haven't looked at how much pots, connectors, and >> switches >> cost. Good luck assembling all the bits (quality >> stuff) for less. >> >> Let alone the cost for a low production board run.. >> hehe. >> >> First I've heard about that, and I'd look to the >> code first. Not is all >> that is seems. Bob >> >> Ryan Hess wrote: >> > 1) Parts are expensive. $75 for a few pots and >> some 555's? >> > >> > 2) I've heard there is crosstalk between the VSS >> and RPM outputs >> > >> > >> > >> > rawardsr wrote: What apparent problems? First >> I've heard of any problems. Bruce >> > Plecan has three of these since day one and is a >> good freind. Ain't >> > said word one of any issues he has found.. And >> trust me, he'd tell me. Bob >> > >> > Ryan Hess wrote: >> > >> >>I think I'd rather build something from the ground >> up, considering the costs (time) involved with >> fixing the apparent problems with the first batch... >> Although I wouldn't mind taking a look at his >> design to have a starting point. Ideally I'd like >> to see the cost get down to $100 with parts and >> board. How realistic that is is yet to be seen. >> I'm getting a preliminary budget together as we >> speak. Cross your fingers ;) >> >> >> >>Ryan >> >> >> >>Mark Mansur wrote: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any >> more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice >> >>piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see >> him make some more. >> >>Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? >> >> >> >>-M >> >> >> >> >> >>----- Original Message ----- >> >>From: "Steve Ravet" >> >>To: >> >>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM >> >>Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>>-----Original Message----- >> >>>From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org >> >>>[mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of >> Ryan Hess >> >>>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM >> >>>To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >> >>>Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >> >>> >> >>>Hi guys, >> >>> >> >>>Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or >> have a >> >>>source for one? I would like to put together a >> test bench >> >>>for myself anyways, but obviously the more the >> merrier. >> >> >> >> >> >>Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you >> probably already know >> >>about this, but those guys designed one some time >> ago and the plans may >> >>still be available. Bruce's original testbench is >> on the gmecm page but >> >>I don't think it used a PCB. >> >> >> >>--steve >> >> >> >> >> >>-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email >> and any attachments are >> >>confidential and may also be privileged. If you >> are not the intended >> >>recipient, please notify the sender immediately >> and do not disclose the >> >>contents to any other person, use it for any >> purpose, or store or copy the >> >>information in any medium. Thank you. >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >>Gmecm mailing list >> >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> >>Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >>Gmecm mailing list >> >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> >>Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>--------------------------------- >> >>See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it >> out. >> >>_______________________________________________ >> >>Gmecm mailing list >> >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> >>Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Gmecm mailing list >> > Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> > Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > >> > >> > >> > --------------------------------- >> > Do you Yahoo!? >> > Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new >> Yahoo! Mail Beta. >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Gmecm mailing list >> > Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> > Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >> --------------------------------- >> How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low >> PC-to-Phone call rates. >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From Joel.Eck at hp.com Fri Aug 4 09:44:54 2006 From: Joel.Eck at hp.com (Eck, Joel (GCC-ISS Escalations)) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 09:44:54 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI In-Reply-To: <20060804143625.BBA0C1CCFD1@ccerelrim01.cce.hp.com> Message-ID: <54D33DF96D82FC4799283C875B2438530284C9C3@cceexc13.americas.cpqcorp.net> Question: '7747 with 8 injectors... Using one injector per cylinder, similar to the edelbrock conversion? Just trying to make sure I understand. Got pics? Joel Message: 7 Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 08:09:52 -0600 From: "Programmer" Subject: To: Message-ID: <002701c6b7cf$af2ef000$4250050a at WESTER2> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Just a heads up for you guys... Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 with 8 injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that the client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it can't be done. Anyway...he's presently blowing away LS1 Camaros with this combo at the track...and everyone is looking for the supercharger or the Nitrous. Best part is that he's also getting 26 MPG ! Lyndon ; ) Westers Garage 1-888-937-8371 403-377-CARS From lwester at lincsat.com Fri Aug 4 09:46:31 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 08:46:31 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI References: <002701c6b7cf$af2ef000$4250050a@WESTER2> <066401c6b7d2$031f83d0$6501a8c0@DELL3G> Message-ID: <002e01c6b7d4$cc4bfe80$4250050a@WESTER2> No kidding ! Did you guys pow--wow this year or.... ? Need to take Bruce for a ride in a tuned SSR ! Lyndon. ; ) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Pearson" To: Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 8:26 AM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] High CR TBI > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Programmer" > >> Just a heads up for you guys... >> >> Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 with >> 8 injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that >> the client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it >> can't be done. > > Hot Rod Magazine is pretty much a subscribed sales catalog. If you don't > have their advertiser's parts, it won't make the rag. > > Maybe some salvage yards should start advertising in there... > > Scott > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From rgmecm at yahoo.com Fri Aug 4 09:52:53 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 07:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <20060804130515.24054.qmail@web35407.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060804145253.37521.qmail@web35913.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Yep. This is why it's important to shop around before having a board laid out. 10k pots - digikey part #CT2265-ND - $1.51 12 position terminal block - DK #27-1587-ND - $1.97 $3 for SPST switches is ludicrous. Just a quick search found these board mount ones for $0.73 (#SW148-ND). When you're buying between 4 and 10 of these various parts, every dollar you save really starts to add up. I'm guessing you were spending close to $5-6 for those terminal blocks? maybe $3 for pots? I can see how you got to $75 in parts. I can get a circuit and layout done in a week or two. I hear you about the people disappearing. I've lived through that with some other things I've sold. Everyone's interested until it's time to pay up. Ryan rawardsr at ameritech.net wrote: Really? Vertical position, board mounted? What terminal block? C&K SPST switches are $3.00 min. Sure LED's, 555's, and resistors are cheap, even at Rat Shack's inflated prices, it is everything else that costs a bit. Hell, some of the instrumentation amplifiers I buy (INA101AM) run $25 each. Whats your time to develop a circuit and layout? You can get board costs down to ~$25 each provided your willing to spend $500 bucks and order 25 boards. Set up fees alone are over $200. Sure you can get the price down in volume. The bugger is when you go to sell one, all those that wanted one, evaporate into thin air. Yes it is. And yes they are.. Bob --- Ryan Hess wrote: > To the contrary, I have. Pots are $1.50, 12 > position terminal blocks are $1.97. That's in > quantities of one. If I buy enough for 10 boards, > prices drop significantly. Boards will be easy to > produce at $50ea. > > Is this Saturn5 by chance? I see some sarcastic > jabs... > > Ryan > > rawardsr wrote: Apparantly > you haven't looked at how much pots, connectors, and > switches > cost. Good luck assembling all the bits (quality > stuff) for less. > > Let alone the cost for a low production board run.. > hehe. > > First I've heard about that, and I'd look to the > code first. Not is all > that is seems. Bob > > Ryan Hess wrote: > > 1) Parts are expensive. $75 for a few pots and > some 555's? > > > > 2) I've heard there is crosstalk between the VSS > and RPM outputs > > > > > > > > rawardsr wrote: What apparent problems? First > I've heard of any problems. Bruce > > Plecan has three of these since day one and is a > good freind. Ain't > > said word one of any issues he has found.. And > trust me, he'd tell me. Bob > > > > Ryan Hess wrote: > > > >>I think I'd rather build something from the ground > up, considering the costs (time) involved with > fixing the apparent problems with the first batch... > Although I wouldn't mind taking a look at his > design to have a starting point. Ideally I'd like > to see the cost get down to $100 with parts and > board. How realistic that is is yet to be seen. > I'm getting a preliminary budget together as we > speak. Cross your fingers ;) > >> > >>Ryan > >> > >>Mark Mansur wrote: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any > more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice > >>piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see > him make some more. > >>Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? > >> > >>-M > >> > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: "Steve Ravet" > >>To: > >>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM > >>Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>-----Original Message----- > >>>From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > >>>[mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of > Ryan Hess > >>>Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM > >>>To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > >>>Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > >>> > >>>Hi guys, > >>> > >>>Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or > have a > >>>source for one? I would like to put together a > test bench > >>>for myself anyways, but obviously the more the > merrier. > >> > >> > >>Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you > probably already know > >>about this, but those guys designed one some time > ago and the plans may > >>still be available. Bruce's original testbench is > on the gmecm page but > >>I don't think it used a PCB. > >> > >>--steve > >> > >> > >>-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email > and any attachments are > >>confidential and may also be privileged. If you > are not the intended > >>recipient, please notify the sender immediately > and do not disclose the > >>contents to any other person, use it for any > purpose, or store or copy the > >>information in any medium. Thank you. > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Gmecm mailing list > >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org > >>Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Gmecm mailing list > >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org > >>Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >> > >> > >> > >>--------------------------------- > >>See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it > out. > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Gmecm mailing list > >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org > >>Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new > Yahoo! Mail Beta. > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low > PC-to-Phone call rates. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it out. From lwester at lincsat.com Fri Aug 4 10:10:11 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 09:10:11 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI References: <54D33DF96D82FC4799283C875B2438530284C9C3@cceexc13.americas.cpqcorp.net> Message-ID: <003f01c6b7d8$1b665cb0$4250050a@WESTER2> Sorry...no pics...that was last year. We used the edelbrock conv 8 injectors...Holley TBI, and machined the manifold ports to match. Picked a very mild camshaft--often this is the first mistake most people make... Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eck, Joel (GCC-ISS Escalations)" To: Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 8:44 AM Subject: RE: [Gmecm] High CR TBI > Question: '7747 with 8 injectors... Using one injector per cylinder, > similar to the edelbrock conversion? Just trying to make sure I > understand. > > Got pics? > > Joel > > Message: 7 > Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 08:09:52 -0600 > From: "Programmer" > Subject: > To: > Message-ID: <002701c6b7cf$af2ef000$4250050a at WESTER2> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Just a heads up for you guys... > > Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 > with 8 > injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that the > > client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it > can't > be done. > > Anyway...he's presently blowing away LS1 Camaros with this combo at the > track...and everyone is looking for the supercharger or the Nitrous. > > Best part is that he's also getting 26 MPG ! > > Lyndon ; ) > Westers Garage > 1-888-937-8371 > 403-377-CARS > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From di_dallas at yahoo.com Fri Aug 4 10:20:11 2006 From: di_dallas at yahoo.com (Tom Butcher) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 08:20:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI In-Reply-To: <002701c6b7cf$af2ef000$4250050a@WESTER2> Message-ID: <20060804152011.74291.qmail@web53701.mail.yahoo.com> Lyndon, what is the induction setup like? Are you running two of the Holley 4BBL TBI's or something else. I ran a similar setup on a 500HP 383 stroker using a single 900 cfm Holley 4BBL TBI on a 16197427 PCM. I built quad P/H injector driver box to go between the TBI and PCM. No reason you could'nt use two boxes and run two 4BBL TBI's. HotRod never gives credit to the people who push the factory EFI to the limits. It does'nt sell their advertisers parts. Tom Programmer wrote: Just a heads up for you guys... Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 with 8 injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that the client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it can't be done. Anyway...he's presently blowing away LS1 Camaros with this combo at the track...and everyone is looking for the supercharger or the Nitrous. Best part is that he's also getting 26 MPG ! Lyndon ; ) Westers Garage 1-888-937-8371 403-377-CARS _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. From rawardsr at ameritech.net Fri Aug 4 10:43:34 2006 From: rawardsr at ameritech.net (rawardsr at ameritech.net) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 08:43:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench plans to be made available tonight In-Reply-To: <20060804145253.37521.qmail@web35913.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060804154334.49107.qmail@web35403.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Tell you folks what I'll do. I'll make it public domain. Why? Simply that I don't have the time to run more off, and I have moved to MSII's to control my SVO. I'll make the parts list, basic instructions and board layout (ExpressPCB file) available and upload it all as a zip file to the server. For this is all I ask is that I don't see a commercial unit popping up.. The diy community has suffered enough with the likes of Gar and Techedge over the DIYWB. If you all want to set up a group buy, that will be the cheapest way to get the boards done. Look for the file to be uploaded sometime tonight as I'm currently at work and don't have copies here. Thanks, and good luck, have fun, and most of all be careful. Bob (SATURN5) From efi at dyakron.com Fri Aug 4 11:40:25 2006 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 12:40:25 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI In-Reply-To: <003f01c6b7d8$1b665cb0$4250050a@WESTER2> References: <54D33DF96D82FC4799283C875B2438530284C9C3@cceexc13.americas.cpqcorp.net> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20060804123850.031b3530@dyakron.com> Hi Lyndon, by 'mistake' you're referring to people going too wild on the overlap with a MAP system?? Do you have the specs handy on his cam? Cheers, MV At 09:10 AM 8/4/2006 -0600, you wrote: >We used the edelbrock conv 8 injectors...Holley TBI, and machined the >manifold ports to match. Picked a very mild camshaft--often this is the >first mistake most people make... From red83brick at yahoo.com Fri Aug 4 20:33:16 2006 From: red83brick at yahoo.com (Chris Reynolds) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 18:33:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20060804123850.031b3530@dyakron.com> Message-ID: <20060805013316.98044.qmail@web61020.mail.yahoo.com> I know what you mean. I have sucessfully tuned a very large cam in my 312 TBI. 230/236* @ .050, roller cam with 1.6:1 rockers (Extreme EFI). Carcraft claims that anything over 206* intake duration @ .050 is IMPOSSIBLE with TBI. I laughed when that article came out and my 305 TBI was running a L-82 knock-off cam (224/224 @ .050) with 1.6:1 rockers. Here is the idle. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XLXwAXkDHo My virtually stock internal HD 350 TBI will get up and go for pulling around 5,500 lbs of G-series Van. Here is a 65-90 MPH run @ 3/4 throttle getting onto the highway http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX5Av4pS1RA Mike V wrote: Hi Lyndon, by 'mistake' you're referring to people going too wild on the overlap with a MAP system?? Do you have the specs handy on his cam? Cheers, MV At 09:10 AM 8/4/2006 -0600, you wrote: >We used the edelbrock conv 8 injectors...Holley TBI, and machined the >manifold ports to match. Picked a very mild camshaft--often this is the >first mistake most people make... _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Groups are talking. We´re listening. Check out the handy changes to Yahoo! Groups. From jryan at caminofx.org Fri Aug 4 21:07:04 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 21:07:04 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI In-Reply-To: <20060805013316.98044.qmail@web61020.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060805013316.98044.qmail@web61020.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6662818f5a9adfeee1e9608cf83b9e8f@caminofx.org> So for grins... how potent should a 350 with a 214/220 @ .050 roller cam, Edelbrock 3704 intake and stock exhaust manifolds with TBI be? I'm just trying to get into tuning it and it's running too rich and with too much spark advance (stinking at idle and pinging at part-throttle acceleration) so far, so I haven't found all of its potential. It's in a 1984 Chevy El Camino, about 3500 lbs. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 4, 2006, at 8:33 PM, Chris Reynolds wrote: > I know what you mean. > > I have sucessfully tuned a very large cam in my 312 TBI. 230/236* @ > .050, roller cam with 1.6:1 rockers (Extreme EFI). Carcraft claims > that anything over 206* intake duration @ .050 is IMPOSSIBLE with TBI. > I laughed when that article came out and my 305 TBI was running a > L-82 knock-off cam (224/224 @ .050) with 1.6:1 rockers. > > Here is the idle. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XLXwAXkDHo > > My virtually stock internal HD 350 TBI will get up and go for > pulling around 5,500 lbs of G-series Van. > > Here is a 65-90 MPH run @ 3/4 throttle getting onto the highway > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX5Av4pS1RA > > > Mike V wrote: > Hi Lyndon, > by 'mistake' you're referring to people going too wild on the overlap > with a MAP system?? > Do you have the specs handy on his cam? > Cheers, > MV > > At 09:10 AM 8/4/2006 -0600, you wrote: > >> We used the edelbrock conv 8 injectors...Holley TBI, and machined the >> manifold ports to match. Picked a very mild camshaft--often this is >> the >> first mistake most people make... > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > Groups are talking. We´re listening. Check out the handy changes > to Yahoo! Groups. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From davesnothereman at netscape.net Fri Aug 4 21:44:44 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 22:44:44 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench plans to be made available tonight Message-ID: <70A79264.1ED6967E.DB881660@netscape.net> Amazing leap of faith. Good to see the scars aren't too deep. Thank you. Zaphod wrote: >Tell you folks what I'll do. I'll make it public >domain. Why? Simply that I don't have the time to >run more off, and I have moved to MSII's to control my >SVO. > >I'll make the parts list, basic instructions and board >layout (ExpressPCB file) available and upload it all >as a zip file to the server. > >For this is all I ask is that I don't see a commercial >unit popping up.. The diy community has suffered >enough with the likes of Gar and Techedge over the >DIYWB. > >If you all want to set up a group buy, that will be >the cheapest way to get the boards done. > >Look for the file to be uploaded sometime tonight as >I'm currently at work and don't have copies here. > >Thanks, and good luck, have fun, and most of all be >careful. Bob (SATURN5) > > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > __________________________________________________________________ Switch to Netscape Internet Service. As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register Netscape. Just the Net You Need. New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups. Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp From davesnothereman at netscape.net Fri Aug 4 21:48:47 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 22:48:47 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI Message-ID: <3E16EF1F.3A6B8754.DB881660@netscape.net> Ahhh, yes. Thanks to the internet, anyone who can read a forum post or two becomes an expert these days. Nice to see that you still aren't smart enough to believe the magazine experts. Now he just has to get them to convert his real HP into magazine advertiser's HP and he'll be all set. Zaphod "Programmer" wrote: >Just a heads up for you guys... > >Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 with 8 >injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that the >client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it can't >be done. > >Anyway...he's presently blowing away LS1 Camaros with this combo at the >track...and everyone is looking for the supercharger or the Nitrous. > >Best part is that he's also getting 26 MPG ! > >Lyndon ; ) >Westers Garage >1-888-937-8371 >403-377-CARS > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > __________________________________________________________________ Switch to Netscape Internet Service. As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register Netscape. Just the Net You Need. New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups. Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp From lwester at lincsat.com Fri Aug 4 22:40:59 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 21:40:59 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI References: <3E16EF1F.3A6B8754.DB881660@netscape.net> Message-ID: <001c01c6b840$fc5bcc10$4250050a@WESTER2> Yes...magazine HP...I hear you there ! Lyndon ; ) ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 8:48 PM Subject: RE: [Gmecm] High CR TBI > Ahhh, yes. Thanks to the internet, anyone who can read a forum post or > two becomes an expert these days. Nice to see that you still aren't smart > enough to believe the magazine experts. > > Now he just has to get them to convert his real HP into magazine > advertiser's HP and he'll be all set. > > Zaphod > > "Programmer" wrote: > >>Just a heads up for you guys... >> >>Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 with >>8 >>injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that the >>client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it can't >>be done. >> >>Anyway...he's presently blowing away LS1 Camaros with this combo at the >>track...and everyone is looking for the supercharger or the Nitrous. >> >>Best part is that he's also getting 26 MPG ! >> >>Lyndon ; ) >>Westers Garage >>1-888-937-8371 >>403-377-CARS >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > __________________________________________________________________ > Switch to Netscape Internet Service. > As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at > http://isp.netscape.com/register > > Netscape. Just the Net You Need. > > New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer > Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups. > Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From lwester at lincsat.com Fri Aug 4 22:43:25 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 21:43:25 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI References: <20060804152011.74291.qmail@web53701.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002a01c6b841$52d2a780$4250050a@WESTER2> Just the single 670 unit (no injectors or pod of course), Tom. We used the 8 injector Edelbrock system... No added injector drivers, nothing wierd...the rest was just some careful tuning. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Butcher" To: Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 9:20 AM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] High CR TBI > Lyndon, what is the induction setup like? Are you running two of the > Holley 4BBL TBI's or something else. I ran a similar setup on a 500HP 383 > stroker using a single 900 cfm Holley 4BBL TBI on a 16197427 PCM. I built > quad P/H injector driver box to go between the TBI and PCM. No reason you > could'nt use two boxes and run two 4BBL TBI's. HotRod never gives credit > to the people who push the factory EFI to the limits. It does'nt sell > their advertisers parts. > > Tom > > Programmer wrote: > Just a heads up for you guys... > > Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 with > 8 > injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that the > client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it can't > be done. > > Anyway...he's presently blowing away LS1 Camaros with this combo at the > track...and everyone is looking for the supercharger or the Nitrous. > > Best part is that he's also getting 26 MPG ! > > Lyndon ; ) > Westers Garage > 1-888-937-8371 > 403-377-CARS > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger's low PC-to-Phone call > rates. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From lwester at lincsat.com Fri Aug 4 22:48:54 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 21:48:54 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI References: <54D33DF96D82FC4799283C875B2438530284C9C3@cceexc13.americas.cpqcorp.net> <5.1.0.14.0.20060804123850.031b3530@dyakron.com> Message-ID: <002f01c6b842$16e27510$4250050a@WESTER2> Camshaft was quite mild...12-408-8 Comp roller. The common mistake is crazy camshafts with low compression. I don't know why the magazines push those combinations--they never work...especially not in a heavy vehicle. There aren't many trucks that scream 5-6K RPM all day long as a daily driver...LOL, so those combinations never work well. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike V" To: Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 10:40 AM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] High CR TBI > Hi Lyndon, > by 'mistake' you're referring to people going too wild on the overlap > with a MAP system?? > Do you have the specs handy on his cam? > Cheers, > MV > > At 09:10 AM 8/4/2006 -0600, you wrote: > >>We used the edelbrock conv 8 injectors...Holley TBI, and machined the >>manifold ports to match. Picked a very mild camshaft--often this is the >>first mistake most people make... > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From lwester at lincsat.com Fri Aug 4 22:56:12 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 21:56:12 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI References: <20060805013316.98044.qmail@web61020.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003801c6b843$1becc820$4250050a@WESTER2> I know what you're saying. I did a higher CR, combo with a Crane 108deg separation in a little shortbox chevy around 5 years ago that still runs with the stock mustangs at the track...and it was a little tricky to get a nice idle out of that one. Engine was 10.25, stock heads with ported exhaust--1.96/1.60 Manley stainless with Z28 valve springs and Comp retainers. We didn't even run headers with that one, and it'll run a 15.3@ 89-90MPH with stock injectors...not fantastic...but it was a cheap buildup, and still took 3 full seconds off the factory E.T. (Our track is at 2600ft)... Nothing is impossible...improbable, more likely ! Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Reynolds" To: Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 7:33 PM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] High CR TBI >I know what you mean. > > I have sucessfully tuned a very large cam in my 312 TBI. 230/236* @ > .050, roller cam with 1.6:1 rockers (Extreme EFI). Carcraft claims that > anything over 206* intake duration @ .050 is IMPOSSIBLE with TBI. I > laughed when that article came out and my 305 TBI was running a L-82 > knock-off cam (224/224 @ .050) with 1.6:1 rockers. > > Here is the idle. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XLXwAXkDHo > > My virtually stock internal HD 350 TBI will get up and go for pulling > around 5,500 lbs of G-series Van. > > Here is a 65-90 MPH run @ 3/4 throttle getting onto the highway > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX5Av4pS1RA > > > Mike V wrote: > Hi Lyndon, > by 'mistake' you're referring to people going too wild on the overlap > with a MAP system?? > Do you have the specs handy on his cam? > Cheers, > MV > > At 09:10 AM 8/4/2006 -0600, you wrote: > >>We used the edelbrock conv 8 injectors...Holley TBI, and machined the >>manifold ports to match. Picked a very mild camshaft--often this is the >>first mistake most people make... > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > Groups are talking. We´re listening. Check out the handy changes to > Yahoo! Groups. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From info at jenkinseng.com Sat Aug 5 01:24:46 2006 From: info at jenkinseng.com (Peter Jenkins) Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 16:24:46 +1000 Subject: [gmecm] ECM test bench Message-ID: <000a01c6b857$dd6b9a80$6501a8c0@PETER> I don't know what all the fuss is about: I posted a photo of mine a while ago but for some reason you can't see the jpeg: it is as simple as a 14v power source a wiring harness assorted pots at less than $2.00 each an ecu and wiring diagrams or use original sensors and a vacuum pump I run my crank angle sensor with a heater fan motor and various resistors for different revs .I am only using an 808 ecu but its all the same .if your serious the cost of the test bench for your application is worth it and if you can't make it yourself then maybe you shouldn't be messing around with your ecu and engine tuning . Making the test bench work proves that you know the basics so the exercise is cheap compared to stuffing up your car/engine > Peter Jenkins > 10336 Murray River Rd Pine Mountain Vic. 3709 > Australia. > PH 0425 705764 > Email. info at jenkinseng.com > web. www.jenkinseng.com DISCLAIMER > * This email and any attachment may contain confidential information. > If you are not the intended recipient you are not authorised to copy > or disclose all or any part of it without the prior written consent > of Jenkins Engineering. > * Opinions expressed in this email and any attachment are those of the > sender and not necessarily the opinions of Jenkins Engineering. > * Please scan this email and any attachment for viruses. Jenkins > Engineering does > not accept responsibility for problems caused by viruses, whether > it is Jenkins Engineering's fault or not!!! From ssealander at Stny.rr.com Sat Aug 5 07:01:21 2006 From: ssealander at Stny.rr.com (Scot Sealander) Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 08:01:21 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI In-Reply-To: <002701c6b7cf$af2ef000$4250050a@WESTER2> Message-ID: <200608051201.k75C1Mrk020853@ms-smtp-02.nyroc.rr.com> Can you tell us more about this? What does it weigh? What heads are on it? What is the cranking compression? Thanks, Scot -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Programmer Sent: Friday, August 04, 2006 10:10 AM To: Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI Just a heads up for you guys... Built a 12.5CR to 1 engine for a client, running this rig on a '7747 with 8 injectors in a 1990 pickup truck (daily driver). Funny thing is that the client contacted "HotRod" magazine and got laughed at...they said it can't be done. Anyway...he's presently blowing away LS1 Camaros with this combo at the track...and everyone is looking for the supercharger or the Nitrous. Best part is that he's also getting 26 MPG ! Lyndon ; ) Westers Garage 1-888-937-8371 403-377-CARS _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From efi at dyakron.com Sat Aug 5 07:27:23 2006 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 08:27:23 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI In-Reply-To: <001c01c6b840$fc5bcc10$4250050a@WESTER2> References: <3E16EF1F.3A6B8754.DB881660@netscape.net> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20060805082505.033351e0@dyakron.com> At 09:40 PM 8/4/2006 -0600, you wrote: >Yes...magazine HP...I hear you there ! So, you mean, that even thought I have the same spark plugs as that magazine engine, I'm not making 790hp on pump gas? 8-) From efi at dyakron.com Sat Aug 5 07:32:14 2006 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 08:32:14 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI In-Reply-To: <20060805013316.98044.qmail@web61020.mail.yahoo.com> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060804123850.031b3530@dyakron.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20060805083057.03338800@dyakron.com> At 06:33 PM 8/4/2006 -0700, you wrote: >Here is the idle. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XLXwAXkDHo Cold start an crack throttle repons are good? That would have taken me a l-o-n-g time. Nice work. > > My virtually stock internal HD 350 TBI will get up and go for pulling > around 5,500 lbs of G-series Van. > > Here is a 65-90 MPH run @ 3/4 throttle getting onto the highway > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX5Av4pS1RA I appreciate the turn signal mate. From aphelion79 at cox.net Sat Aug 5 21:33:16 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Sat, 05 Aug 2006 21:33:16 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? In-Reply-To: <44D34E41.5070205@cox.net> References: <20060804132216.83154.qmail@web60822.mail.yahoo.com> <44D34E41.5070205@cox.net> Message-ID: <44D554EC.7020804@cox.net> Well... for unforeseen events leading up to the lack of spark in my Mazda truck and the unavailability of any form of standard parts being Japanese and all (lol whatever the reason is) I decided to try to fix my Heep ASAP... so... I spliced the tan/black wire.... set the timing to zero... at zero it runs like crap. Plugged it back in... and the timing advanced... however what should the timing advance to on a '88 Chevy S10 Pickup with the 2.5L? For it still runs like crap and idles funny (maybe idle is just set too low? dunno its late to think about it anymore) Any other ideas as to what I would check (sensor wise) as to why it'd be idling funny... so yeah -Matt Aphelion79 wrote: > Yeah, finally it runs :) I'll keep you all updated & will probably > perform the surgery next Wednesday! > > Andrew Gibson wrote: >> You should be able to splice a connector into the tan with black >> wire. This is the est bypass which changes the module over for ecm >> control. I would reccomend solder and heat shrink and a weatherpack >> connector if doing it in the engine compartment. Other than that put >> it wherever you find convenient. Good to know it runs! >> >> --------------------------------- >> Do you Yahoo!? >> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From davida1 at hiwaay.net Sat Aug 5 22:17:55 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 22:17:55 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- Re: How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? References: +ADw-20060804132216.83154.qmail+AEA-web60822.mail.yahoo.com+AD4APA-44D34E41.5070205+AEA-cox.net+AD4- +ADw-44D554EC.7020804+AEA-cox.net+AD4- Message-ID: <000901c6b906$ec327570$0600a8c0@yancey.com> IIRC the base timing is 8 degrees BTDC with bypass disconnected, engine idling. David ----- Original Message ----- From: +ACI-Aphelion79+ACI- +ADw-aphelion79+AEA-cox.net+AD4- To: +ADw-gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org+AD4- Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 9:33 PM Subject: Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- Re: How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? +AD4- Well... for unforeseen events leading up to the lack of spark in my +AD4- Mazda truck and the unavailability of any form of standard parts being +AD4- Japanese and all (lol whatever the reason is) I decided to try to fix my +AD4- Heep ASAP... so... I spliced the tan/black wire.... set the timing to +AD4- zero... at zero it runs like crap. Plugged it back in... and the +AD4- timing advanced... however what should the timing advance to on a '88 +AD4- Chevy S10 Pickup with the 2.5L? For it still runs like crap and idles +AD4- funny (maybe idle is just set too low? dunno its late to think about it +AD4- anymore) Any other ideas as to what I would check (sensor wise) as to +AD4- why it'd be idling funny... so yeah +AD4- +AD4- -Matt +AD4- +AD4- Aphelion79 wrote: +AD4APg- Yeah, finally it runs :) I'll keep you all updated +ACY- will probably +AD4APg- perform the surgery next Wednesday+ACE- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- Andrew Gibson wrote: +AD4APgA+- You should be able to splice a connector into the tan with black +AD4APgA+- wire. This is the est bypass which changes the module over for ecm +AD4APgA+- control. I would reccomend solder and heat shrink and a weatherpack +AD4APgA+- connector if doing it in the engine compartment. Other than that put +AD4APgA+- it wherever you find convenient. Good to know it runs+ACE- +AD4APgA+- +AD4APgA+- --------------------------------- +AD4APgA+- Do you Yahoo+ACE-? +AD4APgA+- Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo+ACE- Mail Beta. +AD4APgA+- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4APgA+- Gmecm mailing list +AD4APgA+- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4APgA+- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4APgA+- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4APgA+- +AD4APgA+- +AD4APg- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4APg- Gmecm mailing list +AD4APg- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4APg- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4APg- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4APg- +AD4- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4- Gmecm mailing list +AD4- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4- From aoturneriii at tds.net Sun Aug 6 01:02:33 2006 From: aoturneriii at tds.net (Arby) Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 02:02:33 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench References: <20060803164819.30571.qmail@web35911.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <01e701c6b91d$ea031ae0$0300a8c0@NATALIE> If you could get the price down to around $100 count me in. Arby ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Hess" To: Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 12:48 PM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >I think I'd rather build something from the ground up, considering the >costs (time) involved with fixing the apparent problems with the first >batch... Although I wouldn't mind taking a look at his design to have a >starting point. Ideally I'd like to see the cost get down to $100 with >parts and board. How realistic that is is yet to be seen. I'm getting a >preliminary budget together as we speak. Cross your fingers ;) > > Ryan > > Mark Mansur wrote: Bob (Saturn5) doesn't have any > more PCBs for that board AFAIK. It's a nice > piece of equipment and I'd personally like to see him make some more. > Perhaps he'd be willing to hand-off to Ryan? > > -M > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Steve Ravet" > To: > Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 8:51 AM > Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM test bench > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org >> [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess >> Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 9:37 AM >> To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench >> >> Hi guys, >> >> Anybody here interested in an ECM test bench, or have a >> source for one? I would like to put together a test bench >> for myself anyways, but obviously the more the merrier. > > Hey Ryan, I know you're on thirdgen also so you probably already know > about this, but those guys designed one some time ago and the plans may > still be available. Bruce's original testbench is on the gmecm page but > I don't think it used a PCB. > > --steve > > > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are > confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended > recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the > contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the > information in any medium. Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > See the all-new, redesigned Yahoo.com. Check it out. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun Aug 6 04:44:47 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 10:44:47 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Injector pins References: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl><11a801c6b6d5$e98cdcd0$020101c0@gandalf> <44D1F40A.7040901@comcast.net><122f01c6b729$82914b20$020101c0@gandalf> <44D2ABF2.40104@comcast.net> Message-ID: <005a01c6b93c$f657bfc0$020101c0@gandalf> Given that each injector bank has _at_least_ 2 pins:- - 1st one connected to the injectors (other side of the injectors being connected to +12v) - 2nd one connected to engine/battery ground Does anybody know which of these pins is switched by the code? Robin From b.shaw at comcast.net Sun Aug 6 07:37:21 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast) Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2006 08:37:21 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Injector pins In-Reply-To: <005a01c6b93c$f657bfc0$020101c0@gandalf> References: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl><11a801c6b6d5$e98cdcd0$020101c0@gandalf> <44D1F40A.7040901@comcast.net><122f01c6b729$82914b20$020101c0@gandalf> <44D2ABF2.40104@comcast.net> <005a01c6b93c$f657bfc0$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <44D5E281.4080205@comcast.net> The pin going to the injector is switched to ground by the ECU to fire the injector. Bill Robin Handley wrote: > Given that each injector bank has _at_least_ 2 pins:- > > - 1st one connected to the injectors (other side of the injectors being > connected to +12v) > - 2nd one connected to engine/battery ground > > Does anybody know which of these pins is switched by the code? > > Robin > From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun Aug 6 07:40:23 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 13:40:23 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] $58 on 727 References: <000a01c6b857$dd6b9a80$6501a8c0@PETER> Message-ID: <009b01c6b955$7d7b7740$020101c0@gandalf> Just wondered: is anybody else running $58 code on 727 hardware? Surely I can't be the only one! :-) Robin From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun Aug 6 08:16:13 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 14:16:13 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Injector pins References: <44CCB38C.4090809@highspeedlink.net> <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl><11a801c6b6d5$e98cdcd0$020101c0@gandalf> <44D1F40A.7040901@comcast.net><122f01c6b729$82914b20$020101c0@gandalf> <44D2ABF2.40104@comcast.net><005a01c6b93c$f657bfc0$020101c0@gandalf> <44D5E281.4080205@comcast.net> Message-ID: <00a401c6b95a$7f6ccdb0$020101c0@gandalf> Many thanks Bill. :-) Consequently if, as I believe, $8D and $58 use the same, single, PWM register to switch the injectors on, then, IIUC, both the injector AND injector ground ECM pins should be the same for both codes (when running on the same hardware). Does anybody know of a reason why this might not be the case? Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill - Comcast" To: Sent: 06 August 2006 13:37 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Injector pins > The pin going to the injector is switched to ground by the ECU to fire > the injector. > > Bill > > Robin Handley wrote: > > Given that each injector bank has _at_least_ 2 pins:- > > > > - 1st one connected to the injectors (other side of the injectors being > > connected to +12v) > > - 2nd one connected to engine/battery ground > > > > Does anybody know which of these pins is switched by the code? > > > > Robin From aphelion79 at cox.net Sun Aug 6 08:24:12 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Sun, 06 Aug 2006 08:24:12 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- Re: How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? In-Reply-To: <000901c6b906$ec327570$0600a8c0@yancey.com> References: +ADw-20060804132216.83154.qmail+AEA-web60822.mail.yahoo.com+AD4APA-44D34E41.5070205+AEA-cox.net+AD4- +ADw-44D554EC.7020804+AEA-cox.net+AD4- <000901c6b906$ec327570$0600a8c0@yancey.com> Message-ID: <44D5ED7C.6090907@cox.net> Oh thats disconnected? Okay thanks I've heard people say 0+ACo- ::shrug:: I'll try 8+ACo- and see how it runs! David Allen wrote: > IIRC the base timing is 8 degrees BTDC with bypass disconnected, engine idling. > David > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Aphelion79" > To: > Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 9:33 PM > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Re: How to wire Timing Bypass on 4-Cyl 151 Iron Duke? > > > >> Well... for unforeseen events leading up to the lack of spark in my >> Mazda truck and the unavailability of any form of standard parts being >> Japanese and all (lol whatever the reason is) I decided to try to fix my >> Heep ASAP... so... I spliced the tan/black wire.... set the timing to >> zero... at zero it runs like crap. Plugged it back in... and the >> timing advanced... however what should the timing advance to on a '88 >> Chevy S10 Pickup with the 2.5L? For it still runs like crap and idles >> funny (maybe idle is just set too low? dunno its late to think about it >> anymore) Any other ideas as to what I would check (sensor wise) as to >> why it'd be idling funny... so yeah >> >> -Matt >> >> Aphelion79 wrote: >> >>> Yeah, finally it runs :) I'll keep you all updated +ACY- will probably >>> perform the surgery next Wednesday! >>> >>> Andrew Gibson wrote: >>> >>>> You should be able to splice a connector into the tan with black >>>> wire. This is the est bypass which changes the module over for ecm >>>> control. I would reccomend solder and heat shrink and a weatherpack >>>> connector if doing it in the engine compartment. Other than that put >>>> it wherever you find convenient. Good to know it runs! >>>> >>>> --------------------------------- >>>> Do you Yahoo!? >>>> Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. >>>> +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- >>>> Gmecm mailing list >>>> Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org >>>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>>> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- >>> Gmecm mailing list >>> Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org >>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >>> >>> >> +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From davida1 at hiwaay.net Sun Aug 6 15:07:08 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2006 15:07:08 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Loss of vacuum while cruising? Message-ID: <001401c6b993$e6b9b8a0$0600a8c0@yancey.com> Here's a way to prevent a loss of accessory vacuum while cruising under low manifold vacuum conditions. This works good on a turbo engine and would work on any low-vacuum engine with a cruise and A/C that needs vacuum. Forgive my shoddy web design - I am not a web artist! David http://home.hiwaay.net/~davida1/auxiliar.htm From mrcad472 at iowatelecom.net Mon Aug 7 10:13:22 2006 From: mrcad472 at iowatelecom.net (Scott Pearson) Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 10:13:22 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI References: <002701c6b7cf$af2ef000$4250050a@WESTER2><066401c6b7d2$031f83d0$6501a8c0@DELL3G> <002e01c6b7d4$cc4bfe80$4250050a@WESTER2> Message-ID: <017501c6ba34$082a1840$6501a8c0@DELL3G> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Programmer" > No kidding ! > Did you guys pow--wow this year or.... ? > Need to take Bruce for a ride in a tuned SSR ! No, we didn't have any pow-wow's this year. Bruce didn't get the spring one done due to a few trips to Madison. Bruce's is the regular deal, I've only had them out here a couple times. Due to all that was going on around here, I didn't have time to have one this year, will try again next summer. Scott From parmega at auburn.edu Mon Aug 7 11:47:00 2006 From: parmega at auburn.edu (Greg Parmer) Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 11:47:00 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] High CR TBI In-Reply-To: <017501c6ba34$082a1840$6501a8c0@DELL3G> Message-ID: <005801c6ba41$1aa1a6c0$376ccc83@acesag.auburn.edu> Good to hear the tradition is still on and the same gang of merry fellas are here. I'm waaay overdue for a second pow-wow and I'd like to make it next year, so post announcements early and often. :) Did I miss the specs on the engine that started this thread, btw? -greg > -----Original Message----- > From: On Behalf Of Scott Pearson > Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 10:13 AM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Programmer" > > > No kidding ! > > Did you guys pow--wow this year or.... ? > > Need to take Bruce for a ride in a tuned SSR ! > > No, we didn't have any pow-wow's this year. Bruce didn't get the spring one > done due to a few trips to Madison. Bruce's is the regular deal, I've only > had them out here a couple times. Due to all that was going on around here, > I didn't have time to have one this year, will try again next summer. > > Scott From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Mon Aug 7 13:32:34 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2006 13:32:34 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] scratch area created Message-ID: I have created scratch areas for both gmecm and diy_efi. The lists are configured to reject attachments, so things of a temporary nature that you would have otherwise sent as an attachment, can now go in the scratch area. It's simple to upload files here, so I would recommend starting to use it rather than the FTP site. To get there, go to www.diy-efi.org, click the list name, click TWiki, then look for the scratch article and click it. The scratch article has further directions for uploading. --steve ------------------- Steve Ravet ARM steve.ravet at arm.com -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From krawczuk at dodo.com.au Mon Aug 7 21:12:39 2006 From: krawczuk at dodo.com.au (mark krawczuk) Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 11:42:39 +0930 Subject: [Gmecm] def file needed.? Message-ID: <002b01c6ba90$1fea65f0$6baef0dc@marka7e6m8swbp> hi, i am after a $59 definition file , its used to open a bin modified by the KALMAKER , software and using a pal security board . anybody help ? thanks, mark k From matthew10_5 at netzero.net Tue Aug 8 22:31:03 2006 From: matthew10_5 at netzero.net (matthew10_5 at netzero.net) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 03:31:03 GMT Subject: [Gmecm] Editing Cell Tables Message-ID: <20060808.203116.4252.637759@webmail49.lax.untd.com> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/gmecm/attachments/20060809/857d4f81/attachment.pl From rmtonazzi at charter.net Tue Aug 8 22:49:47 2006 From: rmtonazzi at charter.net (Mark Tonazzi) Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 22:49:47 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Editing Cell Tables In-Reply-To: <20060808.203116.4252.637759@webmail49.lax.untd.com> Message-ID: <000501c6bb66$dbeb7f60$6601a8c0@Desktop> Hi Matt, I use Tuner Pro as well, I don't know if any other tools break it down further or not but I don't think there is any more granularity than what you see in tables and the ECM would simply extrapolate between them. So if you have a value at 400 and a 50% increase in the value at 800, the ECM would roughly assign a value of 25% more than the value at 400 and 25% less than the value at 800 for the value at 600 since 600 is half way between 400 and 800. I hope I have not confused you further, just think of the tables as a whole and don't break it down further than the cell. Mark BTW, this is my first post; I have been subscribed here for about a week but have spent a long time on many other forums and mailing lists. I gathered a wealth of information from the GMECM site when I dove into DIY tuning. -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of matthew10_5 at netzero.net Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 10:31 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: [Gmecm] Editing Cell Tables I am using TUNER PRO to edit my VE Tables. Does anyone know how the Cells are set up for the 7747 ECM. Does the RPM of 400, 800, 1200, Ect, over the cell coresponds to the begining or the end of the cell? I think I may have just gone stupid looking at these. Maybe someone would be kind enough to unshroud this for me...Thanks..Matt From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Wed Aug 9 00:02:22 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 06:02:22 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Editing Cell Tables References: <20060808.203116.4252.637759@webmail49.lax.untd.com> Message-ID: <00d101c6bb71$014f2360$020101c0@gandalf> I am using TUNER PRO to edit my VE Tables. Does anyone know how the Cells are set up for the 7747 ECM. Does the RPM of 400, 800, 1200, Ect, over the cell coresponds to the begining or the end of the cell? I think I may have just gone stupid looking at these. Maybe someone would be kind enough to unshroud this for me...Thanks..Matt I don't use Tuner Pro, but it should exactly reproduce the lookup tables in the calibration, as there is no reason for it to do otherwise. There is a lot of on-line information about the 747 - to indicate what is in the calibration. If the VE table shows 75% at an RPM of 400 and a MAP of 90 then, if the RPM is exactly 400 and the MAP is exactly 90, the table lookup code will return (output) exactly 75%. However, very rarely will RPM and MAP (input) values match exactly with the tabulated values, so the code does bi-linear interpolation between the tabulated values straddling the input values to calculate a sensible value for VE under those input conditions. This ensures a smooth and continuous transition between one set of input conditions and the next. HTH Robin From info at jenkinseng.com Wed Aug 9 00:22:06 2006 From: info at jenkinseng.com (Peter Jenkins) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 15:22:06 +1000 Subject: [Gmecm] re def file Message-ID: <000801c6bb73$c60a6140$6501a8c0@PETER> I have the kalmaker software ( are you trying to disassemble) > Peter Jenkins > 10336 Murray River Rd Pine Mountain Vic. 3709 > Australia. > PH 0425 705764 > Email. info at jenkinseng.com > web. www.jenkinseng.com DISCLAIMER > * This email and any attachment may contain confidential information. > If you are not the intended recipient you are not authorised to copy > or disclose all or any part of it without the prior written consent > of Jenkins Engineering. > * Opinions expressed in this email and any attachment are those of the > sender and not necessarily the opinions of Jenkins Engineering. > * Please scan this email and any attachment for viruses. Jenkins > Engineering does > not accept responsibility for problems caused by viruses, whether > it is Jenkins Engineering's fault or not!!! From lwester at lincsat.com Wed Aug 9 13:47:27 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 12:47:27 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] Editing Cell Tables References: <20060808.203116.4252.637759@webmail49.lax.untd.com> Message-ID: <000e01c6bbe4$49685630$4250050a@WESTER2> the 'cells' are a 'theoretical load by rpm' grid. Why not tune by the actual values ?? Scan tool attached...look at MAP and RPM. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 9:31 PM Subject: [Gmecm] Editing Cell Tables > > > > > > I am using TUNER PRO to edit my VE Tables. Does anyone know how the > Cells are set up for the 7747 ECM. Does the RPM of 400, 800, 1200, Ect, > over the cell coresponds to the begining or the end of the cell? > I think I may have just gone stupid looking at these. Maybe someone > would be kind enough to unshroud this for me...Thanks..Matt > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From jryan at caminofx.org Wed Aug 9 17:36:20 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:36:20 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 Message-ID: <10a1b41367ad62635c0506f859b86127@caminofx.org> I need a pointer. I must be doing something wrong. I am trying to burn an ANLU .bin in a 2732 chip for a 1228746. I have a Willem programmer, and a blank 2732 and a blank 27C32. The Willem programmer is able to read 2732 chips without problems. To test it, I read an ANTT chip (F-body 305 TBI), and it read without problems, and the data in the resulting .bin file made perfect sense in TunerCat. So I start with a 2732 chip that I know is blank, put it in the ZIF socket in the programmer, select 2732 in the software, and set the DIP switches as the program shows. I click "Burn," and it says it is burning, but when it gets to the "Verify" step, it shows an error at the very first address. I read the chip, and nothing has changed. Every bit is still a 1, so it is still blank. The programmer interfaces with the PC with a parallel cable and I have the USB cable hooked up to provide 5V power. What am I missing? I get the same results whether I try the 2732 or 27C32. The markings on the two chips are as follows: AM2732 ADC 8318DP C1983 AMD B8652 NMC27C32Q -45 Any advice would be most appreciated. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Thu Aug 10 02:27:03 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:27:03 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 References: <10a1b41367ad62635c0506f859b86127@caminofx.org> Message-ID: <012e01c6bc4f$322bfe20$020101c0@gandalf> Has your programmer ever successfully programmed an EPROM? If not, it may be faulty... Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jared Ryan" To: Sent: 09 August 2006 23:36 Subject: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 > I need a pointer. I must be doing something wrong. > > I am trying to burn an ANLU .bin in a 2732 chip for a 1228746. I have > a Willem programmer, and a blank 2732 and a blank 27C32. The Willem > programmer is able to read 2732 chips without problems. To test it, I > read an ANTT chip (F-body 305 TBI), and it read without problems, and > the data in the resulting .bin file made perfect sense in TunerCat. > > So I start with a 2732 chip that I know is blank, put it in the ZIF > socket in the programmer, select 2732 in the software, and set the DIP > switches as the program shows. I click "Burn," and it says it is > burning, but when it gets to the "Verify" step, it shows an error at > the very first address. I read the chip, and nothing has changed. > Every bit is still a 1, so it is still blank. > > The programmer interfaces with the PC with a parallel cable and I have > the USB cable hooked up to provide 5V power. > > What am I missing? I get the same results whether I try the 2732 or > 27C32. The markings on the two chips are as follows: > > AM2732 > ADC > 8318DP > C1983 AMD > > B8652 > NMC27C32Q > -45 > > Any advice would be most appreciated. > > ---> Jared Ryan <--- > jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From jryan at caminofx.org Thu Aug 10 03:17:28 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:17:28 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 In-Reply-To: <012e01c6bc4f$322bfe20$020101c0@gandalf> References: <10a1b41367ad62635c0506f859b86127@caminofx.org> <012e01c6bc4f$322bfe20$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: I finally figured it out, after putting it all aside and coming back to it after a while.. I discovered the Willem forum, on the willem.org Web site, and found some threads where people were discussing exactly the same issue, with the 2732 chip. It turns out, after I switched the positions of the jumpers at JP5 and JP6, the chip burned properly. Apparently this chip needs much higher voltage than most to program. I have not put the chip in the car yet (will do so tomorrow), but the chip verifies perfectly against the .bin file, so I am hopeful that it will work well in the ECM. This is the first EPROM I have ever programmed, so I hope it works. It is an unmodified .bin for a 1989 9C1 Caprice, which should be a close match to my engine to start with. On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Robin Handley wrote: > Has your programmer ever successfully programmed an EPROM? If not, it may be > faulty... > > Robin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jared Ryan" > To: > Sent: 09 August 2006 23:36 > Subject: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 > > >> I need a pointer. I must be doing something wrong. >> >> I am trying to burn an ANLU .bin in a 2732 chip for a 1228746. I have >> a Willem programmer, and a blank 2732 and a blank 27C32. The Willem >> programmer is able to read 2732 chips without problems. To test it, I >> read an ANTT chip (F-body 305 TBI), and it read without problems, and >> the data in the resulting .bin file made perfect sense in TunerCat. >> >> So I start with a 2732 chip that I know is blank, put it in the ZIF >> socket in the programmer, select 2732 in the software, and set the DIP >> switches as the program shows. I click "Burn," and it says it is >> burning, but when it gets to the "Verify" step, it shows an error at >> the very first address. I read the chip, and nothing has changed. >> Every bit is still a 1, so it is still blank. >> >> The programmer interfaces with the PC with a parallel cable and I have >> the USB cable hooked up to provide 5V power. >> >> What am I missing? I get the same results whether I try the 2732 or >> 27C32. The markings on the two chips are as follows: >> >> AM2732 >> ADC >> 8318DP >> C1983 AMD >> >> B8652 >> NMC27C32Q >> -45 >> >> Any advice would be most appreciated. >> >> ---> Jared Ryan <--- >> jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From matthew10_5 at netzero.net Thu Aug 10 20:34:35 2006 From: matthew10_5 at netzero.net (matthew10_5 at netzero.net) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:34:35 GMT Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Editing Cell Tables Message-ID: <20060810.183457.28866.654279@webmail29.lax.untd.com> An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/gmecm/attachments/20060811/d622583f/attachment.pl From rmtonazzi at charter.net Thu Aug 10 22:34:15 2006 From: rmtonazzi at charter.net (Mark Tonazzi) Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:34:15 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Editing Cell Tables In-Reply-To: <20060810.183457.28866.654279@webmail29.lax.untd.com> Message-ID: <000a01c6bcf7$055c8010$6601a8c0@Desktop> Pick the closest cell, in your case 2000 and 90, make the change, scan it and tweak from there. -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of matthew10_5 at netzero.net Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 8:35 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Editing Cell Tables If I am to understand this better. Each cell is 400 RPM apart in the VE tables. The only adjustment is every 4 hundred RPM and the computer averages out everything in between? I am specfically needing to zero in at 1900 rpm at 88 Kpa , now is that cell going to be the "1600" or is it closer to the "2000" rpm cell. Not to confuse the issue further, is 88 Kpa still in the "80" cell or should the "90" cell be used since it is closer to that? I'm Soooo CoNfUsEd. Fred From davesnothereman at netscape.net Fri Aug 11 06:22:33 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 07:22:33 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Editing Cell Tables Message-ID: <607E4A30.6DEA9391.DB881660@netscape.net> "matthew10_5 at netzero.net" wrote: >If I am to understand this better. Each cell is 400 RPM apart in the VE >tables. The only adjustment is every 4 hundred RPM and the computer >averages out everything in between? >I am specfically needing to zero in at 1900 rpm at 88 Kpa , now is that >cell going to be the "1600" ? Some or is it closer to the "2000" rpm cell. Mostly. >Not to confuse the issue further, is 88 Kpa still in the "80" cell Some or >should the "90" cell be used since it is closer to that? ? Yes, the 90 should be used also, and more of the change should be made to this cell. >I'm Soooo >CoNfUsEd. ? ? Fred Remember that the engien is dynamic, that is, it's always in a state of change. You need to "spread out" the tune. If you need to change things at 1800 and 85 kPa, and you only adjust the 90 kPa and 2000 rpm cell, then you may affect fuel (or spark) at 93 kPa and 2100 rpm in a negative way. Zaphod > >- >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 12:47:27 -0600 >From: "Programmer" >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Editing Cell Tables >To: >Message-ID: <000e01c6bbe4$49685630$4250050a at WESTER2> >Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > ? ?reply-type=original > >the 'cells' are a 'theoretical load by rpm' grid. >Why not tune by the actual values ?? >Scan tool attached...look at MAP and RPM. > >Lyndon > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >To: >Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2006 9:31 PM >Subject: [Gmecm] Editing Cell Tables > > >> >> >> >> >> >> I am using TUNER PRO to edit my VE Tables. Does anyone know how the >> Cells are set up for the 7747 ECM. Does the RPM of 400, 800, 1200, Ect, >> over the cell coresponds to the begining or the end of the cell? >> I think I may have just gone stupid looking at these. Maybe someone >> would be kind enough to unshroud this for me...Thanks..Matt >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 2 >Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2006 17:36:20 -0500 >From: Jared Ryan >Subject: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 >To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >Message-ID: <10a1b41367ad62635c0506f859b86127 at caminofx.org> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > >I need a pointer. ?I must be doing something wrong. > >I am trying to burn an ANLU .bin in a 2732 chip for a 1228746. ?I have >a Willem programmer, and a blank 2732 and a blank 27C32. ?The Willem >programmer is able to read 2732 chips without problems. ?To test it, I >read an ANTT chip (F-body 305 TBI), and it read without problems, and >the data in the resulting .bin file made perfect sense in TunerCat. > >So I start with a 2732 chip that I know is blank, put it in the ZIF >socket in the programmer, select 2732 in the software, and set the DIP >switches as the program shows. ?I click "Burn," and it says it is >burning, but when it gets to the "Verify" step, it shows an error at >the very first address. ?I read the chip, and nothing has changed. >Every bit is still a 1, so it is still blank. > >The programmer interfaces with the PC with a parallel cable and I have >the USB cable hooked up to provide 5V power. > >What am I missing? ?I get the same results whether I try the 2732 or >27C32. ?The markings on the two chips are as follows: > >AM2732 >ADC >8318DP >C1983 AMD > >B8652 >NMC27C32Q >-45 > >Any advice would be most appreciated. > > ?---> Jared Ryan <--- >jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org > > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 3 >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 08:27:03 +0100 >From: "Robin Handley" >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 >To: >Message-ID: <012e01c6bc4f$322bfe20$020101c0 at gandalf> >Content-Type: text/plain; ? charset="iso-8859-1" > >Has your programmer ever successfully programmed an EPROM? If not, it >may be >faulty... > >Robin > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Jared Ryan" >To: >Sent: 09 August 2006 23:36 >Subject: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 > > >> I need a pointer. ?I must be doing something wrong. >> >> I am trying to burn an ANLU .bin in a 2732 chip for a 1228746. ?I have >> a Willem programmer, and a blank 2732 and a blank 27C32. ?The Willem >> programmer is able to read 2732 chips without problems. ?To test it, I >> read an ANTT chip (F-body 305 TBI), and it read without problems, and >> the data in the resulting .bin file made perfect sense in TunerCat. >> >> So I start with a 2732 chip that I know is blank, put it in the ZIF >> socket in the programmer, select 2732 in the software, and set the DIP >> switches as the program shows. ?I click "Burn," and it says it is >> burning, but when it gets to the "Verify" step, it shows an error at >> the very first address. ?I read the chip, and nothing has changed. >> Every bit is still a 1, so it is still blank. >> >> The programmer interfaces with the PC with a parallel cable and I have >> the USB cable hooked up to provide 5V power. >> >> What am I missing? ?I get the same results whether I try the 2732 or >> 27C32. ?The markings on the two chips are as follows: >> >> AM2732 >> ADC >> 8318DP >> C1983 AMD >> >> B8652 >> NMC27C32Q >> -45 >> >> Any advice would be most appreciated. >> >> ? ---> Jared Ryan <--- >> jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > > >------------------------------ > >Message: 4 >Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 03:17:28 -0500 (CDT) >From: Jared Ryan >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 >To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >Message-ID: >Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > >I finally figured it out, after putting it all aside and coming back to >it after a while.. > >I discovered the Willem forum, on the willem.org Web site, and found some >threads where people were discussing exactly the same issue, with the 2732 >chip. > >It turns out, after I switched the positions of the jumpers at JP5 and >JP6, the chip burned properly. ?Apparently this chip needs much higher >voltage than most to program. > >I have not put the chip in the car yet (will do so tomorrow), but the chip >verifies perfectly against the .bin file, so I am hopeful that it will >work well in the ECM. > >This is the first EPROM I have ever programmed, so I hope it works. ?It is >an unmodified .bin for a 1989 9C1 Caprice, which should be a close match >to my engine to start with. > >On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Robin Handley wrote: > >> Has your programmer ever successfully programmed an EPROM? If not, it >may be >> faulty... >> >> Robin >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Jared Ryan" >> To: >> Sent: 09 August 2006 23:36 >> Subject: [Gmecm] Burning 2732 >> >> >>> I need a pointer. ?I must be doing something wrong. >>> >>> I am trying to burn an ANLU .bin in a 2732 chip for a 1228746. ?I have >>> a Willem programmer, and a blank 2732 and a blank 27C32. ?The Willem >>> programmer is able to read 2732 chips without problems. ?To test it, I >>> read an ANTT chip (F-body 305 TBI), and it read without problems, and >>> the data in the resulting .bin file made perfect sense in TunerCat. >>> >>> So I start with a 2732 chip that I know is blank, put it in the ZIF >>> socket in the programmer, select 2732 in the software, and set the DIP >>> switches as the program shows. ?I click "Burn," and it says it is >>> burning, but when it gets to the "Verify" step, it shows an error at >>> the very first address. ?I read the chip, and nothing has changed. >>> Every bit is still a 1, so it is still blank. >>> >>> The programmer interfaces with the PC with a parallel cable and I have >>> the USB cable hooked up to provide 5V power. >>> >>> What am I missing? ?I get the same results whether I try the 2732 or >>> 27C32. ?The markings on the two chips are as follows: >>> >>> AM2732 >>> ADC >>> 8318DP >>> C1983 AMD >>> >>> B8652 >>> NMC27C32Q >>> -45 >>> >>> Any advice would be most appreciated. >>> >>> ? ---> Jared Ryan <--- >>> jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gmecm mailing list >>> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > >------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > >End of Gmecm Digest, Vol 18, Issue 13 >************************************* > > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > __________________________________________________________________ Switch to Netscape Internet Service. As low as $9.95 a month -- Sign up today at http://isp.netscape.com/register Netscape. Just the Net You Need. New! Netscape Toolbar for Internet Explorer Search from anywhere on the Web and block those annoying pop-ups. Download now at http://channels.netscape.com/ns/search/install.jsp From perlon at passagen.se Fri Aug 11 09:59:14 2006 From: perlon at passagen.se (Per Lonnborg) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:59:14 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor Message-ID: <14494449.1155308354056.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps10.sth.basefarm.net> Hi, It seems that the O2 sensor info page on this site is not up to date, can someone please tell me which heated 3-wire or 4-wire O2 sensor to use if I now have the AFS21 1-wire sensor? (1988 CHEVROLET G20 VAN V8 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = K) /Per From jay at vessels-clan.com Fri Aug 11 15:00:08 2006 From: jay at vessels-clan.com (Jay Vessels) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:00:08 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor In-Reply-To: <14494449.1155308354056.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps10.sth.basefarm.net> References: <14494449.1155308354056.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps10.sth.basefarm.net> Message-ID: <44DCE1C8.9010100@vessels-clan.com> Hi there! Use the AC AFS-74. Jay Vessels 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) Per Lonnborg wrote: > Hi, > > It seems that the O2 sensor info page on this site is not up to date, can someone please tell me which heated 3-wire or 4-wire O2 sensor > to use if I now have the AFS21 1-wire sensor? > (1988 CHEVROLET G20 VAN V8 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = K) > > > /Per > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > From rgmecm at yahoo.com Fri Aug 11 16:53:27 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 14:53:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <01e701c6b91d$ea031ae0$0300a8c0@NATALIE> Message-ID: <20060811215327.83001.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Well, slowly plugging along. I haven't seen Bob's files yet, but that's fine, since mine will be an all new design. Here are the features that will be implemented. Please speak up if you want to see something else: Features will include: Lights for: -Injectors -Fuel Pump -Fan 1 -SES -Shift -IAC -TCC -EGR -Can Purge -Air Select +4 extra to play with Digital Inputs: -Ign PWR -Switch for A/C clutch on -Park/N switch -Power steer switch -Diagnostic switch with 3 position select resistances. (for ALDL) -4? extra switches for whatever Analog/Controlled Inputs: -RPM -VSS -TPS -MAP -CTS -IAT -KNOCK -o2 simulator -FP voltage Input (adjustable 6-12V) -3 additional pots for extra inputs -Onboard RS232 coms Will keep you guys posted as things progress. I will release the schematic, and you guys can critique and change things as necessary, and we'll go from there. Thanks, Ryan --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. From perlon at passagen.se Fri Aug 11 16:53:46 2006 From: perlon at passagen.se (Per Lonnborg) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 23:53:46 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Ang: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor Message-ID: <33222723.1155333226953.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps15.sth.basefarm.net> OK, is this a 3-wire or a 4-wire? Do you know which vehicles this sensor was in originally? Btw, how come there is so many different sensors? Apart from if they are 0-1 Volts and 1,2,3 or 4-wire types, is it the physical dimension, tread size and so on that differs? I have heard of people with european veichles buying oxygen sensors for $250 when there is actually a sensor for a GM car with exactly the same specs for $25! /Per >----Ursprungligt meddelande---- >Fr?n: jay at vessels-clan.com >Datum: 2006-aug-11 22:00 >Till: "Per Lonnborg", >?rende: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor > >Hi there! > >Use the AC AFS-74. > >Jay Vessels >1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI >1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) > >Per Lonnborg wrote: >> Hi, >> >> It seems that the O2 sensor info page on this site is not up to date, can someone please tell me which heated 3-wire or 4-wire O2 sensor >> to use if I now have the AFS21 1-wire sensor? >> (1988 CHEVROLET G20 VAN V8 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = K) >> >> >> /Per >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> > From jryan at caminofx.org Fri Aug 11 17:23:27 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 17:23:27 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor In-Reply-To: <14494449.1155308354056.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps10.sth.basefarm.net> References: <14494449.1155308354056.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps10.sth.basefarm.net> Message-ID: <74b4ec787771faba8cdd0fd97ee67232@caminofx.org> If I recall correctly, I used an AFS-74 in a similar application. That would be a three-wire heated sensor. Unfortunately, I don't still have the sensor or a receipt, so I'm not 100% sure on the number. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 11, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Per Lonnborg wrote: > Hi, > > It seems that the O2 sensor info page on this site is not up to date, > can someone please tell me which heated 3-wire or 4-wire O2 sensor > to use if I now have the AFS21 1-wire sensor? > (1988 CHEVROLET G20 VAN V8 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = K) > > > /Per > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From b.shaw at comcast.net Fri Aug 11 19:06:19 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 20:06:19 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <20060811215327.83001.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060811215327.83001.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44DD1B7B.8050206@comcast.net> Connectors for injectors(2), IAC, ALDL. Push button for knock, maybe fire off a certain # knock pulses? Leds for +12v, +5V. Led for waste gate. Analog input for WB02. Connectors on the board for the ECM harness...then you could build different harnesses to use it with different ECUs. An easy-to-hit place to connect a scope ground. Easy to hit test points for all the ECM connections for the scope. Main power switch Main power fuse (or breaker) Are you doing the layout? Surface mount? What are you using for software/fab house? I've been using ExpressPCB's software and their fabrication service, it's worked pretty well for the stuff I've done and they have about the cheapest proto boards you can get. Bill You, too can do 0402! http://articulationllc.home.comcast.net/sm0402.htm Ryan Hess wrote: > Well, slowly plugging along. I haven't seen Bob's files yet, but that's fine, since mine will be an all new design. Here are the features that will be implemented. Please speak up if you want to see something else: > > Features will include: > > Lights for: > -Injectors > -Fuel Pump > -Fan 1 > -SES > -Shift > -IAC > -TCC > -EGR > -Can Purge > -Air Select > +4 extra to play with > > Digital Inputs: > -Ign PWR > -Switch for A/C clutch on > -Park/N switch > -Power steer switch > -Diagnostic switch with 3 position select resistances. (for ALDL) > -4? extra switches for whatever > > Analog/Controlled Inputs: > -RPM > -VSS > -TPS > -MAP > -CTS > -IAT > -KNOCK > -o2 simulator > -FP voltage Input (adjustable 6-12V) > -3 additional pots for extra inputs > > -Onboard RS232 coms > > Will keep you guys posted as things progress. I will release the schematic, and you guys can critique and change things as necessary, and we'll go from there. Thanks, > > Ryan > > > --------------------------------- > How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From tl34ru at yahoo.com Fri Aug 11 21:15:28 2006 From: tl34ru at yahoo.com (terry) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 19:15:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor In-Reply-To: <74b4ec787771faba8cdd0fd97ee67232@caminofx.org> Message-ID: <20060812021528.42308.qmail@web32510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> The AFS-74 fits 94-95 GM trucks. Terry rosesandwrenches.com --- Jared Ryan wrote: > If I recall correctly, I used an AFS-74 in a similar > application. That > would be a three-wire heated sensor. Unfortunately, > I don't still have > the sensor or a receipt, so I'm not 100% sure on the > number. > > ---> Jared Ryan <--- > jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org > > On Aug 11, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Per Lonnborg wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > It seems that the O2 sensor info page on this site > is not up to date, > > can someone please tell me which heated 3-wire or > 4-wire O2 sensor > > to use if I now have the AFS21 1-wire sensor? > > (1988 CHEVROLET G20 VAN V8 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N > Engine VIN = K) > > > > > > /Per > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From jryan at caminofx.org Fri Aug 11 21:18:17 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 21:18:17 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor In-Reply-To: <20060812021528.42308.qmail@web32510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060812021528.42308.qmail@web32510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02a715b7c999f271e93f55b4b53002c7@caminofx.org> In my case, I retrofitted it to a 1984 El Camino with CCC carburetor. I was surprised in how it cut the time it took to go into closed loop. It made a big difference. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 11, 2006, at 9:15 PM, terry wrote: > The AFS-74 fits 94-95 GM trucks. > Terry > rosesandwrenches.com > --- Jared Ryan wrote: > >> If I recall correctly, I used an AFS-74 in a similar >> application. That >> would be a three-wire heated sensor. Unfortunately, >> I don't still have >> the sensor or a receipt, so I'm not 100% sure on the >> number. >> >> ---> Jared Ryan <--- >> jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org >> >> On Aug 11, 2006, at 9:59 AM, Per Lonnborg wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> It seems that the O2 sensor info page on this site >> is not up to date, >>> can someone please tell me which heated 3-wire or >> 4-wire O2 sensor >>> to use if I now have the AFS21 1-wire sensor? >>> (1988 CHEVROLET G20 VAN V8 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N >> Engine VIN = K) >>> >>> >>> /Per >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gmecm mailing list >>> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>> Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From info at jenkinseng.com Sat Aug 12 02:38:29 2006 From: info at jenkinseng.com (Peter Jenkins) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:38:29 +1000 Subject: [Gmecm] re 1 wire to heated o2 sensor Message-ID: <003801c6bde2$52b32ad0$6501a8c0@PETER> it is pretty simple it doesn't matter wether you use 3 or 4 wire the o2 sensor input is always d7 earth is for 02 sensor d6 and then you have a 12 v feed for both 3 or 4 wire which heats the o2 sensor (and another earth for the 12 v heater or not) > Peter Jenkins > 10336 Murray River Rd Pine Mountain Vic. 3709 > Australia. > PH 0425 705764 > Email. info at jenkinseng.com > web. www.jenkinseng.com DISCLAIMER > * This email and any attachment may contain confidential information. > If you are not the intended recipient you are not authorised to copy > or disclose all or any part of it without the prior written consent > of Jenkins Engineering. > * Opinions expressed in this email and any attachment are those of the > sender and not necessarily the opinions of Jenkins Engineering. > * Please scan this email and any attachment for viruses. Jenkins > Engineering does > not accept responsibility for problems caused by viruses, whether > it is Jenkins Engineering's fault or not!!! From dennysweet at charter.net Sat Aug 12 07:15:36 2006 From: dennysweet at charter.net (Denny) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 05:15:36 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench References: <20060811215327.83001.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002c01c6be09$04ead600$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> I have never done this,but would love to give it a try! Around here nobody knows how to check them! Denny From rawardsr at ameritech.net Sat Aug 12 10:34:21 2006 From: rawardsr at ameritech.net (rawardsr) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 11:34:21 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <20060811215327.83001.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060811215327.83001.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44DDF4FD.80808@ameritech.net> Sorry, I've been busy as all get up at work. I'm the only electronics tech, and we received over 25 items for me to look at in the past week. Any techs in the Dayon Ohio area who like repairing industial electronics? Must be able to work without schematics to the component level. Mostly DC electric torque equipment, along with some servo drives (Kollmorgen, ReFu/Intramat). I also spent last weekend swapping a motor out and in a 95 V6 Mustang for a co worker. So I'm running a bit behind on this. Bob Ryan Hess wrote: > Well, slowly plugging along. I haven't seen Bob's files yet, but that's fine, since mine will be an all new design. Here are the features that will be implemented. Please speak up if you want to see something else: > > Features will include: > > Lights for: > -Injectors > -Fuel Pump > -Fan 1 > -SES > -Shift > -IAC > -TCC > -EGR > -Can Purge > -Air Select > +4 extra to play with > > Digital Inputs: > -Ign PWR > -Switch for A/C clutch on > -Park/N switch > -Power steer switch > -Diagnostic switch with 3 position select resistances. (for ALDL) > -4? extra switches for whatever > > Analog/Controlled Inputs: > -RPM > -VSS > -TPS > -MAP > -CTS > -IAT > -KNOCK > -o2 simulator > -FP voltage Input (adjustable 6-12V) > -3 additional pots for extra inputs > > -Onboard RS232 coms > > Will keep you guys posted as things progress. I will release the schematic, and you guys can critique and change things as necessary, and we'll go from there. Thanks, > > Ryan > > > --------------------------------- > How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From b.shaw at comcast.net Sat Aug 12 11:33:12 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:33:12 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] 749 twiki Message-ID: <44DE02C8.2030403@comcast.net> I've created a 749 twiki and added it to the EcmInfo page. Anyone want to add to it? (Robin? :-) Just click the 'edit' button at the bottom of the page.... http://www.diy-efi.org/twiki/bin/view.pl/Gmecm/1227749 Best, Bill From b.shaw at comcast.net Sat Aug 12 11:36:42 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 12:36:42 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ECM test bench In-Reply-To: <20060812013414.72545.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060812013414.72545.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44DE039A.8000600@comcast.net> I started a twiki for the ECM Workbench. It's called ECMWorkbench :-) and it's under ECMInfo. http://www.diy-efi.org/twiki/bin/view.pl/Gmecm/ECMWorkbench There's a pic of my 1227749 bench in it. If anyone wants to add to it just click the 'edit' button at the bottom of the page. Through holes for the injectors & stuff would be fine. If they're laid out for a terminal block you'd have the option of using a terminal or just soldering the leads into the board. DB connector to the ECM harness would be OK. Bill Ryan Hess wrote: > All of the below is included. ;) > > Well, the board will allow you to use either terminal blocks, or a DB > connector for easy interchangability between different ECMs. You'll > have to supply the injector connectors (or were you saying you just > want to be able to connect them to the board somehow?) It will have > several extra LEDs, switches, pots, etc. I want to keep this user > friendly, so surface mount is out. (Sorry!) I'm just fine with SMT, in > fact if I were to build them it would make my life 1000x easier, but > 50% of DIY electronics hobbyests don't have experience with SMT. I'm > using eagle to do the schematic and board, and a friend of mine has > promised me cheap boards (we'll see). I've used ExpressPCB, but don't > particularly like their interface, and it doesn't offer an autorouter. > Their boards are good though. > > Ryan > > */Bill - Comcast /* wrote: > > Connectors for injectors(2), IAC, ALDL. > Push button for knock, maybe fire off a certain # knock pulses? > Leds for +12v, +5V. > Led for waste gate. > Analog input for WB02. > Connectors on the board for the ECM harness...then you could build > different harnesses to use it with different ECUs. > An easy-to-hit place to connect a scope ground. > Easy to hit test points for all the ECM connections for the scope. > Main power switch > Main power fuse (or breaker) > > Are you doing the layout? Surface mount? What are you using for > software/fab house? I've been using ExpressPCB's software and their > fabrication service, it's worked pretty well for the stuff I've > done and > they have about the cheapest proto boards you can get. > > Bill > You, too can do 0402! > http://articulationllc.home.comcast.net/sm0402.htm > > Ryan Hess wrote: > > Well, slowly plugging along. I haven't seen Bob's files yet, but > that's fine, since mine will be an all new design. Here are the > features that will be implemented. Please speak up if you want to > see something else: > > > > Features will include: > > > > Lights for: > > -Injectors > > -Fuel Pump > > -Fan 1 > > -SES > > -Shift > > -IAC > > -TCC > > -EGR > > -Can Purge > > -Air Select > > +4 extra to play with > > > > Digital Inputs: > > -Ign PWR > > -Switch for A/C clutch on > > -Park/N switch > > -Power steer switch > > -Diagnostic switch with 3 position select resistances. (for ALDL) > > -4? extra switches for whatever > > > > Analog/Controlled Inputs: > > -RPM > > -VSS > > -TPS > > -MAP > > -CTS > > -IAT > > -KNOCK > > -o2 simulator > > -FP voltage Input (adjustable 6-12V) > > -3 additional pots for extra inputs > > > > -Onboard RS232 coms > > > > Will keep you guys posted as things progress. I will release the > schematic, and you guys can critique and change things as > necessary, and we'll go from there. Thanks, > > > > Ryan > > > > > > --------------------------------- > > How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone > call rates. > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Do you Yahoo!? > Get on board. You're invited > > to try the new Yahoo! Mail Beta. From kc5aeq at earthlink.net Sat Aug 12 17:37:10 2006 From: kc5aeq at earthlink.net (Craig Smith) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:37:10 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem Message-ID: <1553946.1155422230922.JavaMail.root@elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Everyone I'm having a fuel pressure problem with a conversion we're performing on my fathers MGB. The fuel system is plumbed just as a stock Chevy TBI system running at 16# With an external Carter fuel pump mounted in the right hand battery box about three feet from the tank. The fuel return from the tbi is plumbed back to the tank dumping about an inch from the tank bottom. After running for about 5 miles I'm loosing fuel pressure. It acts like a vapor lock condition. After it sits a few minutes it cranks and runs fine until it heats back up. I figure I'm picking up heat from the engine compartment. Has anyone placed an aftermarket fuel return regulator downstream of the pump returning to the tank and blocked the return at the TBI? Is the fuel return thru the TBI used to cool the injectors, or does it have another purpose? Thanks Craig From dgilbert78 at juno.com Sat Aug 12 18:05:41 2006 From: dgilbert78 at juno.com (dgilbert78 at juno.com) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:05:41 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem Message-ID: <20060812.190542.-166465.0.dgilbert78@juno.com> Hello: Try the test with the fuel filler cap loose?? Darryl... On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:37:10 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Craig Smith writes: > Everyone > > I'm having a fuel pressure problem with a conversion we're > performing on my fathers MGB. The fuel system is plumbed just as a > stock Chevy TBI system running at 16# With an external Carter fuel > pump mounted in the right hand battery box about three feet from the > tank. The fuel return from the tbi is plumbed back to the tank > dumping about an inch from the tank bottom. > > After running for about 5 miles I'm loosing fuel pressure. It acts > like a vapor lock condition. After it sits a few minutes it cranks > and runs fine until it heats back up. I figure I'm picking up heat > from the engine compartment. Has anyone placed an aftermarket fuel > return regulator downstream of the pump returning to the tank and > blocked the return at the TBI? Is the fuel return thru the TBI used > to cool the injectors, or does it have another purpose? > > Thanks > Craig > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From dennysweet at charter.net Sat Aug 12 20:52:08 2006 From: dennysweet at charter.net (Denny) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:52:08 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem References: <1553946.1155422230922.JavaMail.root@elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <000601c6be7b$163d0370$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> Craig, I could be that the gas cap needs venting, or maybe the fact that the fuel pump dosent have enough pushing pressure. I have done this before but ended up putting the pump in the tank. Not sure why though. From kc5aeq at earthlink.net Sat Aug 12 19:09:39 2006 From: kc5aeq at earthlink.net (Craig Smith) Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:09:39 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem Message-ID: <14206600.1155427779998.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I have a guage inline at the discharge of the pump. The pump is capable of 45# I'm using the carter external pump that is designed for TBI add ons its a rotary vane pump. When the pressure droped I pinched the return line off at the TBI pressure still stayed at near zero. I pulled the tank checked the pickup no strainer no restriction. I wish there was enough room to run an in tank pump. -----Original Message----- >From: dgilbert78 at juno.com >Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:32 PM >To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > >Are you monitoring fuel pressure someplace with a pressure gauge or >something?? the TBI system is pretty simple. You have a pump pumping at >least 18lb pressure and enough volume for the injectors being used. The >regulator is regulating fuel pressure at the injector inlet typically 13 >lbs. The overflow fuel free flows back to the tank. Possibly a fuel >filter problem, possibly fuel supply starving from pluged fuel pickup. >Check if pump can deliver the required volume at required pressure, not >much left >good luck >Darryl... >On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:16:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Craig Smith > writes: >> I pulled the cap and ran it same thing. >> I'm wondering if the fuel is flashing off between the tank and >> pump. >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >From: dgilbert78 at juno.com >> >Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:05 PM >> >To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net, gmecm at diy-efi.org >> >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem >> > >> >Hello: Try the test with the fuel filler cap loose?? >> >Darryl... >> >On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:37:10 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Craig Smith >> > writes: >> >> Everyone >> >> >> >> I'm having a fuel pressure problem with a conversion we're >> >> performing on my fathers MGB. The fuel system is plumbed just as >> a >> >> stock Chevy TBI system running at 16# With an external Carter >> fuel >> >> pump mounted in the right hand battery box about three feet from >> the >> >> tank. The fuel return from the tbi is plumbed back to the tank >> >> dumping about an inch from the tank bottom. >> >> >> >> After running for about 5 miles I'm loosing fuel pressure. It >> acts >> >> like a vapor lock condition. After it sits a few minutes it >> cranks >> >> and runs fine until it heats back up. I figure I'm picking up >> heat >> >> from the engine compartment. Has anyone placed an aftermarket >> fuel >> >> return regulator downstream of the pump returning to the tank and >> >> >> blocked the return at the TBI? Is the fuel return thru the TBI >> used >> >> to cool the injectors, or does it have another purpose? >> >> >> >> Thanks >> >> Craig >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Gmecm mailing list >> >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> From aphelion79 at cox.net Sun Aug 13 10:03:34 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:03:34 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 In-Reply-To: <000601c6be7b$163d0370$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> References: <1553946.1155422230922.JavaMail.root@elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <000601c6be7b$163d0370$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> Message-ID: <44DF3F46.9020808@cox.net> Ok all... back to my Jeep which is now running wonderful thanks to all of you who helped me figure out how to set the timing! =D The only remaining two "problems" I have... is now I just need to figure out how to wire the Check Engine light... I can't find any wiring schematics that show anything about where it should plug in to! Also there are 3 wires coming out of my Oil Pressure sensor... one wire says it goes to "instrument cluster". I tried that wire and my oil pressure gage shot up to 80 LBS (the upper limit) when I turned the key to "on" it went back to 0 and didn't move after I started it... Should this sender shoot out the same amount of volts as my old oil pressure gage? Can I use my OLD sender and have no problems? (Looking at the wiring diagram it appears possibly that when there is no oil pressure the fuel pump will not run?) Engine Wiring Schematic: http://members.cox.net/aphelion79/enginewiring.pdf If so, would it be safe just to run the gray and orange wires together? Body Wiring Schematic: http://members.cox.net/aphelion79/bodywiring.pdf From aphelion79 at cox.net Sun Aug 13 10:37:35 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:37:35 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 In-Reply-To: <44DF3F46.9020808@cox.net> References: <1553946.1155422230922.JavaMail.root@elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <000601c6be7b$163d0370$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> <44DF3F46.9020808@cox.net> Message-ID: <44DF473F.4040209@cox.net> For those of you new to my endeavor I'm using a TBI system off of an 88 Chevy S-10 2.5L 151CID Engine... 2WD as well... Aphelion79 wrote: > Ok all... back to my Jeep which is now running wonderful thanks to all > of you who helped me figure out how to set the timing! =D The only > remaining two "problems" I have... is now I just need to figure out > how to wire the Check Engine light... I can't find any wiring > schematics that show anything about where it should plug in to! > Also there are 3 wires coming out of my Oil Pressure sensor... one > wire says it goes to "instrument cluster". I tried that wire and my > oil pressure gage shot up to 80 LBS (the upper limit) when I turned > the key to "on" it went back to 0 and didn't move after I started > it... Should this sender shoot out the same amount of volts as my old > oil pressure gage? Can I use my OLD sender and have no problems? > (Looking at the wiring diagram it appears possibly that when there is > no oil pressure the fuel pump will not run?) > Engine Wiring Schematic: > http://members.cox.net/aphelion79/enginewiring.pdf > > If so, would it be safe just to run the gray and orange wires together? > > Body Wiring Schematic: > http://members.cox.net/aphelion79/bodywiring.pdf > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From dennysweet at charter.net Sun Aug 13 18:07:58 2006 From: dennysweet at charter.net (Denny) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 16:07:58 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 References: <1553946.1155422230922.JavaMail.root@elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net><000601c6be7b$163d0370$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> <44DF3F46.9020808@cox.net> Message-ID: <001001c6bf2d$51f9d980$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> Those extra 2 wires go to the fuel pump relay for the prime of fuel when you turn on the key. I think 1 goes to ecm and the other to the relay. From davida1 at hiwaay.net Sun Aug 13 17:19:12 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 17:19:12 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 References: +ADw-1553946.1155422230922.JavaMail.root+AEA-elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net+AD4APA-000601c6be7b+ACQ-163d0370+ACQ-1c02a8c0+AEA-dennyhuyir5nuj+AD4- +ADw-44DF3F46.9020808+AEA-cox.net+AD4- Message-ID: <007101c6bf26$87f5e760$50c8a5a6@yancey.com> I've got 2 GMECM controlled cars which are retrofits. Both of them use the ECM signal only to control the fuel pump relay. No oil pressure switch involved. The ECM keeps the fuel pump signal active as long as it sees the distributor / DIS reference pulses. The oil pressure switch is redundant. If the ECM fails to the point it will not keep the fuelpump signal active, what are the chances it will still run at all? The behaviour of your gauge is just what's expected when a warning lamp switch is connected to a gauge which is expecting an analog sender. The gauge shows a high reading when there is low resistance on the sender. The switch is infinitely low resistance when the engine is not running and will peg the gauge. You can safely use your original Jeep gauge sender. If you want to keep both, just use a brass tee-fitting. Just my two-cents worth+ACE- David ----- Original Message ----- From: +ACI-Aphelion79+ACI- +ADw-aphelion79+AEA-cox.net+AD4- To: +ADw-gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org+AD4- Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 10:03 AM Subject: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring,'88 S-10 +AD4- Ok all... back to my Jeep which is now running wonderful thanks to all +AD4- of you who helped me figure out how to set the timing+ACE- +AD0-D The only +AD4- remaining two +ACI-problems+ACI- I have... is now I just need to figure out how +AD4- to wire the Check Engine light... I can't find any wiring schematics +AD4- that show anything about where it should plug in to+ACE- +AD4- +AD4- Also there are 3 wires coming out of my Oil Pressure sensor... one wire +AD4- says it goes to +ACI-instrument cluster+ACI-. I tried that wire and my oil +AD4- pressure gage shot up to 80 LBS (the upper limit) when I turned the key +AD4- to +ACI-on+ACI- it went back to 0 and didn't move after I started it... Should +AD4- this sender shoot out the same amount of volts as my old oil pressure +AD4- gage? Can I use my OLD sender and have no problems? (Looking at the +AD4- wiring diagram it appears possibly that when there is no oil pressure +AD4- the fuel pump will not run?) +AD4- Engine Wiring Schematic: +AD4- http://members.cox.net/aphelion79/enginewiring.pdf +AD4- +ADw-http://members.cox.net/aphelion79/enginewiring.pdf+AD4- +AD4- If so, would it be safe just to run the gray and orange wires together? +AD4- +AD4- Body Wiring Schematic: +AD4- http://members.cox.net/aphelion79/bodywiring.pdf +AD4- +AD4- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4- Gmecm mailing list +AD4- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4- From aphelion79 at cox.net Sun Aug 13 17:34:46 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 17:34:46 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 In-Reply-To: <007101c6bf26$87f5e760$50c8a5a6@yancey.com> References: +ADw-1553946.1155422230922.JavaMail.root+AEA-elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net+AD4APA-000601c6be7b+ACQ-163d0370+ACQ-1c02a8c0+AEA-dennyhuyir5nuj+AD4- +ADw-44DF3F46.9020808+AEA-cox.net+AD4- <007101c6bf26$87f5e760$50c8a5a6@yancey.com> Message-ID: <44DFA906.20305@cox.net> Brilliant I didn't think of using a T Fitting :) Also I didn't think of the fact that at low oil pressure the S-10 may not have had a gauge at all... just a warning lamp that says "Oil" or something! Thanks for the information... I could always do the "lets see if it runs if I unplug this" thing... but I'd have no idea if it isn't running correctly because its not getting the expected signals for not being plugged in! Anywho... I'll just screw in the old sender and call it good... Thanks again all! Now any information on how to wire up a Check Engine Light, or could I just use a Scan Tool on the ALDL instead and not worry about wiring up a light? (I was reading a website that stated after jumping A and B on the ALDL and turning the key to ON the Check Engine Light would flash so many times and mean this, etc etc... could I get the same info from a Scan Tool?) -Matt David Allen wrote: > I've got 2 GMECM controlled cars which are retrofits. Both of them use the ECM signal only to control the fuel pump relay. No oil pressure switch involved. The ECM keeps the fuel pump signal active as long as it sees the distributor / DIS reference pulses. > The oil pressure switch is redundant. If the ECM fails to the point it will not keep the fuelpump signal active, what are the chances it will still run at all? > The behaviour of your gauge is just what's expected when a warning lamp switch is connected to a gauge which is expecting an analog sender. The gauge shows a high reading when there is low resistance on the sender. The switch is infinitely low resistance when the engine is not running and will peg the gauge. You can safely use your original Jeep gauge sender. If you want to keep both, just use a brass tee-fitting. > Just my two-cents worth! > David > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Aphelion79" > To: > Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 10:03 AM > Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring,'88 S-10 > > > >> Ok all... back to my Jeep which is now running wonderful thanks to all >> of you who helped me figure out how to set the timing! =D The only >> remaining two "problems" I have... is now I just need to figure out how >> to wire the Check Engine light... I can't find any wiring schematics >> that show anything about where it should plug in to! >> >> Also there are 3 wires coming out of my Oil Pressure sensor... one wire >> says it goes to "instrument cluster". I tried that wire and my oil >> pressure gage shot up to 80 LBS (the upper limit) when I turned the key >> to "on" it went back to 0 and didn't move after I started it... Should >> this sender shoot out the same amount of volts as my old oil pressure >> gage? Can I use my OLD sender and have no problems? (Looking at the >> wiring diagram it appears possibly that when there is no oil pressure >> the fuel pump will not run?) >> Engine Wiring Schematic: >> http://members.cox.net/aphelion79/enginewiring.pdf >> >> If so, would it be safe just to run the gray and orange wires together? >> >> Body Wiring Schematic: >> http://members.cox.net/aphelion79/bodywiring.pdf >> >> +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From jay at vessels-clan.com Sun Aug 13 18:06:45 2006 From: jay at vessels-clan.com (Jay Vessels) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 19:06:45 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 In-Reply-To: <44DFA906.20305@cox.net> References: +ADw-1553946.1155422230922.JavaMail.root+AEA-elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net+AD4APA-000601c6be7b+ACQ-163d0370+ACQ-1c02a8c0+AEA-dennyhuyir5nuj+AD4- +ADw-44DF3F46.9020808+AEA-cox.net+AD4- <007101c6bf26$87f5e760$50c8a5a6@yancey.com> <44DFA906.20305@cox.net> Message-ID: <44DFB085.9010808@vessels-clan.com> Hi there! > Now any information on how to wire up a Check Engine Light The Check Engine light is driven off of one of the ECM pins (I don't have a diagram handy or I'd look it up). It connects to one side of a 12V lamp, and the other side of the lamp is grounded. Jay Vessels 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) From aphelion79 at cox.net Sun Aug 13 19:44:42 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 19:44:42 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 In-Reply-To: <44DFB085.9010808@vessels-clan.com> References: +ADw-1553946.1155422230922.JavaMail.root+AEA-elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net+AD4APA-000601c6be7b+ACQ-163d0370+ACQ-1c02a8c0+AEA-dennyhuyir5nuj+AD4- +ADw-44DF3F46.9020808+AEA-cox.net+AD4- <007101c6bf26$87f5e760$50c8a5a6@yancey.com> <44DFA906.20305@cox.net> <44DFB085.9010808@vessels-clan.com> Message-ID: <44DFC77A.1080002@cox.net> Any idea where to look for a good diagram?... the one I have sucks lol Jay Vessels wrote: > Hi there! > > >> Now any information on how to wire up a Check Engine Light >> > > > The Check Engine light is driven off of one of the ECM pins (I don't > have a diagram handy or I'd look it up). It connects to one side of a > 12V lamp, and the other side of the lamp is grounded. > > Jay Vessels > 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI > 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) > +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Sun Aug 13 20:58:58 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 20:58:58 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Aphelion79 > Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 10:04 AM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure > Sensor Wiring,'88 S-10 > > Ok all... back to my Jeep which is now running wonderful > thanks to all of you who helped me figure out how to set the > timing! =D The only remaining two "problems" I have... is > now I just need to figure out how to wire the Check Engine > light... I can't find any wiring schematics that show > anything about where it should plug in to! You should have the service manual for the S-10, it'll make life much simpler. If you go to the gmecm twiki, click ECM info, then click 1227747 you'll some links to scanned service manual pages. Page 4 has the check engine light on it. One side of the light goes to fused +12, the other side of the light to the ECM. I think some applications have this reversed, however, with the light wired to ground and the ECM providing power. Best to check specifically how the S-10 was wired. --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From aphelion79 at cox.net Sun Aug 13 21:28:23 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 21:28:23 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44DFDFC7.9040902@cox.net> 1227165 is the ECM I'm using if the stuff I saved is correct... would that be the same pin number etc? Steve Ravet wrote: > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org >> [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Aphelion79 >> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 10:04 AM >> To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure >> Sensor Wiring,'88 S-10 >> >> Ok all... back to my Jeep which is now running wonderful >> thanks to all of you who helped me figure out how to set the >> timing! =D The only remaining two "problems" I have... is >> now I just need to figure out how to wire the Check Engine >> light... I can't find any wiring schematics that show >> anything about where it should plug in to! >> > > You should have the service manual for the S-10, it'll make life much > simpler. > > If you go to the gmecm twiki, click ECM info, then click 1227747 you'll > some links to scanned service manual pages. Page 4 has the check engine > light on it. One side of the light goes to fused +12, the other side of > the light to the ECM. I think some applications have this reversed, > however, with the light wired to ground and the ECM providing power. > Best to check specifically how the S-10 was wired. > > --steve > > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From aphelion79 at cox.net Sun Aug 13 21:37:38 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 21:37:38 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor Wiring, '88 S-10 In-Reply-To: <44DFDFC7.9040902@cox.net> References: <44DFDFC7.9040902@cox.net> Message-ID: <44DFE1F2.4050402@cox.net> Well it looks like they are both A5 and both BRN/WHT so =D I'll give it a try! It looks like both have fused +12V and use the ECM BRN/WHT as ground... Thanks again all! Aphelion79 wrote: > 1227165 is the ECM I'm using if the stuff I saved is correct... would > that be the same pin number etc? > > Steve Ravet wrote: >> >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] >>> On Behalf Of Aphelion79 >>> Sent: Sunday, August 13, 2006 10:04 AM >>> To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >>> Subject: [Gmecm] Check Engine Light Wiring / Oil Pressure Sensor >>> Wiring,'88 S-10 >>> >>> Ok all... back to my Jeep which is now running wonderful thanks to >>> all of you who helped me figure out how to set the timing! =D The >>> only remaining two "problems" I have... is now I just need to figure >>> out how to wire the Check Engine light... I can't find any wiring >>> schematics that show anything about where it should plug in to! >> >> You should have the service manual for the S-10, it'll make life much >> simpler. >> >> If you go to the gmecm twiki, click ECM info, then click 1227747 you'll >> some links to scanned service manual pages. Page 4 has the check engine >> light on it. One side of the light goes to fused +12, the other side of >> the light to the ECM. I think some applications have this reversed, >> however, with the light wired to ground and the ECM providing power. >> Best to check specifically how the S-10 was wired. >> >> --steve >> >> -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments >> are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the >> intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not >> disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or >> store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From perlon at passagen.se Mon Aug 14 03:09:22 2006 From: perlon at passagen.se (Per Lonnborg) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:09:22 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Ang: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor Message-ID: <19099062.1155542962921.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps17.sth.basefarm.net> Hi, will a AC AFS-76 do the job as well? They seem to fit in 1995 Chevy Trucks: http://198.208.187.182/internet/VehiclePartFits.jsp?autosel=A&part=afs76 My parts dealer here in Sweden only seem to have the AFS-76, for about $95. I repeat my second question again: How come there is so many AC Delco parts-no for these O2 sensors? Is there ANY difference between for example AFGS-74 and AFS-76?? /Per >----Ursprungligt meddelande---- >Fr?n: jay at vessels-clan.com >Datum: 2006-aug-11 22:00 >Till: "Per Lonnborg", >?rende: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor > >Hi there! > >Use the AC AFS-74. > >Jay Vessels >1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI >1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) > >Per Lonnborg wrote: >> Hi, >> >> It seems that the O2 sensor info page on this site is not up to date, can someone please tell me which heated 3-wire or 4-wire O2 sensor >> to use if I now have the AFS21 1-wire sensor? >> (1988 CHEVROLET G20 VAN V8 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = K) >> >> >> /Per >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> > From perlon at passagen.se Mon Aug 14 03:17:34 2006 From: perlon at passagen.se (Per Lonnborg) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 10:17:34 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Ang: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor Message-ID: <5612783.1155543454800.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps17.sth.basefarm.net> Sorry, I meant of course if there is ANY difference between AFS-74 and AFS-76. /Per >----Ursprungligt meddelande---- >Fr?n: perlon at passagen.se >Datum: 2006-aug-14 10:09 >Till: , >?rende: Ang: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor > >Hi, > >will a AC AFS-76 do the job as well? > >They seem to fit in 1995 Chevy Trucks: >http://198.208.187.182/internet/VehiclePartFits.jsp?autosel=A&part=afs76 > >My parts dealer here in Sweden only seem to have the AFS-76, for about $95. > >I repeat my second question again: How come there is so many AC Delco parts-no for these O2 sensors? Is there ANY difference between for >example AFGS-74 and AFS-76?? > >/Per > >>----Ursprungligt meddelande---- >>Fr?n: jay at vessels-clan.com >>Datum: 2006-aug-11 22:00 >>Till: "Per Lonnborg", >>?rende: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor >> >>Hi there! >> >>Use the AC AFS-74. >> >>Jay Vessels >>1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI >>1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) >> >>Per Lonnborg wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> It seems that the O2 sensor info page on this site is not up to date, can someone please tell me which heated 3-wire or 4-wire O2 >sensor >>> to use if I now have the AFS21 1-wire sensor? >>> (1988 CHEVROLET G20 VAN V8 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = K) >>> >>> >>> /Per >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gmecm mailing list >>> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >>> >>> >>> >> > > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From dennysweet at charter.net Mon Aug 14 06:11:26 2006 From: dennysweet at charter.net (Denny) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 04:11:26 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor References: <5612783.1155543454800.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps17.sth.basefarm.net> Message-ID: <000201c6bf92$63269080$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> According to www.rockauto.com the AFS20,21,76 are all listed for the 5.7 truck . It list the AFS21 for the van! It looks like 20 and 21 are single wire(non-heated) and have the same connector but the 76 is multi wire (heated) From kc5aeq at earthlink.net Mon Aug 14 11:50:36 2006 From: kc5aeq at earthlink.net (Craig Smith) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 11:50:36 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem Message-ID: <410-220068114165036415@earthlink.net> Darryl I confirmed it today with an ir temp gun it appears the fuel is getting hot in the tank 120 F and flashing of between the tank and the inlet of the fuel pump. The heat is coming from the Exhaust manifold Thru the TBI ( 4cyl engine both manifolds stacked on one side of the engine). Has anyone had experience with insulation tapes etc. to insulate between the manifolds? Craig > [Original Message] > From: > To: > Date: 8/12/2006 7:30:23 PM > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > > There you answered your question. The pump stopped working , or the pump > blew open a bypass valve, but no pressure when you dead headed it > apparently pump is not pumping or it went into a bypass mode > internally??? > darryl.. > On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:09:39 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Craig Smith > writes: > > I have a guage inline at the discharge of the pump. The pump is > > capable of 45# I'm using the carter external pump that is designed > > for TBI add ons its a rotary vane pump. When the pressure droped I > > pinched the return line off at the TBI pressure still stayed at near > > zero. I pulled the tank checked the pickup no strainer no > > restriction. > > > > I wish there was enough room to run an in tank pump. > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > >From: dgilbert78 at juno.com > > >Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:32 PM > > >To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net > > >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > > > > > >Are you monitoring fuel pressure someplace with a pressure gauge > > or > > >something?? the TBI system is pretty simple. You have a pump > > pumping at > > >least 18lb pressure and enough volume for the injectors being used. > > The > > >regulator is regulating fuel pressure at the injector inlet > > typically 13 > > >lbs. The overflow fuel free flows back to the tank. Possibly a > > fuel > > >filter problem, possibly fuel supply starving from pluged fuel > > pickup. > > >Check if pump can deliver the required volume at required pressure, > > not > > >much left > > >good luck > > >Darryl... > > >On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:16:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Craig Smith > > > writes: > > >> I pulled the cap and ran it same thing. > > >> I'm wondering if the fuel is flashing off between the tank and > > >> pump. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> >From: dgilbert78 at juno.com > > >> >Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:05 PM > > >> >To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net, gmecm at diy-efi.org > > >> >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > > >> > > > >> >Hello: Try the test with the fuel filler cap loose?? > > >> >Darryl... > > >> >On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:37:10 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Craig Smith > > >> > writes: > > >> >> Everyone > > >> >> > > >> >> I'm having a fuel pressure problem with a conversion we're > > >> >> performing on my fathers MGB. The fuel system is plumbed just > > as > > >> a > > >> >> stock Chevy TBI system running at 16# With an external Carter > > > > >> fuel > > >> >> pump mounted in the right hand battery box about three feet > > from > > >> the > > >> >> tank. The fuel return from the tbi is plumbed back to the > > tank > > >> >> dumping about an inch from the tank bottom. > > >> >> > > >> >> After running for about 5 miles I'm loosing fuel pressure. It > > > > >> acts > > >> >> like a vapor lock condition. After it sits a few minutes it > > >> cranks > > >> >> and runs fine until it heats back up. I figure I'm picking up > > > > >> heat > > >> >> from the engine compartment. Has anyone placed an aftermarket > > > > >> fuel > > >> >> return regulator downstream of the pump returning to the tank > > and > > >> > > >> >> blocked the return at the TBI? Is the fuel return thru the > > TBI > > >> used > > >> >> to cool the injectors, or does it have another purpose? > > >> >> > > >> >> Thanks > > >> >> Craig > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> _______________________________________________ > > >> >> Gmecm mailing list > > >> >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > >> >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > >> >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > > From perlon at passagen.se Mon Aug 14 16:23:40 2006 From: perlon at passagen.se (Per Lonnborg) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 23:23:40 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor Message-ID: <7732625.1155590620587.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps16.sth.basefarm.net> Well I went to the shop today and bought two AFS-76, se pic at: http://www.lanechoice.net/EFI/AFS76.jpg I will put one in each collector on my headers. Could it be that it is just the cable connector that differs from a AFS-74?? Oh, and to be completely sure, the purple wire is the oxygen sensor feed and the two brown is for the heating element, no polarity needed? /Per >----Ursprungligt meddelande---- >Fr?n: perlon at passagen.se >Datum: 2006-aug-14 10:17 >Till: >?rende: Ang: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor > > Sorry, > >I meant of course if there is ANY difference between AFS-74 and AFS-76. > >/Per > >>----Ursprungligt meddelande---- >>Fr?n: perlon at passagen.se >>Datum: 2006-aug-14 10:09 >>Till: , >>?rende: Ang: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor >> >>Hi, >> >>will a AC AFS-76 do the job as well? >> >>They seem to fit in 1995 Chevy Trucks: >>http://198.208.187.182/internet/VehiclePartFits.jsp?autosel=A&part=afs76 >> >>My parts dealer here in Sweden only seem to have the AFS-76, for about $95. >> >>I repeat my second question again: How come there is so many AC Delco parts-no for these O2 sensors? Is there ANY difference between for >>example AFGS-74 and AFS-76?? >> >>/Per >> >>>----Ursprungligt meddelande---- >>>Fr?n: jay at vessels-clan.com >>>Datum: 2006-aug-11 22:00 >>>Till: "Per Lonnborg", >>>?rende: Re: [Gmecm] Going from 1-wire to heated O2 sensor >>> >>>Hi there! >>> >>>Use the AC AFS-74. >>> >>>Jay Vessels >>>1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI >>>1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) >>> >>>Per Lonnborg wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> It seems that the O2 sensor info page on this site is not up to date, can someone please tell me which heated 3-wire or 4-wire O2 >>sensor >>>> to use if I now have the AFS21 1-wire sensor? >>>> (1988 CHEVROLET G20 VAN V8 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = K) >>>> >>>> >>>> /Per >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gmecm mailing list >>>> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>>> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From kc5aeq at earthlink.net Mon Aug 14 18:14:37 2006 From: kc5aeq at earthlink.net (Craig Smith) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:14:37 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem Message-ID: <410-220068114231437787@earthlink.net> Darryl The fuel is being heated up by the return from the TBI circulating back to the tank. When the temp at the inlet of the pump gets to about 110 is when the pump cavitates. I think the problem is compounded because the pump is external, it is pulling the fuel out of the tank (lower pressure the fuel flashes easier) Im going to pull the tank back out and see if I can figure a way to add an internal pump. I figured out where were picking up the heat, It's between the intake and exhaust manifolds. The Exhaust manifold for cylinders 2&3 run 1/2" below the bottom of the center of the intake (directly below the TBI) the exhaust manifold is runing 700 or so degrees F. The base of the TBI was over 200, I added some insulation and was able to lower the temp considerably. I have access to some real good insulation blanket we use at work on high temp piping, that should get the heat transfer under control. Do you have anyone have any other suggestions? Thanks Craig P.S. Carrying fire extinguisher on test drive. ----- Original Message ----- From: dgilbert78 at juno.com To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net Sent: 8/14/2006 2:51:17 PM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem Hmmm! That appears dangerous to me, don't know. Typically most TBI pumps are located right in the tank. Fuel lines are than routed inside the frame rails and exit in the vicinity of the engine. Where is this fuel tank, is it not located at the rear of the car?? sounds like it is located in the vicinity of the exhaust manifold??? is that correct?? Then the pump is cavitating (sucking fumes) Darryl.. From dvfagan at yahoo.com Mon Aug 14 18:39:42 2006 From: dvfagan at yahoo.com (DV Fagan) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 16:39:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem In-Reply-To: <410-220068114165036415@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20060814233942.45539.qmail@web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Craig, Why not move the lines inside the frame rail? Assuming you have them. The fuel will stay cooler. Dennis --- Craig Smith wrote: > Darryl > > I confirmed it today with an ir temp gun it appears > the fuel is getting hot > in the tank 120 F and flashing of between the tank > and the inlet of the > fuel pump. The heat is coming from the Exhaust > manifold Thru the TBI ( > 4cyl engine both manifolds stacked on one side of > the engine). > Has anyone had experience with insulation tapes etc. > to insulate between > the manifolds? > > Craig > > > > [Original Message] > > From: > > To: > > Date: 8/12/2006 7:30:23 PM > > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > > > > There you answered your question. The pump stopped > working , or the pump > > blew open a bypass valve, but no pressure when you > dead headed it > > apparently pump is not pumping or it went into a > bypass mode > > internally??? > > darryl.. > > On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:09:39 -0500 (GMT-05:00) > Craig Smith > > writes: > > > I have a guage inline at the discharge of the > pump. The pump is > > > capable of 45# I'm using the carter external > pump that is designed > > > for TBI add ons its a rotary vane pump. When > the pressure droped I > > > pinched the return line off at the TBI pressure > still stayed at near > > > zero. I pulled the tank checked the pickup no > strainer no > > > restriction. > > > > > > I wish there was enough room to run an in tank > pump. > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > >From: dgilbert78 at juno.com > > > >Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:32 PM > > > >To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net > > > >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > > > > > > > >Are you monitoring fuel pressure someplace with > a pressure gauge > > > or > > > >something?? the TBI system is pretty simple. > You have a pump > > > pumping at > > > >least 18lb pressure and enough volume for the > injectors being used. > > > The > > > >regulator is regulating fuel pressure at the > injector inlet > > > typically 13 > > > >lbs. The overflow fuel free flows back to the > tank. Possibly a > > > fuel > > > >filter problem, possibly fuel supply starving > from pluged fuel > > > pickup. > > > >Check if pump can deliver the required volume > at required pressure, > > > not > > > >much left > > > >good luck > > > >Darryl... > > > >On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:16:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) > Craig Smith > > > > writes: > > > >> I pulled the cap and ran it same thing. > > > >> I'm wondering if the fuel is flashing off > between the tank and > > > >> pump. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > >> >From: dgilbert78 at juno.com > > > >> >Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:05 PM > > > >> >To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net, gmecm at diy-efi.org > > > >> >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > > > >> > > > > >> >Hello: Try the test with the fuel filler cap > loose?? > > > >> >Darryl... > > > >> >On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:37:10 -0500 > (GMT-05:00) Craig Smith > > > >> > writes: > > > >> >> Everyone > > > >> >> > > > >> >> I'm having a fuel pressure problem with a > conversion we're > > > >> >> performing on my fathers MGB. The fuel > system is plumbed just > > > as > > > >> a > > > >> >> stock Chevy TBI system running at 16# With > an external Carter > > > > > > >> fuel > > > >> >> pump mounted in the right hand battery box > about three feet > > > from > > > >> the > > > >> >> tank. The fuel return from the tbi is > plumbed back to the > > > tank > > > >> >> dumping about an inch from the tank > bottom. > > > >> >> > > > >> >> After running for about 5 miles I'm > loosing fuel pressure. It > > > > > > >> acts > > > >> >> like a vapor lock condition. After it > sits a few minutes it > > > >> cranks > > > >> >> and runs fine until it heats back up. I > figure I'm picking up > > > > > > >> heat > > > >> >> from the engine compartment. Has anyone > placed an aftermarket > > > > > > >> fuel > > > >> >> return regulator downstream of the pump > returning to the tank > > > and > > > >> > > > >> >> blocked the return at the TBI? Is the > fuel return thru the > > > TBI > > > >> used > > > >> >> to cool the injectors, or does it have > another purpose? > > > >> >> > > > >> >> Thanks > > > >> >> Craig > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > _______________________________________________ > > > >> >> Gmecm mailing list > > > >> >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > > >> >> Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > > >> >> Main WWW page: > http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From krawczuk at dodo.com.au Mon Aug 14 19:04:14 2006 From: krawczuk at dodo.com.au (mark krawczuk) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 09:34:14 +0930 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem References: <410-220068114231437787@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <000f01c6bffe$596ef480$6baef0dc@marka7e6m8swbp> hi, would a surge tank/ another sure tank help ? mark k ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Smith" To: ; Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 8:44 AM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > Darryl > > The fuel is being heated up by the return from the TBI circulating back to > the tank. When the temp at the inlet of the pump gets to about 110 is > when the pump cavitates. I think the problem is compounded because the > pump is external, it is pulling the fuel out of the tank (lower pressure > the fuel flashes easier) Im going to pull the tank back out and see if I > can figure a way to add an internal pump. > > I figured out where were picking up the heat, It's between the intake and > exhaust manifolds. The Exhaust manifold for cylinders 2&3 run 1/2" below > the bottom of the center of the intake (directly below the TBI) the > exhaust manifold is runing 700 or so degrees F. The base of the TBI was > over 200, I added some insulation and was able to lower the temp > considerably. I have access to some real good insulation blanket we use > at work on high temp piping, that should get the heat transfer under > control. Do you have anyone have any other suggestions? > > Thanks > Craig > > P.S. Carrying fire extinguisher on test drive. > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: dgilbert78 at juno.com > To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net > Sent: 8/14/2006 2:51:17 PM > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > > > Hmmm! That appears dangerous to me, don't know. Typically most TBI pumps > are located right in the tank. Fuel lines are than routed inside the frame > rails and exit in the vicinity of the engine. Where is this fuel tank, is > it not located at the rear of the car?? sounds like it is located in the > vicinity of the exhaust manifold??? is that correct?? Then the pump is > cavitating (sucking fumes) > Darryl.. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From lwester at lincsat.com Mon Aug 14 19:19:57 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 18:19:57 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem References: <20060814233942.45539.qmail@web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001601c6c000$8f38b8b0$4250050a@WESTER2> Yes...use the frame as a heat sink... Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "DV Fagan" To: ; Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 5:39 PM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem > Craig, > Why not move the lines inside the frame rail? > Assuming you have them. The fuel will stay cooler. > Dennis > > > > --- Craig Smith wrote: > >> Darryl >> >> I confirmed it today with an ir temp gun it appears >> the fuel is getting hot >> in the tank 120 F and flashing of between the tank >> and the inlet of the >> fuel pump. The heat is coming from the Exhaust >> manifold Thru the TBI ( >> 4cyl engine both manifolds stacked on one side of >> the engine). >> Has anyone had experience with insulation tapes etc. >> to insulate between >> the manifolds? >> >> Craig >> >> >> > [Original Message] >> > From: >> > To: >> > Date: 8/12/2006 7:30:23 PM >> > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem >> > >> > There you answered your question. The pump stopped >> working , or the pump >> > blew open a bypass valve, but no pressure when you >> dead headed it >> > apparently pump is not pumping or it went into a >> bypass mode >> > internally??? >> > darryl.. >> > On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:09:39 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >> Craig Smith >> > writes: >> > > I have a guage inline at the discharge of the >> pump. The pump is >> > > capable of 45# I'm using the carter external >> pump that is designed >> > > for TBI add ons its a rotary vane pump. When >> the pressure droped I >> > > pinched the return line off at the TBI pressure >> still stayed at near >> > > zero. I pulled the tank checked the pickup no >> strainer no >> > > restriction. >> > > >> > > I wish there was enough room to run an in tank >> pump. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > >From: dgilbert78 at juno.com >> > > >Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:32 PM >> > > >To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net >> > > >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem >> > > > >> > > >Are you monitoring fuel pressure someplace with >> a pressure gauge >> > > or >> > > >something?? the TBI system is pretty simple. >> You have a pump >> > > pumping at >> > > >least 18lb pressure and enough volume for the >> injectors being used. >> > > The >> > > >regulator is regulating fuel pressure at the >> injector inlet >> > > typically 13 >> > > >lbs. The overflow fuel free flows back to the >> tank. Possibly a >> > > fuel >> > > >filter problem, possibly fuel supply starving >> from pluged fuel >> > > pickup. >> > > >Check if pump can deliver the required volume >> at required pressure, >> > > not >> > > >much left >> > > >good luck >> > > >Darryl... >> > > >On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:16:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) >> Craig Smith >> > > > writes: >> > > >> I pulled the cap and ran it same thing. >> > > >> I'm wondering if the fuel is flashing off >> between the tank and >> > > >> pump. >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> -----Original Message----- >> > > >> >From: dgilbert78 at juno.com >> > > >> >Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:05 PM >> > > >> >To: kc5aeq at earthlink.net, gmecm at diy-efi.org >> > > >> >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem >> > > >> > >> > > >> >Hello: Try the test with the fuel filler cap >> loose?? >> > > >> >Darryl... >> > > >> >On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:37:10 -0500 >> (GMT-05:00) Craig Smith >> > > >> > writes: >> > > >> >> Everyone >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> I'm having a fuel pressure problem with a >> conversion we're >> > > >> >> performing on my fathers MGB. The fuel >> system is plumbed just >> > > as >> > > >> a >> > > >> >> stock Chevy TBI system running at 16# With >> an external Carter >> > > >> > > >> fuel >> > > >> >> pump mounted in the right hand battery box >> about three feet >> > > from >> > > >> the >> > > >> >> tank. The fuel return from the tbi is >> plumbed back to the >> > > tank >> > > >> >> dumping about an inch from the tank >> bottom. >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> After running for about 5 miles I'm >> loosing fuel pressure. It >> > > >> > > >> acts >> > > >> >> like a vapor lock condition. After it >> sits a few minutes it >> > > >> cranks >> > > >> >> and runs fine until it heats back up. I >> figure I'm picking up >> > > >> > > >> heat >> > > >> >> from the engine compartment. Has anyone >> placed an aftermarket >> > > >> > > >> fuel >> > > >> >> return regulator downstream of the pump >> returning to the tank >> > > and >> > > >> >> > > >> >> blocked the return at the TBI? Is the >> fuel return thru the >> > > TBI >> > > >> used >> > > >> >> to cool the injectors, or does it have >> another purpose? >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> Thanks >> > > >> >> Craig >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> > > >> >> Gmecm mailing list >> > > >> >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> > > >> >> Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> > > >> >> Main WWW page: >> http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: >> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From aphelion79 at cox.net Mon Aug 14 22:34:15 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 22:34:15 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] 2.5L 151 TBI'ed & Working Great, but... In-Reply-To: <001601c6c000$8f38b8b0$4250050a@WESTER2> References: <20060814233942.45539.qmail@web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <001601c6c000$8f38b8b0$4250050a@WESTER2> Message-ID: <44E140B7.2010201@cox.net> Ok, got the check engine light figured out... got my oil pressure sender figured out... only problem now is on startup it doesn't "fast idle"... can anyone explain to me why this would be and what I should check for (or how even works lol)... * Idle Air Control maybe? * Is there a sensor that would send info to the IAC that it needed to "fast idle" in the first place until the engine got "warmed up"? * Does it only fast idle in cold weather? Those are the only things I can brainstorm about it ATM lol... If it is some sort of sensor, how would I test them to see if they're working properly? From davida1 at hiwaay.net Mon Aug 14 22:53:24 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 22:53:24 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- TBI Fuel problem References: +ADw-20060814233942.45539.qmail+AEA-web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com+AD4- +ADw-001601c6c000+ACQ-8f38b8b0+ACQ-4250050a+AEA-WESTER2+AD4- Message-ID: <006a01c6c01e$8cf13e10$f9cfa5a6@yancey.com> What about a fuel cooler? These heavy equipment diesels have a fuel cooler in the fuel return circut. You would not need a big one. This would be a bulletproof way to reduce fuel temps however there are safety concerns that you would need to carefully address when you located, mounted, and plumbed a fuel cooler on a gasoline engine. It would need to be protected from potential collision damage. Mercedes Benz has used on their gas engines a freon-cooled fuel cooler. It was basically a heat exchanger in the suction line to the A/C compressor and the fuel return from the Bosch CIS-E injection system routed through it. Just a thought+ACE- Later, David ----- Original Message ----- From: +ACI-Programmer+ACI- +ADw-lwester+AEA-lincsat.com+AD4- To: +ADw-gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org+AD4- Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 7:19 PM Subject: Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- TBI Fuel problem +AD4- Yes...use the frame as a heat sink... +AD4- +AD4- Lyndon. +AD4- +AD4- ----- Original Message ----- +AD4- From: +ACI-DV Fagan+ACI- +ADw-dvfagan+AEA-yahoo.com+AD4- +AD4- To: +ADw-kc5aeq+AEA-earthlink.net+AD4AOw- +ADw-gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org+AD4- +AD4- Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 5:39 PM +AD4- Subject: Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- TBI Fuel problem +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- Craig, +AD4APg- Why not move the lines inside the frame rail? +AD4APg- Assuming you have them. The fuel will stay cooler. +AD4APg- Dennis +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- --- Craig Smith +ADw-kc5aeq+AEA-earthlink.net+AD4- wrote: +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- Darryl +AD4APgA+- +AD4APgA+- I confirmed it today with an ir temp gun it appears +AD4APgA+- the fuel is getting hot +AD4APgA+- in the tank 120 F and flashing of between the tank +AD4APgA+- and the inlet of the +AD4APgA+- fuel pump. The heat is coming from the Exhaust +AD4APgA+- manifold Thru the TBI ( +AD4APgA+- 4cyl engine both manifolds stacked on one side of +AD4APgA+- the engine). +AD4APgA+- Has anyone had experience with insulation tapes etc. +AD4APgA+- to insulate between +AD4APgA+- the manifolds? +AD4APgA+- +AD4APgA+- Craig +AD4APgA+- +AD4APgA+- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AFs-Original Message+AF0- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- From: +ADw-dgilbert78+AEA-juno.com+AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- To: +ADw-kc5aeq+AEA-earthlink.net+AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- Date: 8/12/2006 7:30:23 PM +AD4APgA+- +AD4- Subject: Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- TBI Fuel problem +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- There you answered your question. The pump stopped +AD4APgA+- working , or the pump +AD4APgA+- +AD4- blew open a bypass valve, but no pressure when you +AD4APgA+- dead headed it +AD4APgA+- +AD4- apparently pump is not pumping or it went into a +AD4APgA+- bypass mode +AD4APgA+- +AD4- internally??? +AD4APgA+- +AD4- darryl.. +AD4APgA+- +AD4- On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 19:09:39 -0500 (GMT-05:00) +AD4APgA+- Craig Smith +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +ADw-kc5aeq+AEA-earthlink.net+AD4- writes: +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- I have a guage inline at the discharge of the +AD4APgA+- pump. The pump is +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- capable of 45+ACM- I'm using the carter external +AD4APgA+- pump that is designed +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- for TBI add ons its a rotary vane pump. When +AD4APgA+- the pressure droped I +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- pinched the return line off at the TBI pressure +AD4APgA+- still stayed at near +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- zero. I pulled the tank checked the pickup no +AD4APgA+- strainer no +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- restriction. +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- I wish there was enough room to run an in tank +AD4APgA+- pump. +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- -----Original Message----- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-From: dgilbert78+AEA-juno.com +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:32 PM +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-To: kc5aeq+AEA-earthlink.net +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-Subject: Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- TBI Fuel problem +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-Are you monitoring fuel pressure someplace with +AD4APgA+- a pressure gauge +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- or +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-something?? the TBI system is pretty simple. +AD4APgA+- You have a pump +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- pumping at +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-least 18lb pressure and enough volume for the +AD4APgA+- injectors being used. +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- The +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-regulator is regulating fuel pressure at the +AD4APgA+- injector inlet +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- typically 13 +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-lbs. The overflow fuel free flows back to the +AD4APgA+- tank. Possibly a +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- fuel +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-filter problem, possibly fuel supply starving +AD4APgA+- from pluged fuel +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- pickup. +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-Check if pump can deliver the required volume +AD4APgA+- at required pressure, +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- not +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-much left +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-good luck +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-Darryl... +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4-On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 18:16:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) +AD4APgA+- Craig Smith +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APA-kc5aeq+AEA-earthlink.net+AD4- writes: +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- I pulled the cap and ran it same thing. +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- I'm wondering if the fuel is flashing off +AD4APgA+- between the tank and +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- pump. +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- -----Original Message----- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4-From: dgilbert78+AEA-juno.com +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4-Sent: Aug 12, 2006 6:05 PM +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4-To: kc5aeq+AEA-earthlink.net, gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4-Subject: Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- TBI Fuel problem +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4-Hello: Try the test with the fuel filler cap +AD4APgA+- loose?? +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4-Darryl... +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4-On Sat, 12 Aug 2006 17:37:10 -0500 +AD4APgA+- (GMT-05:00) Craig Smith +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APA-kc5aeq+AEA-earthlink.net+AD4- writes: +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- Everyone +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- I'm having a fuel pressure problem with a +AD4APgA+- conversion we're +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- performing on my fathers MGB. The fuel +AD4APgA+- system is plumbed just +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- as +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- a +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- stock Chevy TBI system running at 16+ACM- With +AD4APgA+- an external Carter +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- fuel +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- pump mounted in the right hand battery box +AD4APgA+- about three feet +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- from +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- the +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- tank. The fuel return from the tbi is +AD4APgA+- plumbed back to the +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- tank +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- dumping about an inch from the tank +AD4APgA+- bottom. +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- After running for about 5 miles I'm +AD4APgA+- loosing fuel pressure. It +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- acts +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- like a vapor lock condition. After it +AD4APgA+- sits a few minutes it +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- cranks +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- and runs fine until it heats back up. I +AD4APgA+- figure I'm picking up +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- heat +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- from the engine compartment. Has anyone +AD4APgA+- placed an aftermarket +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- fuel +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- return regulator downstream of the pump +AD4APgA+- returning to the tank +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- and +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- blocked the return at the TBI? Is the +AD4APgA+- fuel return thru the +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- TBI +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- used +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- to cool the injectors, or does it have +AD4APgA+- another purpose? +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- Thanks +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- Craig +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- Gmecm mailing list +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- Subscribe: +AD4APgA+- http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- Main WWW page: +AD4APgA+- http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APg- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4- +AD4- +AD4APgA+- +AD4APgA+- +AD4APgA+- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4APgA+- Gmecm mailing list +AD4APgA+- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4APgA+- Subscribe: +AD4APgA+- http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4APgA+- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4APgA+- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AD4APg- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4APg- Do You Yahoo+ACE-? +AD4APg- Tired of spam? Yahoo+ACE- Mail has the best spam protection around +AD4APg- http://mail.yahoo.com +AD4APg- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4APg- Gmecm mailing list +AD4APg- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4APg- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4APg- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4- Gmecm mailing list +AD4- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4- From davida1 at hiwaay.net Mon Aug 14 22:58:07 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2006 22:58:07 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- 2.5L 151 TBI'ed +ACY- Working Great, but... References: +ADw-20060814233942.45539.qmail+AEA-web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com+AD4APA-001601c6c000+ACQ-8f38b8b0+ACQ-4250050a+AEA-WESTER2+AD4- +ADw-44E140B7.2010201+AEA-cox.net+AD4- Message-ID: <006d01c6c01f$09d9ddb0$f9cfa5a6@yancey.com> In my experience, TBI engines don't fast-idle nearly as fast as a carb engine. The ECM uses the IAC motor to add extra air to make the fast idle. The amount of extra air is determined by coolant temperature. There is a table in the calibration for this function. If the IAC is frozen the engine will run fine but the idle will be fixed and not able to respond to changes in load or temperature. Hppe this helps+ACE- David +AD4- Ok, got the check engine light figured out... got my oil pressure sender +AD4- figured out... only problem now is on startup it doesn't +ACI-fast idle+ACI-... +AD4- can anyone explain to me why this would be and what I should check for +AD4- (or how even works lol)... +AD4- +AD4- +ACo- Idle Air Control maybe? +AD4- +ACo- Is there a sensor that would send info to the IAC that it needed +AD4- to +ACI-fast idle+ACI- in the first place until the engine got +ACI-warmed up+ACI-? +AD4- +ACo- Does it only fast idle in cold weather? +AD4- +AD4- Those are the only things I can brainstorm about it ATM lol... +AD4- +AD4- If it is some sort of sensor, how would I test them to see if they're +AD4- working properly? +AD4- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4- Gmecm mailing list +AD4- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From jryan at caminofx.org Tue Aug 15 04:32:50 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 04:32:50 -0500 (CDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- 2.5L 151 TBI'ed +ACY- Working Great, but... In-Reply-To: <006d01c6c01f$09d9ddb0$f9cfa5a6@yancey.com> References: +ADw-20060814233942.45539.qmail+AEA-web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com+AD4APA-001601c6c000+ACQ-8f38b8b0+ACQ-4250050a+AEA-WESTER2+AD4- +ADw-44E140B7.2010201+AEA-cox.net+AD4- <006d01c6c01f$09d9ddb0$f9cfa5a6@yancey.com> Message-ID: TBI doesn't fast-idle nearly as fast as a carburetor. The maximum fast-idle speed in my 9C1 '746 calibration is 1400 rpm. The fast-idle specification for my car with the factory QuadraJet was 2200 rpm. That's a huge difference. I like not having the engine run so fast at start-up, and not having to bump the accelerator pedal to get it to slow down. The ECM does that all by itself, using the IAC motor. The normal idle speed can vary. The ECM has tables that let it change the idle speed according to temperature and whether or not the air conditioner is running. On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, David Allen wrote: > In my experience, TBI engines don't fast-idle nearly as fast as a carb engine. The ECM uses the IAC motor to add extra air to make the fast idle. The amount of extra air is determined by coolant temperature. There is a table in the calibration for this function. If the IAC is frozen the engine will run fine but the idle will be fixed and not able to respond to changes in load or temperature. > Hppe this helps+ACE- > David > > > > +AD4- Ok, got the check engine light figured out... got my oil pressure sender > +AD4- figured out... only problem now is on startup it doesn't +ACI-fast idle+ACI-... > +AD4- can anyone explain to me why this would be and what I should check for > +AD4- (or how even works lol)... > +AD4- > +AD4- +ACo- Idle Air Control maybe? > +AD4- +ACo- Is there a sensor that would send info to the IAC that it needed > +AD4- to +ACI-fast idle+ACI- in the first place until the engine got +ACI-warmed up+ACI-? > +AD4- +ACo- Does it only fast idle in cold weather? > +AD4- > +AD4- Those are the only things I can brainstorm about it ATM lol... > +AD4- > +AD4- If it is some sort of sensor, how would I test them to see if they're > +AD4- working properly? > +AD4- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- > +AD4- Gmecm mailing list > +AD4- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org > +AD4- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > +AD4- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From robert.sjodin at scania.com Tue Aug 15 05:52:22 2006 From: robert.sjodin at scania.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Sj=F6din_Robert?=) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 12:52:22 +0200 Subject: [Gmecm] Cold idle stall... Message-ID: <02A3C863F485574985DC489CE97DA40C02542BFA@sesoexmb02.scania.se> Hello! I have a cold idle issue with a 165 ($6E). I've checked/replaced TPS, TB, IAC, vacuum leaks, inital timing etc etc but the problem remains. Could it be that the superram and 1.6 rockers are causing this problem? Should I add some more fuel at startup? In that case which tables? I have a Datamaster logg but everything seems fine for the first 5-10 seconds and then the engine rpm increases a little and down and up and finaly down to zero. Once it start to oscillate it will soon come to a full stop. When the engine is fully warm there is no idle problem when I start the engine. Any suggestion? Thanks Rob From jryan at caminofx.org Tue Aug 15 15:48:58 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 15:48:58 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Hard Starting Message-ID: I just need a starting point for this. I need a good guess at which way to go to correct this problem. This engine "catches" *fast* on a cold start. I just turn the key, and after a few revolutions it's running. It smoothes out, and the ECM gradually reduces the idle speed. No problem. On a hot start, it usually won't catch. It cranks very fast, but just doesn't catch. However, if I hold my foot down all the way on the accelerator pedal, it will always catch after several seconds of cranking. It's just like if I was trying to clear a flooded engine and I open the throttle all the way on a carburetor. When it does catch after doing this, there is a puff of black smoke from the tailpipes. Once it catches, it idles smoothly and there is no problem keeping it running. So... I have the programmer and TunerCat and WinALDL... what should I alter to make the hot starts easier? Is there anything I can analyze with WinALDL that would tell us? I call this a hot start problem, not an idle problem (again, once running, it's very stable and relatively smooth). My impression - based on having to open the throttle and that black smoke comes out when it catches - is that it's too rich on hot starts, but maybe it is too lean and I am adding fuel by opening the throttle. I don't really know how the ECM "thinks" at start-up. Any thoughts are appreciated! Engine: New GM long block 350, 9.2:1 compression, Crane 2032 camshaft, .214? int., .220? exh. @ .050" lift. Injection system: Rochester TBI, unmodified throttle body, 65 lb./hr. injectors, Edelbrock 3704 intake manifold, 14 psi fuel pressure measured before the filter. ECM: 1228746, ANLU .bin (1989 Chevrolet Caprice 9C1 Police calibration) ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Tue Aug 15 16:18:11 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:18:11 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Hard Starting Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Jared Ryan > Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 3:49 PM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] Hard Starting > > I just need a starting point for this. I need a good guess > at which way to go to correct this problem. > > This engine "catches" *fast* on a cold start. I just turn > the key, and after a few revolutions it's running. It > smoothes out, and the ECM gradually reduces the idle speed. > No problem. > > On a hot start, it usually won't catch. It cranks very fast, > but just doesn't catch. However, if I hold my foot down all > the way on the accelerator pedal, it will always catch after > several seconds of cranking. It's just like if I was trying > to clear a flooded engine and I open the throttle all the way > on a carburetor. When it does catch after doing this, there > is a puff of black smoke from the tailpipes. > Once it catches, it idles smoothly and there is no problem > keeping it running. When you hold the gas down while cranking the ECM goes into clear flood mode. You can read about this in the archives, basically the ECM reduces or cuts off fuel delivery as long as it sees WOT while cranking. Sounds like you need to take fuel out of the hot portion of the cranking fuel tables. --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 15 16:22:38 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 14:22:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Hard Starting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060815212238.83663.qmail@web80507.mail.yahoo.com> My understanding on hot-start mashed pedal the ECM is in 'clear-flood' mode where it disables injection in an attempt to clear a flooded engine, therefore your assumption that it is adding fuel by opening the throttle (if mashed) would be incorrect, it is actually cutting fuel drastically. It may still be 'flooded' as evidenced by the black poof, the routine is doing it's job. I would think reducing hot-start fuel @ crank would be the first attempt, but the rest of the board may chime in and challenge ----- Original Message ---- From: Jared Ryan To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 3:48:58 PM Subject: [Gmecm] Hard Starting I just need a starting point for this. I need a good guess at which way to go to correct this problem. This engine "catches" *fast* on a cold start. I just turn the key, and after a few revolutions it's running. It smoothes out, and the ECM gradually reduces the idle speed. No problem. On a hot start, it usually won't catch. It cranks very fast, but just doesn't catch. However, if I hold my foot down all the way on the accelerator pedal, it will always catch after several seconds of cranking. It's just like if I was trying to clear a flooded engine and I open the throttle all the way on a carburetor. When it does catch after doing this, there is a puff of black smoke from the tailpipes. Once it catches, it idles smoothly and there is no problem keeping it running. So... I have the programmer and TunerCat and WinALDL... what should I alter to make the hot starts easier? Is there anything I can analyze with WinALDL that would tell us? I call this a hot start problem, not an idle problem (again, once running, it's very stable and relatively smooth). My impression - based on having to open the throttle and that black smoke comes out when it catches - is that it's too rich on hot starts, but maybe it is too lean and I am adding fuel by opening the throttle. I don't really know how the ECM "thinks" at start-up. Any thoughts are appreciated! Engine: New GM long block 350, 9.2:1 compression, Crane 2032 camshaft, .214? int., .220? exh. @ .050" lift. Injection system: Rochester TBI, unmodified throttle body, 65 lb./hr. injectors, Edelbrock 3704 intake manifold, 14 psi fuel pressure measured before the filter. ECM: 1228746, ANLU .bin (1989 Chevrolet Caprice 9C1 Police calibration) ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From jryan at caminofx.org Tue Aug 15 16:43:03 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:43:03 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Hard Starting In-Reply-To: <20060815212238.83663.qmail@web80507.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060815212238.83663.qmail@web80507.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <874b035cc9a1578e3abc3a7215801b1e@caminofx.org> I think my first guess - that it was clearing a flood - was correct. I didn't realize that TBI had "clear-flood" programmed into it, but that's useful! So perhaps I should increase the cranking AFR in the hot portion of the table by, say, 10% and try it and see what happens? I think the idle is a bit rich across the board, but I haven't had time to run with WinALDL logging. I will do that before making the change to the chip, to see what I have. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 15, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Rick McLeod wrote: > My understanding on hot-start mashed pedal the ECM is in 'clear-flood' > mode where it disables injection in an attempt to clear a flooded > engine, therefore your assumption that it is adding fuel by opening > the throttle (if mashed) would be incorrect, it is actually cutting > fuel drastically. It may still be 'flooded' as evidenced by the black > poof, the routine is doing it's job. I would think reducing hot-start > fuel @ crank would be the first attempt, but the rest of the board may > chime in and challenge > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Jared Ryan > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 3:48:58 PM > Subject: [Gmecm] Hard Starting > > > I just need a starting point for this. I need a good guess at which > way to go to correct this problem. > > This engine "catches" *fast* on a cold start. I just turn the key, and > after a few revolutions it's running. It smoothes out, and the ECM > gradually reduces the idle speed. No problem. > > On a hot start, it usually won't catch. It cranks very fast, but just > doesn't catch. However, if I hold my foot down all the way on the > accelerator pedal, it will always catch after several seconds of > cranking. It's just like if I was trying to clear a flooded engine and > I open the throttle all the way on a carburetor. When it does catch > after doing this, there is a puff of black smoke from the tailpipes. > Once it catches, it idles smoothly and there is no problem keeping it > running. > > So... I have the programmer and TunerCat and WinALDL... what should I > alter to make the hot starts easier? Is there anything I can analyze > with WinALDL that would tell us? I call this a hot start problem, not > an idle problem (again, once running, it's very stable and relatively > smooth). > > My impression - based on having to open the throttle and that black > smoke comes out when it catches - is that it's too rich on hot starts, > but maybe it is too lean and I am adding fuel by opening the throttle. > I don't really know how the ECM "thinks" at start-up. > > Any thoughts are appreciated! > > Engine: New GM long block 350, 9.2:1 compression, Crane 2032 camshaft, > .214? int., .220? exh. @ .050" lift. > > Injection system: Rochester TBI, unmodified throttle body, 65 lb./hr. > injectors, Edelbrock 3704 intake manifold, 14 psi fuel pressure > measured before the filter. > > ECM: 1228746, ANLU .bin (1989 Chevrolet Caprice 9C1 Police calibration) > > ---> Jared Ryan <--- > jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From jryan at caminofx.org Tue Aug 15 16:46:51 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 16:46:51 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Hard Starting In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1cd0dd53d049f5b5f4f0e607f12e8ccc@caminofx.org> It may also be a bit too rich at idle normally. I'm not gagging, and I don't see black smoke, but I smell a little fuel. I wonder if it could be loading up with fuel at idle, and some of that overly-rich mixture is in the chambers when I come back to start it again. I'll get some data with WinALDL and see if the idle mixture needs to be adjusted. I just don't know, if it idles well, if it could be rich enough to load up the combustion chambers so that it floods when the engine is shut off. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 15, 2006, at 4:18 PM, Steve Ravet wrote: > When you hold the gas down while cranking the ECM goes into clear flood > mode. You can read about this in the archives, basically the ECM > reduces or cuts off fuel delivery as long as it sees WOT while > cranking. > Sounds like you need to take fuel out of the hot portion of the > cranking > fuel tables. From jeremygonyou at yahoo.com Tue Aug 15 21:02:03 2006 From: jeremygonyou at yahoo.com (Jeremy Gonyou) Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 19:02:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Mystery Module: BMBX Message-ID: <20060816020203.63516.qmail@web56503.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Guys, I have a mystery module I'm trying to identify. I believe it has something to do with a 4.3 marine engine. Perhaps an ignition controller. It has the following identifying marks on it: BMBX 888969 10208969 (maybe 1*6*208969?) 4241 Any ideas? Thanks, Jeremy __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From donsauman at cythera.net Wed Aug 16 01:52:53 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 14:52:53 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44E2C0C5.5080401@cythera.net> Guys I am looking at replacing the I-6 250ci Chevy/Mercruiser engine in my 21' deep V offshore sport boat. I have 8.5CR Chevy 350 short motor which I will build with (probably) LT1 heads and a TBI manifold. I have a TBI unit ex a C/K truck and a couple of 1227747 ECM and vehicle wiring diagrams. Can I get some advice on: code for ECM ie BCC etc, best ignition system for this application, camshaft type, or any other comments. Thanks Don -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Wed Aug 16 08:21:22 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:21:22 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Don Sauman > Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 1:53 AM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat > > Guys > > I am looking at replacing the I-6 250ci Chevy/Mercruiser > engine in my 21' deep V offshore sport boat. > > I have 8.5CR Chevy 350 short motor which I will build with (probably) > LT1 heads and a TBI manifold. I have a TBI unit ex a C/K > truck and a couple of 1227747 ECM and vehicle wiring diagrams. > > Can I get some advice on: code for ECM ie BCC etc, best > ignition system for this application, camshaft type, or any > other comments. Hi Don, let me add another question to yours. How do you tune a boat installation? In an I/O boat (for those who don't know) the exhaust manifold is cast with a water jacket around it, and water is injected into the exhaust so that it can pass through rubber bellows on it's way out the stern drive. It doesn't seem like there's a way to install an O2 sensor. I have a Mercury only block, 215 CI or so 4 cyl aluminum block so there's no factory efi. --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From efi at dyakron.com Wed Aug 16 08:35:44 2006 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:35:44 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Mystery Module: BMBX In-Reply-To: <20060816020203.63516.qmail@web56503.mail.re3.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20060816093526.00b85090@dyakron.com> Nothing here Jeremy, mv At 07:02 PM 8/15/2006 -0700, you wrote: >BMBX >888969 >10208969 (maybe 1*6*208969?) >4241 > >Any ideas? From donsauman at cythera.net Wed Aug 16 10:40:07 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:40:07 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <44E33C57.1040102@cythera.net> Hi Steve There was a guy on this list some time ago who was offering information on TBI conversions for Jeeps. If I remember right, the same person talked about boat applications. Initially the system was run without an O2 sensor in open loop mode. He then said that he had worked out a way of getting an O2 sensor to work. I realise that is kind of muddled but I am working from memory. I would be happy to work open loop. As far as the O2 sensor is concerned, on my I-6 there is one point where I can access exhaust gas at the end on the water jacket and just before the exit water injection. I think mine is not quite standard. Cheers Don Steve Ravet wrote: > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org >>[mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Don Sauman >>Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 1:53 AM >>To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subject: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat >> >>Guys >> >>I am looking at replacing the I-6 250ci Chevy/Mercruiser >>engine in my 21' deep V offshore sport boat. >> >>I have 8.5CR Chevy 350 short motor which I will build with (probably) >>LT1 heads and a TBI manifold. I have a TBI unit ex a C/K >>truck and a couple of 1227747 ECM and vehicle wiring diagrams. >> >>Can I get some advice on: code for ECM ie BCC etc, best >>ignition system for this application, camshaft type, or any >>other comments. >> >> > >Hi Don, let me add another question to yours. How do you tune a boat >installation? In an I/O boat (for those who don't know) the exhaust >manifold is cast with a water jacket around it, and water is injected >into the exhaust so that it can pass through rubber bellows on it's way >out the stern drive. It doesn't seem like there's a way to install an >O2 sensor. I have a Mercury only block, 215 CI or so 4 cyl aluminum >block so there's no factory efi. > >--steve > > >-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From dvfagan at yahoo.com Wed Aug 16 11:41:16 2006 From: dvfagan at yahoo.com (DV Fagan) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:41:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060816164116.29512.qmail@web30311.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi, Why not use the over 8500# or leaded gas chip as a starting point. Both are no O2, open loop patterns. I'm not sure of the code but but I think one is BDUZ. Dennis --- Steve Ravet wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of > Don Sauman > > Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 1:53 AM > > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subject: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat > > > > Guys > > > > I am looking at replacing the I-6 250ci > Chevy/Mercruiser > > engine in my 21' deep V offshore sport boat. > > > > I have 8.5CR Chevy 350 short motor which I will > build with (probably) > > LT1 heads and a TBI manifold. I have a TBI unit ex > a C/K > > truck and a couple of 1227747 ECM and vehicle > wiring diagrams. > > > > Can I get some advice on: code for ECM ie BCC etc, > best > > ignition system for this application, camshaft > type, or any > > other comments. > > Hi Don, let me add another question to yours. How > do you tune a boat > installation? In an I/O boat (for those who don't > know) the exhaust > manifold is cast with a water jacket around it, and > water is injected > into the exhaust so that it can pass through rubber > bellows on it's way > out the stern drive. It doesn't seem like there's a > way to install an > O2 sensor. I have a Mercury only block, 215 CI or > so 4 cyl aluminum > block so there's no factory efi. > > --steve > > > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and > any attachments are confidential and may also be > privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, > please notify the sender immediately and do not > disclose the contents to any other person, use it > for any purpose, or store or copy the information in > any medium. Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From Greg at WildoaksRanch.com Wed Aug 16 11:55:18 2006 From: Greg at WildoaksRanch.com (Greg Etchell) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 09:55:18 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat In-Reply-To: <44E33C57.1040102@cythera.net> Message-ID: <008201c6c154$c11859d0$6b01a8c0@zoom> I was wondering the same thing? I thought about drilling and tapping the exhaust crossover passage in the intake and installing a heated o2 or drilling and tapping the exhaust manifold right at the head before the water jacket starts. The water is not dumped into the exhaust system until just at the end the exhaust elbow before the rubber coupling. I have not had the time or energy try either approach yet. Greg -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Don Sauman Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 8:40 AM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat Hi Steve There was a guy on this list some time ago who was offering information on TBI conversions for Jeeps. If I remember right, the same person talked about boat applications. Initially the system was run without an O2 sensor in open loop mode. He then said that he had worked out a way of getting an O2 sensor to work. I realise that is kind of muddled but I am working from memory. I would be happy to work open loop. As far as the O2 sensor is concerned, on my I-6 there is one point where I can access exhaust gas at the end on the water jacket and just before the exit water injection. I think mine is not quite standard. Cheers Don Steve Ravet wrote: > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org >>[mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Don Sauman >>Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 1:53 AM >>To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subject: [Gmecm] SB Chevy in boat >> >>Guys >> >>I am looking at replacing the I-6 250ci Chevy/Mercruiser engine in my >>21' deep V offshore sport boat. >> >>I have 8.5CR Chevy 350 short motor which I will build with (probably) >>LT1 heads and a TBI manifold. I have a TBI unit ex a C/K truck and a >>couple of 1227747 ECM and vehicle wiring diagrams. >> >>Can I get some advice on: code for ECM ie BCC etc, best ignition >>system for this application, camshaft type, or any other comments. >> >> > >Hi Don, let me add another question to yours. How do you tune a boat >installation? In an I/O boat (for those who don't know) the exhaust >manifold is cast with a water jacket around it, and water is injected >into the exhaust so that it can pass through rubber bellows on it's way >out the stern drive. It doesn't seem like there's a way to install an >O2 sensor. I have a Mercury only block, 215 CI or so 4 cyl aluminum >block so there's no factory efi. > >--steve > > >-- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From aphelion79 at cox.net Wed Aug 16 13:01:08 2006 From: aphelion79 at cox.net (Aphelion79) Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 13:01:08 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- 2.5L 151 TBI'ed +ACY- Working Great, but... In-Reply-To: References: +ADw-20060814233942.45539.qmail+AEA-web30310.mail.mud.yahoo.com+AD4APA-001601c6c000+ACQ-8f38b8b0+ACQ-4250050a+AEA-WESTER2+AD4- +ADw-44E140B7.2010201+AEA-cox.net+AD4- <006d01c6c01f$09d9ddb0$f9cfa5a6@yancey.com> Message-ID: <44E35D64.1000905@cox.net> Any ways to test the IAC? Jared Ryan wrote: > TBI doesn't fast-idle nearly as fast as a carburetor. The maximum > fast-idle speed in my 9C1 '746 calibration is 1400 rpm. The fast-idle > specification for my car with the factory QuadraJet was 2200 rpm. > That's a huge difference. > > I like not having the engine run so fast at start-up, and not having > to bump the accelerator pedal to get it to slow down. The ECM does > that all by itself, using the IAC motor. > > The normal idle speed can vary. The ECM has tables that let it change > the idle speed according to temperature and whether or not the air > conditioner is running. > > On Mon, 14 Aug 2006, David Allen wrote: > >> In my experience, TBI engines don't fast-idle nearly as fast as a >> carb engine. The ECM uses the IAC motor to add extra air to make the >> fast idle. The amount of extra air is determined by coolant >> temperature. There is a table in the calibration for this function. >> If the IAC is frozen the engine will run fine but the idle will be >> fixed and not able to respond to changes in load or temperature. >> Hppe this helps! >> David >> >> >> >> > Ok, got the check engine light figured out... got my oil pressure >> sender >> > figured out... only problem now is on startup it doesn't "fast >> idle"... >> > can anyone explain to me why this would be and what I should check for >> > (or how even works lol)... >> > >> > +ACo- Idle Air Control maybe? >> > +ACo- Is there a sensor that would send info to the IAC that it needed >> > to "fast idle" in the first place until the engine got "warmed >> up"? >> > +ACo- Does it only fast idle in cold weather? >> > >> > Those are the only things I can brainstorm about it ATM lol... >> > >> > If it is some sort of sensor, how would I test them to see if they're >> > working properly? >> > +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- >> > Gmecm mailing list >> > Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org >> > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From andrewsharyn at yahoo.com Thu Aug 17 15:00:32 2006 From: andrewsharyn at yahoo.com (Andrew Gibson) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 13:00:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] RE: SB Chevy in boat Message-ID: <20060817200032.76171.qmail@web60824.mail.yahoo.com> I worked with a former boat mechanic a few years ago who told me that mercuiser was using the vortec 350 in the boats for more power and fuel economy. They didn't use an o2 sensor because with the water cooling of the boat exh manifolds it can't stay hot enough. So the motor is just run in open loop. You may want to check that out. --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min. From donsauman at cythera.net Thu Aug 17 17:45:49 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 06:45:49 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] RE: SB Chevy in boat In-Reply-To: <20060817200032.76171.qmail@web60824.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060817200032.76171.qmail@web60824.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44E4F19D.7090402@cythera.net> Andrew Thanks for that. Makes sense, although economics dictate that I go LT1 (I think) heads and a TBI that I have. Don Andrew Gibson wrote: >I worked with a former boat mechanic a few years ago who told me that mercuiser was using the vortec 350 in the boats for more power and fuel economy. They didn't use an o2 sensor because with the water cooling of the boat exh manifolds it can't stay hot enough. So the motor is just run in open loop. You may want to check that out. > >--------------------------------- >Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min. >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From harford at gmail.com Thu Aug 17 17:57:13 2006 From: harford at gmail.com (Alex Harford) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:57:13 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] RE: SB Chevy in boat In-Reply-To: <44E4F19D.7090402@cythera.net> References: <20060817200032.76171.qmail@web60824.mail.yahoo.com> <44E4F19D.7090402@cythera.net> Message-ID: LT1 heads won't fit on a SBC. What's the casting number? On 8/17/06, Don Sauman wrote: > Andrew > > Thanks for that. > > Makes sense, although economics dictate that I go LT1 (I think) heads > and a TBI that I have. From davida1 at hiwaay.net Thu Aug 17 19:45:03 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 19:45:03 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- RE: SB Chevy in boat References: +ADw-20060817200032.76171.qmail+AEA-web60824.mail.yahoo.com+AD4- Message-ID: <003901c6c25f$8bbd2bb0$27cea5a6@yancey.com> My retrofitted 4.3 TBI motor in a boat runs only open loop. It still uses half the gas of the carb setup on the same motor. Look at the link below for details if you are interested. http://home.hiwaay.net/+AH4-davida1/boat.htm David ----- Original Message ----- From: +ACI-Andrew Gibson+ACI- +ADw-andrewsharyn+AEA-yahoo.com+AD4- To: +ADw-gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org+AD4- Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:00 PM Subject: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- RE: SB Chevy in boat +AD4-I worked with a former boat mechanic a few years ago who told me that mercuiser was using the vortec 350 in the boats for more power and fuel economy. They didn't use an o2 sensor because with the water cooling of the boat exh manifolds it can't stay hot enough. So the motor is just run in open loop. You may want to check that out. +AD4- +AD4- --------------------------------- +AD4- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo+ACE- Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1+AKI-/min. +AD4- +AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- +AD4- Gmecm mailing list +AD4- Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org +AD4- Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm +AD4- Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm +AD4- From red83brick at yahoo.com Thu Aug 17 19:50:47 2006 From: red83brick at yahoo.com (Chris Reynolds) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 17:50:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- RE: SB Chevy in boat In-Reply-To: <003901c6c25f$8bbd2bb0$27cea5a6@yancey.com> Message-ID: <20060818005047.46400.qmail@web61022.mail.yahoo.com> I did a MAF TPI in place of a Q-Jet on 305 in a boat a while back then ended up selling it to a friend. All I did was raise the temp required for closed loop in the prom to well above what it was stock. I also had to slow the engines idle down for smooth gear changes. David Allen wrote: My retrofitted 4.3 TBI motor in a boat runs only open loop. It still uses half the gas of the carb setup on the same motor. Look at the link below for details if you are interested. http://home.hiwaay.net/~davida1/boat.htm David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrew Gibson" To: Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:00 PM Subject: [Gmecm] RE: SB Chevy in boat >I worked with a former boat mechanic a few years ago who told me that mercuiser was using the vortec 350 in the boats for more power and fuel economy. They didn't use an o2 sensor because with the water cooling of the boat exh manifolds it can't stay hot enough. So the motor is just run in open loop. You may want to check that out. > > --------------------------------- > Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. From kc5aeq at earthlink.net Thu Aug 17 19:51:27 2006 From: kc5aeq at earthlink.net (Craig Smith) Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 19:51:27 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI Fuel problem Update Message-ID: <31505786.1155862287961.JavaMail.root@elwamui-hybrid.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Everyone Got everything back together wound up insulating between the intake and exhaust manifold and putting the pump in the fuel tank. Problem fixed. I want to thank everyone for their input. Thanks Craig From donsauman at cythera.net Fri Aug 18 18:50:37 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 07:50:37 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- RE: SB Chevy in boat In-Reply-To: <003901c6c25f$8bbd2bb0$27cea5a6@yancey.com> References: +ADw-20060817200032.76171.qmail+AEA-web60824.mail.yahoo.com+AD4- <003901c6c25f$8bbd2bb0$27cea5a6@yancey.com> Message-ID: <44E6524D.5080107@cythera.net> Thanks David David Allen wrote: >My retrofitted 4.3 TBI motor in a boat runs only open loop. It still uses half the gas of the carb setup on the same motor. Look at the link below for details if you are interested. >http://home.hiwaay.net/+AH4-davida1/boat.htm >David > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Andrew Gibson" >To: >Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:00 PM >Subject: [Gmecm] RE: SB Chevy in boat > > > > >>I worked with a former boat mechanic a few years ago who told me that mercuiser was using the vortec 350 in the boats for more power and fuel economy. They didn't use an o2 sensor because with the water cooling of the boat exh manifolds it can't stay hot enough. So the motor is just run in open loop. You may want to check that out. >> >>--------------------------------- >>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1+AKI-/min. >>+AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >+AF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXwBfAF8AXw- >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm+AEA-diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Fri Aug 18 19:36:10 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:36:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- RE: SB Chevy in boat In-Reply-To: <44E6524D.5080107@cythera.net> Message-ID: <20060819003610.54739.qmail@web80505.mail.yahoo.com> Awsome job of documenting the conversion. This is the type of stuff that makes this site so good, the knowledge share. This doc would make it easy for someone to pull off a similar conversion. ----- Original Message ---- From: Don Sauman To: David Allen ; gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Friday, August 18, 2006 6:50:37 PM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Re: +AFs-Gmecm+AF0- RE: SB Chevy in boat Thanks David David Allen wrote: >My retrofitted 4.3 TBI motor in a boat runs only open loop. It still uses half the gas of the carb setup on the same motor. Look at the link below for details if you are interested. >http://home.hiwaay.net/~davida1/boat.htm >David > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Andrew Gibson" >To: >Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2006 3:00 PM >Subject: [Gmecm] RE: SB Chevy in boat > > > > >>I worked with a former boat mechanic a few years ago who told me that mercuiser was using the vortec 350 in the boats for more power and fuel economy. They didn't use an o2 sensor because with the water cooling of the boat exh manifolds it can't stay hot enough. So the motor is just run in open loop. You may want to check that out. >> >>--------------------------------- >>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min. >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From davida1 at hiwaay.net Fri Aug 18 22:20:00 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 22:20:00 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] RE: SB Chevy in boat References: +ADw-20060819003610.54739.qmail+AEA-web80505.mail.yahoo.com+AD4- Message-ID: <011a01c6c33e$5cc01a40$27cea5a6@yancey.com> Glad you found it informative! It is great to share knowlege. Even if someone doesn't do it exactly this way they may get ideas to use here or there on other projects. Later, David > Awsome job of documenting the conversion. This is the type of stuff that makes this site so good, the knowledge share. This doc would make it easy for someone to pull off a similar conversion. From pmkls1 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 20 16:17:18 2006 From: pmkls1 at yahoo.com (Phillip Kuhn) Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 14:17:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Which ecm to use In-Reply-To: <200608011123.35684.tsokorai@xperts.cl> Message-ID: <20060820211718.98248.qmail@web54601.mail.yahoo.com> Okay, I have a 730 ecm and a 4cyl memcal on the way along with all of the hardware for adapting and burning a chip. I still have a few simple questions that remain to be answered and I will begin programming. I am still not 100% on what route I am going with my ignition system but I think for the most part I will figure that out easily enough. I will eventually go with a DIS setup, but for now I am going to use my stock distributor to save cost just to get the initial phase of the swap done. One of my main questions is is there anything that I need to modify in the $58 code for it to work properly in the 730 ? If I use my distributor setup for now shouldnt I use a GM style ignition module to make it work properly ? Once I get all of my parts I am sure I will have a million other questions but for now I cant think of any more. Thanks in advance for any advice. I would definately be lost without this mailing list ! Phil __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Mon Aug 21 03:23:33 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:23:33 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] 749 twiki References: <44DE02C8.2030403@comcast.net> Message-ID: <04b501c6c4fc$25e69930$020101c0@gandalf> Not sure if a 749 page is the best place for information on running $58 code on 727 hardware. Would it be a good idea to have code pages as well as hardware pages, or are non-standard code/hardware combinations like mine not mainstream enough? Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill - Comcast" To: Sent: 12 August 2006 17:33 Subject: [Gmecm] 749 twiki > I've created a 749 twiki and added it to the EcmInfo page. Anyone want > to add to it? (Robin? :-) Just click the 'edit' button at the bottom > of the page.... > > http://www.diy-efi.org/twiki/bin/view.pl/Gmecm/1227749 > > Best, > > Bill From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Mon Aug 21 03:41:02 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:41:02 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Which ecm to use References: <20060820211718.98248.qmail@web54601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <04b601c6c4fd$8e578c30$020101c0@gandalf> > Okay, I have a 730 ecm and a 4cyl memcal on the way > along with all of the hardware for adapting and > burning a chip. I still have a few simple questions > that remain to be answered and I will begin > programming. I am still not 100% on what route I am > going with my ignition system but I think for the most > part I will figure that out easily enough. I will > eventually go with a DIS setup, but for now I am going > to use my stock distributor to save cost just to get > the initial phase of the swap done. > > One of my main questions is is there anything that I > need to modify in the $58 code for it to work properly > in the 730 ? I think I've mentioned that I'm running $58 on 727 hardware, which I *believe* is the same PCB in a different enclosure with different edge connectors (and hence pinout) as the 730. Putting aside the code changes to run $58 'properly' in a NA application, I don't believe any *code* changes are necessary to actually just *run* the $58 code to control ignition (albeit totally uncalibrated, and therefore potentially dangerous, of course) on a 730 (as they aren't for a 727). I've actually idled my 4cyl NA engine using an exact copy of the Sunbird ($58) code. I found that the $8D (Corvette) 727 pinout worked for ignition on my 727 running $58. I believe the pinout of the 730 running its native code should be valid for ignition when running $58. See: http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/diy-prom/213539-58-frequently-asked-questi ons.html > If I use my distributor setup for now shouldnt I use a > GM style ignition module to make it work properly ? I use an 8-pin GM HEI. Robin P.S. I have to say that making any changes to your car's engine management system is at your own risk! :-) From b.shaw at comcast.net Mon Aug 21 08:02:31 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:02:31 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] 749 twiki In-Reply-To: <04b501c6c4fc$25e69930$020101c0@gandalf> References: <44DE02C8.2030403@comcast.net> <04b501c6c4fc$25e69930$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <44E9AEE7.7010107@comcast.net> Right, you might want to put it up one level, in the ecminfo section. Best, Bill Robin Handley wrote: > Not sure if a 749 page is the best place for information on running $58 code > on 727 hardware. > > Would it be a good idea to have code pages as well as hardware pages, or are > non-standard code/hardware combinations like mine not mainstream enough? > > Robin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill - Comcast" > To: > Sent: 12 August 2006 17:33 > Subject: [Gmecm] 749 twiki > > > >> I've created a 749 twiki and added it to the EcmInfo page. Anyone want >> to add to it? (Robin? :-) Just click the 'edit' button at the bottom >> of the page.... >> >> http://www.diy-efi.org/twiki/bin/view.pl/Gmecm/1227749 >> >> Best, >> >> Bill >> From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Mon Aug 21 08:28:00 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:28:00 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] 749 twiki Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Robin Handley > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 3:24 AM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] 749 twiki > > Not sure if a 749 page is the best place for information on > running $58 code on 727 hardware. > > Would it be a good idea to have code pages as well as > hardware pages, or are non-standard code/hardware > combinations like mine not mainstream enough? > > Robin Projects like yours are the most interesting. As Bill suggested you can put it up a level under ECM info, or you can create your own page at the top under member projects, and then put a link to it in the 749 and 727 pages, or something else. The good thing about the wiki is that it's easy to edit and rearrange later. --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Mon Aug 21 13:01:41 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:01:41 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] 749 twiki References: Message-ID: <04cb01c6c54b$e13fed40$020101c0@gandalf> Projects like yours are the most interesting. As Bill suggested you can put it up a level under ECM info, or you can create your own page at the top under member projects, and then put a link to it in the 749 and 727 pages, or something else. The good thing about the wiki is that it's easy to edit and rearrange later. As a start, I've added a 'personal web pages' category under the main EcmInfo page and put a link to my simple GMECM web page there. Hope this is ok. Robin From papegoj at telia.com Mon Aug 21 15:45:20 2006 From: papegoj at telia.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C5ke_Georgsson?=) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 22:45:20 +0200 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? Message-ID: <44EA1B60.90604@telia.com> hello my name is ?ke Georgsson and i live in sweden . i?v been a Subscriber of this list for a loong time now but it?s alittle bit owerkill for me but im still reading it and get some small popups what it?s al about .. but far FAR away from say that im understund lots of what u guys are talking about :-) well it seems in the loong run that this is a great list and finaly i?v got the use of it i?v got a projekt that has stoped at a matter that il think u guys can help me out on so here it comes : I has got an Old suburban (1995 4 x 4 / 350 / Aut ) and i have rebuild an ZZZ engine with new pistons , this zzz engine (first edition) has smaller combustionchabers then stock ( 58 cc ) so the compression is gonna be little higher then stock ( the aprox compression ratio 9.73:1 with a 64cc head according to summit ) but my heads are as smaller . that wouldent be bad cause im planning to run it on E85 and then i need a higher combustion , well headers also and a new comb from crane (compucam 2010 ) then to the thing iv know U can help me out .. the injectionsystem ,, i have an complette >TPI system a take of from an 1989 Pontiac GTA and i have a set of bigger injectors ( accel 36 # ?) That i wanna use instead of the stock oem TBI system i?v had planned to us an megasquirt system to manage the fuelinjection in run the stock ECM parallel to get the transmission work right .. i been mailed around on the net and get alot of persons that says that this ECM i have in the 95 burb is been hacked down and are able even to run a TPI system ,, the question is is this thru ? and if so where do i find any instructions how i shall do ? and the things around that i need to map the chip that i must customise to make it al run ( even on E85 thats need moore fuel ) is it expensive and where do i find it ? be gentel please im a good mecanic and know electrics quite good but as i already told this is alittle bit to owerrated for me NOW .. but im quick learning and are not afraid of testing new things .. best regards ?ke From red83brick at yahoo.com Mon Aug 21 16:15:26 2006 From: red83brick at yahoo.com (Chris Reynolds) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 14:15:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? In-Reply-To: <44EA1B60.90604@telia.com> Message-ID: <20060821211526.24891.qmail@web61014.mail.yahoo.com> Be prepared to lose about 30 ft/lbs of torque under 2,200 RPM with the TPI intake setup over the TBI. ?ke Georgsson wrote: hello my name is ?ke Georgsson and i live in sweden . i?v been a Subscriber of this list for a loong time now but it?s alittle bit owerkill for me but im still reading it and get some small popups what it?s al about .. but far FAR away from say that im understund lots of what u guys are talking about :-) well it seems in the loong run that this is a great list and finaly i?v got the use of it i?v got a projekt that has stoped at a matter that il think u guys can help me out on so here it comes : I has got an Old suburban (1995 4 x 4 / 350 / Aut ) and i have rebuild an ZZZ engine with new pistons , this zzz engine (first edition) has smaller combustionchabers then stock ( 58 cc ) so the compression is gonna be little higher then stock ( the aprox compression ratio 9.73:1 with a 64cc head according to summit ) but my heads are as smaller . that wouldent be bad cause im planning to run it on E85 and then i need a higher combustion , well headers also and a new comb from crane (compucam 2010 ) then to the thing iv know U can help me out .. the injectionsystem ,, i have an complette >TPI system a take of from an 1989 Pontiac GTA and i have a set of bigger injectors ( accel 36 # ?) That i wanna use instead of the stock oem TBI system i?v had planned to us an megasquirt system to manage the fuelinjection in run the stock ECM parallel to get the transmission work right .. i been mailed around on the net and get alot of persons that says that this ECM i have in the 95 burb is been hacked down and are able even to run a TPI system ,, the question is is this thru ? and if so where do i find any instructions how i shall do ? and the things around that i need to map the chip that i must customise to make it al run ( even on E85 thats need moore fuel ) is it expensive and where do i find it ? be gentel please im a good mecanic and know electrics quite good but as i already told this is alittle bit to owerrated for me NOW .. but im quick learning and are not afraid of testing new things .. best regards ?ke _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business. From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Mon Aug 21 16:30:24 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 16:30:24 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? Message-ID: Hi Ake, I wouldn't try to use the megasquirt and factory computer in parallel, that just sounds like a wiring mess. Both computers are going to want to use lots of the same inputs, but you can't just take the MAP signal and send it to both computers. Electrically it just doesn't work that way. This sounds like your first project so you'll want to keep it as simple and close to stock as possible to increase your chance of success. I think it makes sense to keep the TBI system. That way most of your changes are just in the tuning, to compensate for the heads, cam, etc. You'll have to get the part number for your computer off the box and then do some searching (or ask here) to find out if there is any tuning software for it. A good place to start is tunercat.com. Keep the TPI for later, if you decide to switch to it then what you've learned from tuning the fuel and ignition will carry over to tuning a TPI system also. Others can comment on whether the TBI or TPI is more suitable for your truck. --steve > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of ?ke Georgsson > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 3:45 PM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? > > hello my name is ?ke Georgsson and i live in sweden . i?v > been a Subscriber of this list for a loong time now but it?s > alittle bit owerkill for me but im still reading it and get > some small popups what it?s al about .. but far FAR away > from say that im understund lots of > what u guys are talking about :-) well it seems in the > loong run that > this is a great list and finaly i?v got the use of it > > i?v got a projekt that has stoped at a matter that il think > u guys can help me out on so here it comes : > > I has got an Old suburban (1995 4 x 4 / 350 / Aut ) and i have > rebuild an ZZZ engine with new pistons , this zzz engine (first > edition) has smaller combustionchabers then stock ( 58 > cc ) so the compression is gonna be little higher then > stock ( the aprox compression ratio 9.73:1 with a 64cc head > according to summit ) but my heads are as smaller . that > wouldent be bad cause im planning to run > it on E85 and then i need a higher combustion , well > headers also > and a new comb from crane (compucam 2010 ) then to the thing > iv know U can help me out .. the injectionsystem ,, i have > an complette >TPI > system a take of from an 1989 Pontiac GTA and i have a set of > bigger injectors ( accel 36 # ?) That i wanna use instead of > the stock > oem TBI system i?v had planned to us an megasquirt system to manage > the fuelinjection in run the stock ECM parallel to get > the transmission work right .. i been mailed around on the > net and get alot of persons that says that this ECM i have > in the 95 burb is been hacked down and are able even to run a > TPI system ,, the question is is this thru ? and if so > where do i find any instructions how i shall do ? and the > things around that i need to map the chip that i must > customise to make it al run ( even on E85 thats need > moore fuel ) is it expensive and where do i find it ? > > be gentel please im a good mecanic and know electrics > quite good > but as i already told this is alittle bit to owerrated for me NOW .. > but im quick learning and are not afraid of testing new things .. > > best regards ?ke > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From dennysweet at charter.net Mon Aug 21 22:20:44 2006 From: dennysweet at charter.net (Denny) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 20:20:44 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? References: Message-ID: <000a01c6c599$f4ccd2d0$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> Hi Ake, I think you have a great idea to use the TPI,but as Steve has wrote it is a little tough for the first project. I have a old Chevy truck that has a Vortec 350 motor that I went thru the same thing with. I started out with a TPI unit from a 89 Camaro. Problems I ran into is 1) You will lose alot of torque on the low side of the rpm scale with TPI, 2) I tryed to make a stock wiring harness work, it dosent. So be prepared to purchase a custom harness w/ matching ecm. 730 is the ECM I have. 3) For performance, The TBI I run now outperformed the TPI by a large margin. Tuned Port Injection is pretty impressive to look at but you cant get a lot of power after 5500 rpm and you lose a great amount of torque on the lower end of the RPM scale. So if your not looking for a system to perform well then use the TPI unit. However if you want a injection system for offroad,hill climbing or playing in the Mud stick with the TBI. Just my 2 cents Denny From bcroe at juno.com Mon Aug 21 21:12:55 2006 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 21:12:55 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? Message-ID: <20060821.212031.740.2.bcroe@juno.com> Actually it is possible to use the same sensor for more than one unit in some cases. For example, your factory computer may have a temperature sensor which receives some power from a pullup resistor. A Megasquirt could be attached with no pullup resistor, so it doesn't affect the voltage, then program it up for thr factory curve. I have a 79 Eldo with the factory Cad port injection. The sensors on this are completely incompatible with later designs, so I just modified the (Olds small block) intake manifold to accept a second set of sensors. Now with a new wiring harness, I can plug in about any ECU I want as well as the original (without opening the hood). I have used 3 different types so far. The Cad HEI even had a "cam sensor" output useful for sequential, though I would like to devise something independent of that vacuum/weight advance unit. Olds has lots of bungs, but getting the second throttle position sensor was a little tricky. Intake vacuum comes into the car, so it is just attached to the MAP. Bruce Roe 21 Aug 2006 "Steve Ravet" writes: > Hi Ake, I wouldn't try to use the megasquirt and factory computer in > parallel, that just sounds like a wiring mess. Both computers are > going to want to use lots of the same inputs, but you can't just > take the MAP signal and send it to both computers. Electrically it > just doesn't work that way. From rgmecm at yahoo.com Mon Aug 21 21:44:28 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 19:44:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Memcal adapters Message-ID: <20060822024428.56245.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi Guys, Just wanted to mention that I now have memcal adapters and parts in stock... These will help fund the ecm test bench project. Unassembled kits are $15, assembled $20. I have 27SF512 Flash/proms in stock, for $3 with an order, and can include a ZIF socket for $7 more. See the thread here: http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/engine-drivetrain-parts-sale/383669-theyre-memcal-adapters-all.html Let me know if you're interested. Thanks, Ryan --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min. From romans at starstream.net Tue Aug 22 00:27:19 2006 From: romans at starstream.net (Mark Romans) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 22:27:19 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] Memcal adapters References: <20060822024428.56245.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001501c6c5ab$a3467120$6701a8c0@fci9bo2ay5h5y8> Hey Ryan: I need an adapter for programming the chip while it's still in the memcal! Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Hess" To: Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 7:44 PM Subject: [Gmecm] Memcal adapters > Hi Guys, > > Just wanted to mention that I now have memcal adapters and parts in > stock... These will help fund the ecm test bench project. Unassembled > kits are $15, assembled $20. I have 27SF512 Flash/proms in stock, for $3 > with an order, and can include a ZIF socket for $7 more. See the thread > here: > > http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/engine-drivetrain-parts-sale/383669-theyre-memcal-adapters-all.html > > Let me know if you're interested. Thanks, > > Ryan > > > --------------------------------- > Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great > rates starting at 1?/min. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From papegoj at telia.com Tue Aug 22 04:25:20 2006 From: papegoj at telia.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C5ke_Georgsson?=) Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 11:25:20 +0200 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? In-Reply-To: <000a01c6c599$f4ccd2d0$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> References: <000a01c6c599$f4ccd2d0$1c02a8c0@dennyhuyir5nuj> Message-ID: <44EACD80.3020805@telia.com> > The TBI I run now outperformed the TPI by a large margin. Tuned Port > Injection is pretty impressive to look at but you cant get a lot of > power after 5500 rpm and you lose a great amount of torque on the > lower end of the RPM scale. > So if your not looking for a system to perform well then use the TPI > unit. However if you want a injection system for offroad,hill climbing > or playing in the Mud stick with the TBI. > Just my 2 cents > Denny _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > Hi denny no problems the cam i use dosent know high rpms Basic Operating RPM Range: 500-3,800 RPM so that wouldent be a problem :-) From red83brick at yahoo.com Tue Aug 22 10:01:54 2006 From: red83brick at yahoo.com (Chris Reynolds) Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 08:01:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? In-Reply-To: <44EACD80.3020805@telia.com> Message-ID: <20060822150154.79990.qmail@web61021.mail.yahoo.com> The problem with TPI is the runners are setup to resonate at around 3,000 RPM, which greatly improves torque there. The throttle response will be slightly better than the TBI setup, but you will lose a ton of low-speed torque, which is everything in a heavy suburban. I put TPI on a modified TBI 305 in a fullsize van that I use for pulling heavy trailers. It spends 90% of its time between 2,500 and 3,000 rpm in 3rd gear doing 60-70 MPH with brief runs to 4,500 in 2nd gear climbing some good grades. Works well enough for me, but the torque loss definately shows up with an unloaded van cruising in overdrive. PS- I am also using a 1997 SFI Vortec PCM to run the TPI and 4L60E that is in this 1994 G20. Made the swap so much easier than using a piggy back ecm and harness. I just pulled the harness from the 1997 G1500 Express, the underhood PCM, the distributer, the ignition module, the coil, and swapped it over to the TPI. ?ke Georgsson wrote: > The TBI I run now outperformed the TPI by a large margin. Tuned Port > Injection is pretty impressive to look at but you cant get a lot of > power after 5500 rpm and you lose a great amount of torque on the > lower end of the RPM scale. > So if your not looking for a system to perform well then use the TPI > unit. However if you want a injection system for offroad,hill climbing > or playing in the Mud stick with the TBI. > Just my 2 cents > Denny _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > Hi denny no problems the cam i use dosent know high rpms Basic Operating RPM Range: 500-3,800 RPM so that wouldent be a problem :-) _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. From red83brick at yahoo.com Tue Aug 22 10:07:12 2006 From: red83brick at yahoo.com (Chris Reynolds) Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 08:07:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? In-Reply-To: <44EACD80.3020805@telia.com> Message-ID: <20060822150713.26523.qmail@web61024.mail.yahoo.com> The problem with TPI is the runners are setup to resonate at around 3,000 RPM, which greatly improves torque there. The throttle response will be slightly better than the TBI setup, but you will lose a ton of low-speed torque, which is everything in a heavy suburban. I put TPI on a modified TBI 305 in a fullsize van that I use for pulling heavy trailers. It spends 90% of its time between 2,500 and 3,000 rpm in 3rd gear doing 60-70 MPH with brief runs to 4,500 in 2nd gear climbing some good grades. Works well enough for me, but the torque loss definately shows up with an unloaded van cruising in overdrive. I would try to find a later model CSFI Vortec 350 to use the harness, PCM, etc. It is already PFI, uses a MAF sensor, and is Sequential Fuel Injection. I am also using a 1997 SFI Vortec PCM to run the TPI and 4L60E that is in this 1994 G20. Made the swap so much easier than using a piggy back ecm and harness. I just pulled the harness from the 1997 G1500 Express, the underhood PCM, the distributer, the ignition module, the coil, and swapped it over to the TPI. I ran it on the stock 305 Vortec PCM for a while and it ran great. Wanting more, I bought a software package that allows me to reprogram the PCM with my laptop, it runs alot better now. But it still won't make torque like my TBI setup did. ?ke Georgsson wrote: > The TBI I run now outperformed the TPI by a large margin. Tuned Port > Injection is pretty impressive to look at but you cant get a lot of > power after 5500 rpm and you lose a great amount of torque on the > lower end of the RPM scale. > So if your not looking for a system to perform well then use the TPI > unit. However if you want a injection system for offroad,hill climbing > or playing in the Mud stick with the TBI. > Just my 2 cents > Denny _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > Hi denny no problems the cam i use dosent know high rpms Basic Operating RPM Range: 500-3,800 RPM so that wouldent be a problem :-) _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out. From red83brick at yahoo.com Tue Aug 22 10:08:02 2006 From: red83brick at yahoo.com (Chris Reynolds) Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 08:08:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? In-Reply-To: <44EACD80.3020805@telia.com> Message-ID: <20060822150802.56944.qmail@web61013.mail.yahoo.com> The problem with TPI is the runners are setup to resonate at around 3,000 RPM, which greatly improves torque there. The throttle response will be slightly better than the TBI setup, but you will lose a ton of low-speed torque, which is everything in a heavy suburban. I put TPI on a modified TBI 305 in a fullsize van that I use for pulling heavy trailers. It spends 90% of its time between 2,500 and 3,000 rpm in 3rd gear doing 60-70 MPH with brief runs to 4,500 in 2nd gear climbing some good grades. Works well enough for me, but the torque loss definately shows up with an unloaded van cruising in overdrive. I would try to find a later model CSFI Vortec 350 to use the harness, PCM, etc. It is already PFI, uses a MAF sensor, and is Sequential Fuel Injection. I am also using a 1997 SFI Vortec PCM to run the TPI and 4L60E that is in this 1994 G20. Made the swap so much easier than using a piggy back ecm and harness. I just pulled the harness from the 1997 G1500 Express, the underhood PCM, the distributer, the ignition module, the coil, and swapped it over to the TPI. I ran it on the stock 305 Vortec PCM for a while and it ran great. Wanting more, I bought a software package that allows me to reprogram the PCM with my laptop, it runs alot better now. But it still won't make torque like my TBI setup did. ?ke Georgsson wrote: > The TBI I run now outperformed the TPI by a large margin. Tuned Port > Injection is pretty impressive to look at but you cant get a lot of > power after 5500 rpm and you lose a great amount of torque on the > lower end of the RPM scale. > So if your not looking for a system to perform well then use the TPI > unit. However if you want a injection system for offroad,hill climbing > or playing in the Mud stick with the TBI. > Just my 2 cents > Denny _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > Hi denny no problems the cam i use dosent know high rpms Basic Operating RPM Range: 500-3,800 RPM so that wouldent be a problem :-) _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com From jktucker at usamedia.tv Thu Aug 24 21:02:43 2006 From: jktucker at usamedia.tv (Kim Tucker) Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:02:43 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? In-Reply-To: <44EA1B60.90604@telia.com> Message-ID: <000001c6c7ea$949f9980$0200a8c0@office> ?ke, Well, it sounds like you're too far down this path to consider another, but I thought I'd suggest another path to others that may go down this road. A friend of mine had a '95 truck and he was looking for more power and horsepower without spending a lot of money. On his truck, we grafted a '97 engine and OEM harness into the truck with very little difficulty. I plan to put the swap on a web page someday, and I'll have to go through my notes to verify the wiring chart. The end result was a engine that looked bone stock since we were able to just re-pin the stock firewall connector for most of the connections. There were a few splices that had to be made where the ECM once was, but for the most part it went smoothly. In his case, he had a manual trans truck, so there wasn't any concern about whether the transmission could be controlled with the newer PCM. In the end, it cost him only $1200 at the junkyard for the whole kit (including all accessories, A/C hoses, air intake, and other misc. Then, he was able to sell his old TBI motor back to the wrecking yard for $400. He wound up with a 75,000 mile vortec motor, with 255 horsepower and 330 ft-lbs. of torque. Instead of 210 horsepower and 300 ft-lbs of torque. I'm not sure how similar the wiring is for '91-'94's, but the '95 only had about 12 wires that had to be re-routed. Jake -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of ?ke Georgsson Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 1:45 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? hello my name is ?ke Georgsson and i live in sweden . i?v been a Subscriber of this list for a loong time now but it?s alittle bit owerkill for me but im still reading it and get some small popups what it?s al about .. but far FAR away from say that im understund lots of what u guys are talking about :-) well it seems in the loong run that this is a great list and finaly i?v got the use of it i?v got a projekt that has stoped at a matter that il think u guys can help me out on so here it comes : I has got an Old suburban (1995 4 x 4 / 350 / Aut ) and i have rebuild an ZZZ engine with new pistons , this zzz engine (first edition) has smaller combustionchabers then stock ( 58 cc ) so the compression is gonna be little higher then stock ( the aprox compression ratio 9.73:1 with a 64cc head according to summit ) but my heads are as smaller . that wouldent be bad cause im planning to run it on E85 and then i need a higher combustion , well headers also and a new comb from crane (compucam 2010 ) then to the thing iv know U can help me out .. the injectionsystem ,, i have an complette >TPI system a take of from an 1989 Pontiac GTA and i have a set of bigger injectors ( accel 36 # ?) That i wanna use instead of the stock oem TBI system i?v had planned to us an megasquirt system to manage the fuelinjection in run the stock ECM parallel to get the transmission work right .. i been mailed around on the net and get alot of persons that says that this ECM i have in the 95 burb is been hacked down and are able even to run a TPI system ,, the question is is this thru ? and if so where do i find any instructions how i shall do ? and the things around that i need to map the chip that i must customise to make it al run ( even on E85 thats need moore fuel ) is it expensive and where do i find it ? be gentel please im a good mecanic and know electrics quite good but as i already told this is alittle bit to owerrated for me NOW .. but im quick learning and are not afraid of testing new things .. best regards ?ke _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From donsauman at cythera.net Fri Aug 25 04:36:41 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:36:41 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] BCC and Def file for 4L80E In-Reply-To: <44E6524D.5080107@cythera.net> References: +ADw-20060817200032.76171.qmail+AEA-web60824.mail.yahoo.com+AD4- <003901c6c25f$8bbd2bb0$27cea5a6@yancey.com> <44E6524D.5080107@cythera.net> Message-ID: <44EEC4A9.500@cythera.net> This a variation on a question asked before. I have 1996 4L80E and a TCM with a BACT code and +ACM-D3 definition file for 1992. These transmissions had a force motor change in 1994 and a new chip was used. Can anyone tell me what it was and where I can get it? Presumably out of a Chevy truck but the combination of naturally aspirated diesel and 4L80 was also used in the Hummer of that period. Cheers Don -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From tsokorai at minimania.org Fri Aug 25 16:58:48 2006 From: tsokorai at minimania.org (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:58:48 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Strange effect while trying to tune my GM-EFIed beast Message-ID: <200608251758.49303.tsokorai@minimania.org> I'm in the tuning stage of the conversion from a mechanical FI '82 I6 BMW to a '727 ECM with $8D code and DIS ignition, and last set of modifications gets me the following strange effect: The engine runs cold very well, a little rough, but pulls strongly and at any RPM. But when it gets near its working temperature, it starts to have a strange cut-off at exactly 2000 RPM. It feels exactly like a hard revlimiter. The harder I put the foot down, the more pronounced is the cut/resume effect. See http://www.xperts.cl/temp/revlim_problem.png For a screenshot of a datalog I'm slowly trying to get the 2000 RPM and it starts jerking. Then I try to put a bit more throttle, and I get only harder cut/resume cycles. At the strong oscillation, I get some loud "bang"s on the exhaust too. Any ideas of what is happening? -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From davida1 at hiwaay.net Fri Aug 25 17:17:59 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:17:59 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Strange effect while trying to tune my GM-EFIed beast References: <200608251758.49303.tsokorai@minimania.org> Message-ID: <002001c6c894$583214f0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> What was the last set of modifications you mention? Have you scoped the "reference" signal from the DIS module to the ECM? Is it faltering away over 2000 RPM? What kind of crank trigger are you using? Could it be gaining resistance as it warms up? If it's a VR sensor (magnetic pin with a coil winding) then the signal is usually dirtier at high-revs. Anything interfering with it would be worse when hot (more coil resistance) and at high-revs (dirtier signal). Have you verified the polarity of the crank trigger coil with relation to the DIS module? To isolate tuning versus hardware causes, you could replace the temp sensor with a fixed resistor. This resistor would give a low "temperature" reading which corresponds to the actual engine temperature reange where the engine performs properly. If the engine runs right when fully warned up so long as the ECM is being told it is not warmed up, then it is a tuning or code issue. If the problem persists, then it is a hardware issue and not a tuning issue. Hope this helps! David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." To: Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 4:58 PM Subject: [Gmecm] Strange effect while trying to tune my GM-EFIed beast > I'm in the tuning stage of the conversion from a mechanical FI '82 I6 BMW to > a '727 ECM with $8D code and DIS ignition, and last set of modifications gets > me the following strange effect: > > The engine runs cold very well, a little rough, but pulls strongly and at any > RPM. > But when it gets near its working temperature, it starts to have a strange > cut-off at exactly 2000 RPM. It feels exactly like a hard revlimiter. > The harder I put the foot down, the more pronounced is the cut/resume effect. > > See http://www.xperts.cl/temp/revlim_problem.png > For a screenshot of a datalog I'm slowly trying to get the 2000 RPM and it > starts jerking. Then I try to put a bit more throttle, and I get only harder > cut/resume cycles. > > At the strong oscillation, I get some loud "bang"s on the exhaust too. > > Any ideas of what is happening? > > -- > Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From tsokorai at minimania.org Fri Aug 25 17:56:26 2006 From: tsokorai at minimania.org (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:56:26 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Strange effect while trying to tune my GM-EFIed beast In-Reply-To: <002001c6c894$583214f0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> References: <200608251758.49303.tsokorai@minimania.org> <002001c6c894$583214f0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> Message-ID: <200608251856.26883.tsokorai@minimania.org> On Friday 25 August 2006 18:17, David Allen wrote: > What was the last set of modifications you mention? Uhh ... hard to remember... I'm a bit "non-methodic" when doing table & consts. changes: sometimes I get into a "change everything" frenzy :) The main were a bit more of fuel (VE lower and upper tables) and a bit more of advance. I also played a bit with the DFCO parameters, but I only increased the RPM threshold, because before that I was getting engine stalls on downshifts on long decels (manual tranny). The strange thing is that before my last modification session, the engine ran at any RPM, but very anemic at high RPMs. > Have you scoped the "reference" signal from the DIS module to the ECM? Is > it faltering away over 2000 RPM? What kind of crank trigger are you using? I'm using a "frankenstein-sensor" ;) it is a VR sensor from the TDC diagnostic setup BMW put on these old k-jetronic engines, but the signal was too low, so I modified the sensor a bit stacking three NdBFe magnets on the back to get a higher signal level. > Could it be gaining resistance as it warms up? If it's a VR sensor > (magnetic pin with a coil winding) then the signal is usually dirtier at > high-revs. Anything interfering with it would be worse when hot (more coil > resistance) and at high-revs (dirtier signal). Have you verified the > polarity of the crank trigger coil with relation to the DIS module? To I checked the polarity very early on my adaption phase: with the switched polarity, it barely runs at any RPM :) > isolate tuning versus hardware causes, you could replace the temp sensor > with a fixed resistor. This resistor would give a low "temperature" > reading which corresponds to the actual engine temperature reange where the > engine performs properly. If the engine runs right when fully warned up so > long as the ECM is being told it is not warmed up, then it is a tuning or > code issue. If the problem persists, then it is a hardware issue and not > a tuning issue. Hope this helps! Thanks!. I'm getting the feeling it is a too big advance, but the strange thing is that instead of knock or backfire, I get a complete missfire and even an exhaust bang! I don't think it is the crank sensor because before my last changes it was running more or less smooth at any RPM. Now I need to narrow down exactly *what* in my modification-fest gave me that result. Well... it was fun trying to drive the car across the whole city with a 2000 RPM limit ;) -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From davida1 at hiwaay.net Fri Aug 25 18:09:01 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 18:09:01 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Strange effect while trying to tune my GM-EFIed beast References: <200608251758.49303.tsokorai@minimania.org><002001c6c894$583214f0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> <200608251856.26883.tsokorai@minimania.org> Message-ID: <002b01c6c89b$7607b320$0700a8c0@yancey.com> Tomas, since the effect is so profound, probably the error is something obvious if you just happen to focus on it. For instance, I had a car that needed a little more canking fuel to get it started when cold. I intended to modify the cold-engine cranking fuel pulse-width. The car started perfect cold and hot, but there was a temperature range when it would NOT start. My mother discovered this (it was her car) and I had to drive into town to get it started. Using clear-flood mode got it going in a cloud of black smoke! After farting around with it, I noticed 2 cells in the table (which I had not intended to modify) were off by a factor of 10! I must have "bumped the mouse" and accidentally edited these cells. Correcting this fixed it. Look at your tables in "graph view" and see if there are any strange peaks, valleys or cutoffs. Anything major wrong should show up. Do you save each old calibration? So you can therefore "go back" and undo the changes? I've got about 7 calibrations where I tweaked on different aspects of my turbo motor. This has saved me hours of work on more than one occation! Which model Bimmer have you got? (used to work at an independant BMW / Mercedes shop) Later, David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." To: Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 5:56 PM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Strange effect while trying to tune my GM-EFIed beast > On Friday 25 August 2006 18:17, David Allen wrote: >> What was the last set of modifications you mention? > > Uhh ... hard to remember... I'm a bit "non-methodic" when doing table & > consts. changes: sometimes I get into a "change everything" frenzy :) > The main were a bit more of fuel (VE lower and upper tables) and a bit more of > advance. I also played a bit with the DFCO parameters, but I only increased > the RPM threshold, because before that I was getting engine stalls on > downshifts on long decels (manual tranny). > The strange thing is that before my last modification session, the engine ran > at any RPM, but very anemic at high RPMs. > >> Have you scoped the "reference" signal from the DIS module to the ECM? Is >> it faltering away over 2000 RPM? What kind of crank trigger are you using? > > I'm using a "frankenstein-sensor" ;) it is a VR sensor from the TDC diagnostic > setup BMW put on these old k-jetronic engines, but the signal was too low, so > I modified the sensor a bit stacking three NdBFe magnets on the back to get a > higher signal level. > >> Could it be gaining resistance as it warms up? If it's a VR sensor >> (magnetic pin with a coil winding) then the signal is usually dirtier at >> high-revs. Anything interfering with it would be worse when hot (more coil >> resistance) and at high-revs (dirtier signal). Have you verified the >> polarity of the crank trigger coil with relation to the DIS module? To > > I checked the polarity very early on my adaption phase: with the switched > polarity, it barely runs at any RPM :) > >> isolate tuning versus hardware causes, you could replace the temp sensor >> with a fixed resistor. This resistor would give a low "temperature" >> reading which corresponds to the actual engine temperature reange where the >> engine performs properly. If the engine runs right when fully warned up so >> long as the ECM is being told it is not warmed up, then it is a tuning or >> code issue. If the problem persists, then it is a hardware issue and not >> a tuning issue. Hope this helps! > > Thanks!. > I'm getting the feeling it is a too big advance, but the strange thing is that > instead of knock or backfire, I get a complete missfire and even an exhaust > bang! > I don't think it is the crank sensor because before my last changes it was > running more or less smooth at any RPM. > Now I need to narrow down exactly *what* in my modification-fest gave me that > result. > > Well... it was fun trying to drive the car across the whole city with a 2000 > RPM limit ;) > > -- > Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From tsokorai at minimania.org Fri Aug 25 18:25:29 2006 From: tsokorai at minimania.org (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 19:25:29 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Strange effect while trying to tune my GM-EFIed beast In-Reply-To: <002b01c6c89b$7607b320$0700a8c0@yancey.com> References: <200608251758.49303.tsokorai@minimania.org> <200608251856.26883.tsokorai@minimania.org> <002b01c6c89b$7607b320$0700a8c0@yancey.com> Message-ID: <200608251925.29993.tsokorai@minimania.org> On Friday 25 August 2006 19:09, David Allen wrote: > black smoke! After farting around with it, I noticed 2 cells in the table > (which I had not intended to modify) were off by a factor of 10! I must > have "bumped the mouse" and accidentally edited these cells. Correcting > this fixed it. Look at your tables in "graph view" and see if there are any > strange peaks, valleys or cutoffs. Anything major wrong should show up. Do Good point! I'll check the tables as soon as I get home. > you save each old calibration? So you can therefore "go back" and undo > the changes? I've got about 7 calibrations where I tweaked on different > aspects of my turbo motor. This has saved me hours of work on more than one Yes, I normally save "snapshots" of a knowing half-working calibrations :) > occation! Which model Bimmer have you got? (used to work at an independant > BMW / Mercedes shop) Later, It is a 1982 E21 323i, 5sp. manual gearbox. I'm still early on the tuning phase, but the areas that already work right, the GM EFI setup is giving me *much* better responsiveness than the old k-jetronic mechanical injection setup. -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From donsauman at cythera.net Fri Aug 25 19:13:11 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 08:13:11 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] Strange effect while trying to tune my GM-EFIed beast In-Reply-To: <002b01c6c89b$7607b320$0700a8c0@yancey.com> References: <200608251758.49303.tsokorai@minimania.org><002001c6c894$583214f0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> <200608251856.26883.tsokorai@minimania.org> <002b01c6c89b$7607b320$0700a8c0@yancey.com> Message-ID: <44EF9217.3070202@cythera.net> I am impressed that your mother lets you fiddle with her car. My wife won't even let me touch hers. Don David Allen wrote: > Tomas, since the effect is so profound, probably the error is something obvious if you just happen to focus on it. For instance, I had a car that needed a little more canking fuel to get it started when cold. I intended to modify the cold-engine cranking fuel pulse-width. The car started perfect cold and hot, but there was a temperature range when it would NOT start. My mother discovered this (it was her car) and I had to drive into town to get it started. Using clear-flood mode got it going in a cloud of black smoke! > After farting around with it, I noticed 2 cells in the table (which I had not intended to modify) were off by a factor of 10! I must have "bumped the mouse" and accidentally edited these cells. Correcting this fixed it. > Look at your tables in "graph view" and see if there are any strange peaks, valleys or cutoffs. Anything major wrong should show up. > Do you save each old calibration? So you can therefore "go back" and undo the changes? I've got about 7 calibrations where I tweaked on different aspects of my turbo motor. This has saved me hours of work on more than one occation! > Which model Bimmer have you got? (used to work at an independant BMW / Mercedes shop) >Later, >David > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." >To: >Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 5:56 PM >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Strange effect while trying to tune my GM-EFIed beast > > > > >>On Friday 25 August 2006 18:17, David Allen wrote: >> >> >>> What was the last set of modifications you mention? >>> >>> >>Uhh ... hard to remember... I'm a bit "non-methodic" when doing table & >>consts. changes: sometimes I get into a "change everything" frenzy :) >>The main were a bit more of fuel (VE lower and upper tables) and a bit more of >>advance. I also played a bit with the DFCO parameters, but I only increased >>the RPM threshold, because before that I was getting engine stalls on >>downshifts on long decels (manual tranny). >>The strange thing is that before my last modification session, the engine ran >>at any RPM, but very anemic at high RPMs. >> >> >> >>> Have you scoped the "reference" signal from the DIS module to the ECM? Is >>>it faltering away over 2000 RPM? What kind of crank trigger are you using? >>> >>> >>I'm using a "frankenstein-sensor" ;) it is a VR sensor from the TDC diagnostic >>setup BMW put on these old k-jetronic engines, but the signal was too low, so >>I modified the sensor a bit stacking three NdBFe magnets on the back to get a >>higher signal level. >> >> >> >>>Could it be gaining resistance as it warms up? If it's a VR sensor >>>(magnetic pin with a coil winding) then the signal is usually dirtier at >>>high-revs. Anything interfering with it would be worse when hot (more coil >>>resistance) and at high-revs (dirtier signal). Have you verified the >>>polarity of the crank trigger coil with relation to the DIS module? To >>> >>> >>I checked the polarity very early on my adaption phase: with the switched >>polarity, it barely runs at any RPM :) >> >> >> >>>isolate tuning versus hardware causes, you could replace the temp sensor >>>with a fixed resistor. This resistor would give a low "temperature" >>>reading which corresponds to the actual engine temperature reange where the >>>engine performs properly. If the engine runs right when fully warned up so >>>long as the ECM is being told it is not warmed up, then it is a tuning or >>>code issue. If the problem persists, then it is a hardware issue and not >>>a tuning issue. Hope this helps! >>> >>> >>Thanks!. >>I'm getting the feeling it is a too big advance, but the strange thing is that >>instead of knock or backfire, I get a complete missfire and even an exhaust >>bang! >>I don't think it is the crank sensor because before my last changes it was >>running more or less smooth at any RPM. >>Now I need to narrow down exactly *what* in my modification-fest gave me that >>result. >> >>Well... it was fun trying to drive the car across the whole city with a 2000 >>RPM limit ;) >> >>-- >>Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From davida1 at hiwaay.net Sat Aug 26 10:39:29 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 10:39:29 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Camaros - Off topic! References: <382-22006852501518218@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <008401c6c925$d35dca70$0700a8c0@yancey.com> That Camaro Song is great! I'm not against Camaros, it just happens one of the most awful cars I ever saw happened to be a Camaro. Here in AL, many of the country-boy racers have that bodystyle Camaro as in the Camaro song video. Customized so that it is MUCH louder than it is fast. A boy I know had one with all the following features. This was the WORST car I have ever seen aside from in a junkyard. What was so funny was he actually considered it fast. He had this car while I was putting the mostly-stock TBI injected 305 in my Nova. Always he was talking trash about how my "computer motor" would never be as fast as his car! His specs follow: -Left and right cylinder heads different valve sizes and compression ratio... -Holley vacuum-secondary carb converted to mechanical using coathanger wire linkages... -Off-the wall race cam nowhere near matched to either cylinder head... -Computer-advance HEI distributor with no ECM connected... -El-Cheapo headers - different style on each side... -Turbo350 transmission w/ bark-in-each-gear shift-kit and "3 million RPM" torque converter... -One-wheel brakes... (rear brake lines capped, one front caliper sticking and inoperable) -Missing steering pump and hydraulic hoses but still has a power steering box... -Each bolt-on body panel a different color (trunk, hood, each door, each fender)... -HUGE globs of silicone caulk sealing t-top panels... -At least 20 % of cars surface area covered in performance aftermarket parts stickers, in various stages of sun-bleaching... -Left and right tail lights from different bodystyles (yellow vs. red turn-signals) -Radio repalced with 3 gauge pod... -Air conditioner controls leaking engine oil onto console... (mechanical oil pressure gauge above them leaking into dash) -Bevel gears welded up in differential for full-time lock. Could hardly turn a corner... -Mismatched tires and rims... I bet we've all seen one or two of these type of setups! David From teamblitz01 at voyager.net Sat Aug 26 10:59:17 2006 From: teamblitz01 at voyager.net (blitz@teamblitz.com) Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 11:59:17 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Camaros - Off topic! Message-ID: <200608261559.k7QFxHIX011161@mail1.mx.voyager.net> **And being the good guy you are, and wanting to help a kid in the car hobby, I'm sure you spent a little time with him trying to assist him rather than just laughing at him. You know, like some older guys helped you out when you were a kid and same age as him. (After they were done laughing at you.) :-) Norm That Camaro Song is great!
> I'm not against Camaros, it just happens one of the most awful cars I ever saw happened to be a Camaro. Here in AL, many of the country-boy racers have that bodystyle Camaro as in the Camaro song video. Customized so that it is MUCH louder than it is fast. A boy I know had one with all the following features. This was the WORST car I have ever seen aside from in a junkyard. What was so funny was he actually considered it fast.
> He had this car while I was putting the mostly-stock TBI injected 305 in my Nova. Always he was talking trash about how my "computer motor" would never be as fast as his car! His specs follow:
> -Left and right cylinder heads different valve sizes and compression ratio...
> -Holley vacuum-secondary carb converted to mechanical using coathanger wire linkages...
> -Off-the wall race cam nowhere near matched to either cylinder head...
> -Computer-advance HEI distributor with no ECM connected...
> -El-Cheapo headers - different style on each side...
> -Turbo350 transmission w/ bark-in-each-gear shift-kit and "3 million RPM" torque converter...
> -One-wheel brakes... (rear brake lines capped, one front caliper sticking and inoperable)
> -Missing steering pump and hydraulic hoses but still has a power steering box...
> -Each bolt-on body panel a different color (trunk, hood, each door, each fender)...
> -HUGE globs of silicone caulk sealing t-top panels...
> -At least 20 % of cars surface area covered in performance aftermarket parts stickers, in various stages of sun-bleaching...
> -Left and right tail lights from different bodystyles (yellow vs. red turn-signals)
> -Radio repalced with 3 gauge pod...
> -Air conditioner controls leaking engine oil onto console... (mechanical oil pressure gauge above them leaking into dash)
> -Bevel gears welded up in differential for full-time lock. Could hardly turn a corner...
> -Mismatched tires and rims...
>
> I bet we've all seen one or two of these type of setups!
> David
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gmecm mailing list
> Gmecm at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm
> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm
> Team Blitz, 2-1/2 million Capri parts in 7 warehouses. New, Used, Restoration, and Racing parts technology for your 1970-78 European-built Capri. http://www.teamblitz.com From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Sat Aug 26 11:57:09 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 12:57:09 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] What mask do I have? Message-ID: <44F07D65.8050802@highspeedlink.net> 1990 Pontiac 6000 *AWD*, 7730, 3.1 V6. The AWD's retained the vacuum operated EGR when other apps went to the "digital" EGR. What mask do I have? My dad just bought TunerCat to work on his Cad 500 Suburban and 400 TPI Jaguar, both with 94/5 LT1 controls (8051?), so I figure I might as well get the appropriate definition file for my 6000 and kill the EGR off. Will From davida1 at hiwaay.net Sat Aug 26 12:56:14 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 12:56:14 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Camaros - Off topic! References: <200608261559.k7QFxHIX011161@mail1.mx.voyager.net> Message-ID: <009301c6c938$fb057bf0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> I was only 2 years older! Yes, I tried to be nice but since he already knew everything, it went in one ear and out the other. Finally he wanted to race me in my original, non-turbo, carburetted 2.8L Century. He almost won. I almost didn't laugh. :-) Later, David ----- Original Message ----- From: "blitz at teamblitz.com" To: Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 10:59 AM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Camaros - Off topic! > **And being the good guy you are, and wanting to help a kid in the car hobby, I'm sure you spent a little time with him trying to assist him rather than just laughing at him. You know, like some older guys helped you out when you were a kid and same age as him. (After they were done laughing at you.) :-) Norm > > > That Camaro Song is great!
> > I'm not against Camaros, it just happens one of the most awful cars I ever saw happened to be a Camaro. Here in AL, many of the country-boy racers have that bodystyle Camaro as in the Camaro song video. Customized so that it is MUCH louder than it is fast. A boy I know had one with all the following features. This was the WORST car I have ever seen aside from in a junkyard. What was so funny was he actually considered it fast.
> > He had this car while I was putting the mostly-stock TBI injected 305 in my Nova. Always he was talking trash about how my "computer motor" would never be as fast as his car! His specs follow:
> > -Left and right cylinder heads different valve sizes and compression ratio...
> > -Holley vacuum-secondary carb converted to mechanical using coathanger wire linkages...
> > -Off-the wall race cam nowhere near matched to either cylinder head...
> > -Computer-advance HEI distributor with no ECM connected...
> > -El-Cheapo headers - different style on each side...
> > -Turbo350 transmission w/ bark-in-each-gear shift-kit and "3 million RPM" torque converter...
> > -One-wheel brakes... (rear brake lines capped, one front caliper sticking and inoperable)
> > -Missing steering pump and hydraulic hoses but still has a power steering box...
> > -Each bolt-on body panel a different color (trunk, hood, each door, each fender)...
> > -HUGE globs of silicone caulk sealing t-top panels...
> > -At least 20 % of cars surface area covered in performance aftermarket parts stickers, in various stages of sun-bleaching...
> > -Left and right tail lights from different bodystyles (yellow vs. red turn-signals)
> > -Radio repalced with 3 gauge pod...
> > -Air conditioner controls leaking engine oil onto console... (mechanical oil pressure gauge above them leaking into dash)
> > -Bevel gears welded up in differential for full-time lock. Could hardly turn a corner...
> > -Mismatched tires and rims...
> >
> > I bet we've all seen one or two of these type of setups!
> > David From rgmecm at yahoo.com Sat Aug 26 18:42:14 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 16:42:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] What mask do I have? In-Reply-To: <44F07D65.8050802@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <20060826234214.44991.qmail@web35909.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Yours would be $6D, which tunercat does sell a definition file for... William Lucke wrote: 1990 Pontiac 6000 *AWD*, 7730, 3.1 V6. The AWD's retained the vacuum operated EGR when other apps went to the "digital" EGR. What mask do I have? My dad just bought TunerCat to work on his Cad 500 Suburban and 400 TPI Jaguar, both with 94/5 LT1 controls (8051?), so I figure I might as well get the appropriate definition file for my 6000 and kill the EGR off. Will _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Sat Aug 26 20:09:25 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 18:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm Message-ID: <20060827010925.34943.qmail@web80510.mail.yahoo.com> Getting ready to launch a new project: convert 1985 ElCamino 305 4BBL to EFI using TBI The current engine uses a 1226865 ECM to control the engine ?? which is appears to be a vacuum control carburetor? I am not finding any reference to information regarding this ECM. I'm sure others have done this conversion, but here's my draft plan. If anyone has done this conversion, can they chime in w/ thier comments, please? Use an ECM such as the 747 and a suitable bin, Painless harness, and the throttle body that 'matches' the bin/ECM chosen. Obviously, will need to ensure the sensors match, but this engine already has some in that it is an ECM engine w/ O2, so I assume (dangerously) that it has coolant, manifold pressure, knock (maybe) already that are suitable. I'm open to suggestions and guidance to kick start me in selections, unfortuantely most all my experience is w/ the 165 on TPI L98's. Thanks in advance for suggestions. From dgilbert78 at juno.com Sat Aug 26 20:46:17 2006 From: dgilbert78 at juno.com (dgilbert78 at juno.com) Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 21:46:17 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm Message-ID: <20060826.214618.-142383.0.dgilbert78@juno.com> Hello: My 85 elcamino had a 4.3 TBI factory. Removed the 4.3 TBI, installed a 350 using the same TBI with 350 injectors. Used same wiring harness with 1227747 ECM and chip from a 87 350 pick up. Because yours is a carbed engine I suspect the harness will not work very well. If you have any other questions feel free to ask good luck Darryl.. On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 18:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod writes: > Getting ready to launch a new project: convert 1985 ElCamino 305 4BBL > to EFI using TBI > > The current engine uses a 1226865 ECM to control the engine ?? which > is appears to be a vacuum control carburetor? I am not finding any > reference to information regarding this ECM. I'm sure others have > done this conversion, but here's my draft plan. If anyone has done > this conversion, can they chime in w/ thier comments, please? > > Use an ECM such as the 747 and a suitable bin, Painless harness, and > the throttle body that 'matches' the bin/ECM chosen. Obviously, will > need to ensure the sensors match, but this engine already has some > in that it is an ECM engine w/ O2, so I assume (dangerously) that it > has coolant, manifold pressure, knock (maybe) already that are > suitable. > > I'm open to suggestions and guidance to kick start me in selections, > unfortuantely most all my experience is w/ the 165 on TPI L98's. > > Thanks in advance for suggestions. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From bpatten at centurytel.net Sat Aug 26 23:12:45 2006 From: bpatten at centurytel.net (Brendan Patten) Date: Sat, 26 Aug 2006 23:12:45 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] What mask do I have? In-Reply-To: <44F07D65.8050802@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <001601c6c98f$10200cc0$6400a8c0@p42000> Now you know your 7730 Pontiac will have the MEMCAL, not flash memory like the 94/95 ECMs. You will need a eprom reader/writer. That out of the way. Read the stock EPROM from the Pontiac 6000 and open up the .bin file in a hex editor. On the very first row of data (0000), 3rd column, first bit, will be the mask ID. Example, this is from an AUJP 350 TPI. 0000: 02 3B FF FF FF FF A2 98 8D 00 FA 23 C1 07 0C CD -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of William Lucke Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 11:57 AM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: [Gmecm] What mask do I have? 1990 Pontiac 6000 *AWD*, 7730, 3.1 V6. The AWD's retained the vacuum operated EGR when other apps went to the "digital" EGR. What mask do I have? My dad just bought TunerCat to work on his Cad 500 Suburban and 400 TPI Jaguar, both with 94/5 LT1 controls (8051?), so I figure I might as well get the appropriate definition file for my 6000 and kill the EGR off. Will _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From jryan at caminofx.org Sun Aug 27 02:21:15 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 02:21:15 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: <20060826.214618.-142383.0.dgilbert78@juno.com> References: <20060826.214618.-142383.0.dgilbert78@juno.com> Message-ID: I converted a 1984 LG4 305 El Camino to TBI using a Painless harness and a 1228746 ECM. I prefer the '746 because it uses an inlet air temperature sensor and can control valves for an AIR pump. I kept the part numbers of what throttle and cruise control brackets work and other parts. Parts from a '90 R-series Suburban with a 350 fit very nicely. The 1226865 is for a CCC carburetor, one that has a TPS and a mixture control solenoid. It is the ECM my El Camino had with the feedback carburetor. It is much easier to remove the entire factory harness for the feedback emissions system and use the Painless harness. That is what I did. The factory ECM harness is accessible by unbolting and moving the right front inner fender. The MAP sensor will need to be changed. Unlike the carbureted ECM, TBI does not use a BARO sensor (which is under the dashboard above the glove box, next to the Check Engine light driver). Instead of driving the Check Engine light through a driver, the EFI ECM drives it directly. There are several small things like that, that will need to be changed. If you are using a TBI manifold and throttle bracket, you will need the correct kickdown/TV cable. Again, the part for a '90 R-series Suburban with a 350 fits nicely. Inline Tube sells the fuel supply line for EFI for the El Camino. You will end up installing that and using the stock fuel supply line as the return. Outlets that sell restoration parts for the El Camino have the correct fuel tank sender that mounts an internal fuel pump, which is very helpful, unless you want to use an external pump. I remember almost everything about the conversion, but it is better to ask specific questions about the conversion to help jog my memory. I will help as best I can. I will take some pictures of the engine compartment in its current state and put them on my Web site. The serpentine belt system and Camaro air cleaner (moves the snorkel to the driver side, much better fit with serpentine belts) make it look a little different, but hopefully it will help and it will show how neatly this conversion can be done. Those who are not familiar with this body style do not realize the significance of what they are looking at. 1984 Chevrolet El Camino GM Goodwrench long block 350 Crane PowerMax 2032 hydraulic roller cam Edelbrock 3704 intake manifold GM serpentine belt conversion TBI fuel injection TH-200-4R automatic overdrive 3.23:1 rear axle with PosiTrac Hooker AeroChamber muffler Passes emissions inspection, 20+ mpg highway, 16 mpg in town with A/C on. Not too shabby for an '80s brick. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 26, 2006, at 8:46 PM, dgilbert78 at juno.com wrote: > Hello: My 85 elcamino had a 4.3 TBI factory. Removed the 4.3 TBI, > installed a 350 using the same TBI with 350 injectors. Used same wiring > harness with 1227747 ECM and chip from a 87 350 pick up. Because yours > is > a carbed engine I suspect the harness will not work very well. If you > have any other questions feel free to ask > good luck > Darryl.. > On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 18:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod > writes: >> Getting ready to launch a new project: convert 1985 ElCamino 305 4BBL >> to EFI using TBI >> >> The current engine uses a 1226865 ECM to control the engine ?? which >> is appears to be a vacuum control carburetor? I am not finding any >> reference to information regarding this ECM. I'm sure others have >> done this conversion, but here's my draft plan. If anyone has done >> this conversion, can they chime in w/ thier comments, please? >> >> Use an ECM such as the 747 and a suitable bin, Painless harness, and >> the throttle body that 'matches' the bin/ECM chosen. Obviously, will >> need to ensure the sensors match, but this engine already has some >> in that it is an ECM engine w/ O2, so I assume (dangerously) that it >> has coolant, manifold pressure, knock (maybe) already that are >> suitable. >> >> I'm open to suggestions and guidance to kick start me in selections, >> unfortuantely most all my experience is w/ the 165 on TPI L98's. >> >> Thanks in advance for suggestions. >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 27 09:42:03 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 07:42:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060827144203.29967.qmail@web80511.mail.yahoo.com> My objective is simply to get this vehicle to EFI with absolutely as little modifications as possible. I was under the impression GM's initial TBI was essentially the next step in evolution from carb to EFI, transitioning through the CCC (short lived) phase, so a couple questions come to mind: Will the throttle body for a TBI directly replace the CCC carb, or is it absolutely necessary to lift the manifold and replace it? If I can use the existing manifold, shouldn't all the linkage and kickdown cables essintially just hook up, We've a local show and swap event next weekend, so I'd like to have a 'shopping list' in my pocket of things to try to find. With that in mind, will the 846 work w/ most any GM throttle body from an equivalent engine, ie from a truck w/ 305 or can I expand my search to include throttle body units from the 350 as well. Jared, your comments are going a long way toward getting me started. I'd hope you can either place a link on the twiki or even some of the write up papers as well, so we capture this. I intend to try to photo-doc this conversion, I didn't do that on the last one and am shooting my self. ('83 Jag lumped w/ an '89 IROC Z/28 TPI) Again, thanks for the comments from all so far, I hope to keep this alive long enough to come up w/ my menu and plan. ----- Original Message ---- From: Jared Ryan To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 2:21:15 AM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm I converted a 1984 LG4 305 El Camino to TBI using a Painless harness and a 1228746 ECM. I prefer the '746 because it uses an inlet air temperature sensor and can control valves for an AIR pump. I kept the part numbers of what throttle and cruise control brackets work and other parts. Parts from a '90 R-series Suburban with a 350 fit very nicely. The 1226865 is for a CCC carburetor, one that has a TPS and a mixture control solenoid. It is the ECM my El Camino had with the feedback carburetor. It is much easier to remove the entire factory harness for the feedback emissions system and use the Painless harness. That is what I did. The factory ECM harness is accessible by unbolting and moving the right front inner fender. The MAP sensor will need to be changed. Unlike the carbureted ECM, TBI does not use a BARO sensor (which is under the dashboard above the glove box, next to the Check Engine light driver). Instead of driving the Check Engine light through a driver, the EFI ECM drives it directly. There are several small things like that, that will need to be changed. If you are using a TBI manifold and throttle bracket, you will need the correct kickdown/TV cable. Again, the part for a '90 R-series Suburban with a 350 fits nicely. Inline Tube sells the fuel supply line for EFI for the El Camino. You will end up installing that and using the stock fuel supply line as the return. Outlets that sell restoration parts for the El Camino have the correct fuel tank sender that mounts an internal fuel pump, which is very helpful, unless you want to use an external pump. I remember almost everything about the conversion, but it is better to ask specific questions about the conversion to help jog my memory. I will help as best I can. I will take some pictures of the engine compartment in its current state and put them on my Web site. The serpentine belt system and Camaro air cleaner (moves the snorkel to the driver side, much better fit with serpentine belts) make it look a little different, but hopefully it will help and it will show how neatly this conversion can be done. Those who are not familiar with this body style do not realize the significance of what they are looking at. 1984 Chevrolet El Camino GM Goodwrench long block 350 Crane PowerMax 2032 hydraulic roller cam Edelbrock 3704 intake manifold GM serpentine belt conversion TBI fuel injection TH-200-4R automatic overdrive 3.23:1 rear axle with PosiTrac Hooker AeroChamber muffler Passes emissions inspection, 20+ mpg highway, 16 mpg in town with A/C on. Not too shabby for an '80s brick. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 26, 2006, at 8:46 PM, dgilbert78 at juno.com wrote: > Hello: My 85 elcamino had a 4.3 TBI factory. Removed the 4.3 TBI, > installed a 350 using the same TBI with 350 injectors. Used same wiring > harness with 1227747 ECM and chip from a 87 350 pick up. Because yours > is > a carbed engine I suspect the harness will not work very well. If you > have any other questions feel free to ask > good luck > Darryl.. > On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 18:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod > writes: >> Getting ready to launch a new project: convert 1985 ElCamino 305 4BBL >> to EFI using TBI >> >> The current engine uses a 1226865 ECM to control the engine ?? which >> is appears to be a vacuum control carburetor? I am not finding any >> reference to information regarding this ECM. I'm sure others have >> done this conversion, but here's my draft plan. If anyone has done >> this conversion, can they chime in w/ thier comments, please? >> >> Use an ECM such as the 747 and a suitable bin, Painless harness, and >> the throttle body that 'matches' the bin/ECM chosen. Obviously, will >> need to ensure the sensors match, but this engine already has some >> in that it is an ECM engine w/ O2, so I assume (dangerously) that it >> has coolant, manifold pressure, knock (maybe) already that are >> suitable. >> >> I'm open to suggestions and guidance to kick start me in selections, >> unfortuantely most all my experience is w/ the 165 on TPI L98's. >> >> Thanks in advance for suggestions. >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From dgilbert78 at juno.com Sun Aug 27 10:30:00 2006 From: dgilbert78 at juno.com (dgilbert78 at juno.com) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 11:30:00 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm Message-ID: <20060827.113001.-776917.0.dgilbert78@juno.com> Hello: The bolt pattern for a TBI is quiet a bit different than carb bolt pattern. I know 4.3 and 350 use same TBI unit with the exception of injectors. The 4.3 is basically a short 350 if you want to look at it that way. Even the knock sensors are the same. I think All TBI manifolds will need the 4 center bolt holes machined or adapted because of the different angle of the 4 center bolt holes (2 on either side ) Good Luck with your change over. Darryl.. On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 07:42:03 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod writes: > My objective is simply to get this vehicle to EFI with absolutely as > little modifications as possible. I was under the impression GM's > initial TBI was essentially the next step in evolution from carb to > EFI, transitioning through the CCC (short lived) phase, so a couple > questions come to mind: > Will the throttle body for a TBI directly replace the CCC carb, or > is it absolutely necessary to lift the manifold and replace it? > If I can use the existing manifold, shouldn't all the linkage and > kickdown cables essintially just hook up, > We've a local show and swap event next weekend, so I'd like to have > a 'shopping list' in my pocket of things to try to find. With that > in mind, will the 846 work w/ most any GM throttle body from an > equivalent engine, ie from a truck w/ 305 or can I expand my search > to include throttle body units from the 350 as well. > > Jared, your comments are going a long way toward getting me started. > I'd hope you can either place a link on the twiki or even some of > the write up papers as well, so we capture this. I intend to try to > photo-doc this conversion, I didn't do that on the last one and am > shooting my self. ('83 Jag lumped w/ an '89 IROC Z/28 TPI) > > Again, thanks for the comments from all so far, I hope to keep this > alive long enough to come up w/ my menu and plan. > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Jared Ryan > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 2:21:15 AM > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm > > > I converted a 1984 LG4 305 El Camino to TBI using a Painless harness > > and a 1228746 ECM. I prefer the '746 because it uses an inlet air > temperature sensor and can control valves for an AIR pump. I kept > the > part numbers of what throttle and cruise control brackets work and > other parts. Parts from a '90 R-series Suburban with a 350 fit very > > nicely. > > The 1226865 is for a CCC carburetor, one that has a TPS and a > mixture > control solenoid. It is the ECM my El Camino had with the feedback > > carburetor. It is much easier to remove the entire factory harness > for > the feedback emissions system and use the Painless harness. That is > > what I did. The factory ECM harness is accessible by unbolting and > > moving the right front inner fender. > > The MAP sensor will need to be changed. Unlike the carbureted ECM, > TBI > does not use a BARO sensor (which is under the dashboard above the > glove box, next to the Check Engine light driver). Instead of > driving > the Check Engine light through a driver, the EFI ECM drives it > directly. There are several small things like that, that will need > to > be changed. > > If you are using a TBI manifold and throttle bracket, you will need > the > correct kickdown/TV cable. Again, the part for a '90 R-series > Suburban > with a 350 fits nicely. > > Inline Tube sells the fuel supply line for EFI for the El Camino. > You > will end up installing that and using the stock fuel supply line as > the > return. Outlets that sell restoration parts for the El Camino have > the > correct fuel tank sender that mounts an internal fuel pump, which is > > very helpful, unless you want to use an external pump. > > I remember almost everything about the conversion, but it is better > to > ask specific questions about the conversion to help jog my memory. > I > will help as best I can. > > I will take some pictures of the engine compartment in its current > state and put them on my Web site. The serpentine belt system and > Camaro air cleaner (moves the snorkel to the driver side, much > better > fit with serpentine belts) make it look a little different, but > hopefully it will help and it will show how neatly this conversion > can > be done. Those who are not familiar with this body style do not > realize the significance of what they are looking at. > > 1984 Chevrolet El Camino > GM Goodwrench long block 350 > Crane PowerMax 2032 hydraulic roller cam > Edelbrock 3704 intake manifold > GM serpentine belt conversion > TBI fuel injection > TH-200-4R automatic overdrive > 3.23:1 rear axle with PosiTrac > Hooker AeroChamber muffler > > Passes emissions inspection, 20+ mpg highway, 16 mpg in town with > A/C > on. Not too shabby for an '80s brick. > > ---> Jared Ryan <--- > jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org > > On Aug 26, 2006, at 8:46 PM, dgilbert78 at juno.com wrote: > > > Hello: My 85 elcamino had a 4.3 TBI factory. Removed the 4.3 TBI, > > installed a 350 using the same TBI with 350 injectors. Used same > wiring > > harness with 1227747 ECM and chip from a 87 350 pick up. Because > yours > > is > > a carbed engine I suspect the harness will not work very well. If > you > > have any other questions feel free to ask > > good luck > > Darryl.. > > On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 18:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod > > writes: > >> Getting ready to launch a new project: convert 1985 ElCamino 305 > 4BBL > >> to EFI using TBI > >> > >> The current engine uses a 1226865 ECM to control the engine ?? > which > >> is appears to be a vacuum control carburetor? I am not finding > any > >> reference to information regarding this ECM. I'm sure others > have > >> done this conversion, but here's my draft plan. If anyone has > done > >> this conversion, can they chime in w/ thier comments, please? > >> > >> Use an ECM such as the 747 and a suitable bin, Painless harness, > and > >> the throttle body that 'matches' the bin/ECM chosen. Obviously, > will > >> need to ensure the sensors match, but this engine already has > some > >> in that it is an ECM engine w/ O2, so I assume (dangerously) that > it > >> has coolant, manifold pressure, knock (maybe) already that are > >> suitable. > >> > >> I'm open to suggestions and guidance to kick start me in > selections, > >> unfortuantely most all my experience is w/ the 165 on TPI L98's. > >> > >> Thanks in advance for suggestions. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gmecm mailing list > >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org > >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From dgilbert78 at juno.com Sun Aug 27 10:32:22 2006 From: dgilbert78 at juno.com (dgilbert78 at juno.com) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 11:32:22 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm Message-ID: <20060827.113224.-776917.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> OOps! I should have said depends on what heads you have for the 4 center bolt holes, I used a 78 block and heads so Had to modify intake bolt holes Darryl.. On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 07:42:03 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod writes: > My objective is simply to get this vehicle to EFI with absolutely as > little modifications as possible. I was under the impression GM's > initial TBI was essentially the next step in evolution from carb to > EFI, transitioning through the CCC (short lived) phase, so a couple > questions come to mind: > Will the throttle body for a TBI directly replace the CCC carb, or > is it absolutely necessary to lift the manifold and replace it? > If I can use the existing manifold, shouldn't all the linkage and > kickdown cables essintially just hook up, > We've a local show and swap event next weekend, so I'd like to have > a 'shopping list' in my pocket of things to try to find. With that > in mind, will the 846 work w/ most any GM throttle body from an > equivalent engine, ie from a truck w/ 305 or can I expand my search > to include throttle body units from the 350 as well. > > Jared, your comments are going a long way toward getting me started. > I'd hope you can either place a link on the twiki or even some of > the write up papers as well, so we capture this. I intend to try to > photo-doc this conversion, I didn't do that on the last one and am > shooting my self. ('83 Jag lumped w/ an '89 IROC Z/28 TPI) > > Again, thanks for the comments from all so far, I hope to keep this > alive long enough to come up w/ my menu and plan. > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Jared Ryan > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 2:21:15 AM > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm > > > I converted a 1984 LG4 305 El Camino to TBI using a Painless harness > > and a 1228746 ECM. I prefer the '746 because it uses an inlet air > temperature sensor and can control valves for an AIR pump. I kept > the > part numbers of what throttle and cruise control brackets work and > other parts. Parts from a '90 R-series Suburban with a 350 fit very > > nicely. > > The 1226865 is for a CCC carburetor, one that has a TPS and a > mixture > control solenoid. It is the ECM my El Camino had with the feedback > > carburetor. It is much easier to remove the entire factory harness > for > the feedback emissions system and use the Painless harness. That is > > what I did. The factory ECM harness is accessible by unbolting and > > moving the right front inner fender. > > The MAP sensor will need to be changed. Unlike the carbureted ECM, > TBI > does not use a BARO sensor (which is under the dashboard above the > glove box, next to the Check Engine light driver). Instead of > driving > the Check Engine light through a driver, the EFI ECM drives it > directly. There are several small things like that, that will need > to > be changed. > > If you are using a TBI manifold and throttle bracket, you will need > the > correct kickdown/TV cable. Again, the part for a '90 R-series > Suburban > with a 350 fits nicely. > > Inline Tube sells the fuel supply line for EFI for the El Camino. > You > will end up installing that and using the stock fuel supply line as > the > return. Outlets that sell restoration parts for the El Camino have > the > correct fuel tank sender that mounts an internal fuel pump, which is > > very helpful, unless you want to use an external pump. > > I remember almost everything about the conversion, but it is better > to > ask specific questions about the conversion to help jog my memory. > I > will help as best I can. > > I will take some pictures of the engine compartment in its current > state and put them on my Web site. The serpentine belt system and > Camaro air cleaner (moves the snorkel to the driver side, much > better > fit with serpentine belts) make it look a little different, but > hopefully it will help and it will show how neatly this conversion > can > be done. Those who are not familiar with this body style do not > realize the significance of what they are looking at. > > 1984 Chevrolet El Camino > GM Goodwrench long block 350 > Crane PowerMax 2032 hydraulic roller cam > Edelbrock 3704 intake manifold > GM serpentine belt conversion > TBI fuel injection > TH-200-4R automatic overdrive > 3.23:1 rear axle with PosiTrac > Hooker AeroChamber muffler > > Passes emissions inspection, 20+ mpg highway, 16 mpg in town with > A/C > on. Not too shabby for an '80s brick. > > ---> Jared Ryan <--- > jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org > > On Aug 26, 2006, at 8:46 PM, dgilbert78 at juno.com wrote: > > > Hello: My 85 elcamino had a 4.3 TBI factory. Removed the 4.3 TBI, > > installed a 350 using the same TBI with 350 injectors. Used same > wiring > > harness with 1227747 ECM and chip from a 87 350 pick up. Because > yours > > is > > a carbed engine I suspect the harness will not work very well. If > you > > have any other questions feel free to ask > > good luck > > Darryl.. > > On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 18:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod > > writes: > >> Getting ready to launch a new project: convert 1985 ElCamino 305 > 4BBL > >> to EFI using TBI > >> > >> The current engine uses a 1226865 ECM to control the engine ?? > which > >> is appears to be a vacuum control carburetor? I am not finding > any > >> reference to information regarding this ECM. I'm sure others > have > >> done this conversion, but here's my draft plan. If anyone has > done > >> this conversion, can they chime in w/ thier comments, please? > >> > >> Use an ECM such as the 747 and a suitable bin, Painless harness, > and > >> the throttle body that 'matches' the bin/ECM chosen. Obviously, > will > >> need to ensure the sensors match, but this engine already has > some > >> in that it is an ECM engine w/ O2, so I assume (dangerously) that > it > >> has coolant, manifold pressure, knock (maybe) already that are > >> suitable. > >> > >> I'm open to suggestions and guidance to kick start me in > selections, > >> unfortuantely most all my experience is w/ the 165 on TPI L98's. > >> > >> Thanks in advance for suggestions. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gmecm mailing list > >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org > >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From jay at vessels-clan.com Sun Aug 27 10:46:03 2006 From: jay at vessels-clan.com (Jay Vessels) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 11:46:03 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: <20060827144203.29967.qmail@web80511.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060827144203.29967.qmail@web80511.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44F1BE3B.3060507@vessels-clan.com> Hi there! > My objective is simply to get this vehicle to EFI with absolutely as > little modifications as possible. I understand that. I did a similar swap on an '85 Caprice, from CCC Q-jet on a 305 to TBI, grabbed from an '87 Caprice 305. It wasn't that bad. The pre-existing dash wiring is nice since with some small changes you can re-use it. The rest of the CCC harness is scrap. The existing O2 sensor can be re-used, as can the knock sensor/module and CCC distributor. > I was under the impression GM's initial TBI was essentially the next > step in evolution from carb to EFI, transitioning through the CCC > (short lived) phase CCC wasn't short-lived enough. It should have never seen the light of day. GM knew how to do EFI before unleashing CCC on the world, and they were doing TBI as early as 1982. TBI is just as valid an EFI system as port injection (MPI/TPI/SFI) and I like it a lot. It has some advantages. Simplicity and compactness come to mind. Port injection certainly brings a lot to the table, but a properly-tuned TBI system isn't bad. Check out the Ultimate TBI stuff going on over at Thridgen.org. > Will the throttle body for a TBI directly replace the CCC carb, or is > it absolutely necessary to lift the manifold and replace it? Stock GM TBI units have three bolts in a roughly triangular pattern, so it will not bolt to a stock intake. You can get/make an adapter plate to put the TBI on a carb. intake. Your other choice is to get a TBI intake. GM used TBI on cars and light trucks from around 1985-mid '90s. Later model (1987+) intakes have the center four bolts angled differently than the older intakes. There are ways around this, none of which are fun. I redrilled a newer intake but was never really happy with it. If I were going to do it again, I'd either get the adapter plate or I'd get something like the Holley 300-49 TBI intake for older heads. Knowing me, I'd probably spring for the Holley ;) > If I can use the existing manifold, shouldn't all the linkage and > kickdown cables essintially just hook up It depends on your donor, but the answer is "probably". When I get parts from a donor, throttle/TV/cruise cables are on the list. > We've a local show and swap event next weekend, so I'd like to have a > 'shopping list' in my pocket of things to try to find. With that in > mind, will the 846 work w/ most any GM throttle body from an > equivalent engine, ie from a truck w/ 305 or can I expand my search > to include throttle body units from the 350 as well. Almost all 2-barrel GM TBIs are the same mechanically and electrically, with the exception being throttle bore size and injector flow rate. 4.3/305/350 all share the same bore, using different injectors. Some 4.3 systems have injectors with two different flow rates, so be careful. The 454 TBI has a larger throttle bore than the 4.3/305/350, and the 2.8 TBI has a smaller bore. If you use a TBI from a different engine size than yours, you'll either need to change the injectors or change the cal to know what injectors you've got. Either choice is pretty simple. The TPS sensor changed physical plug style sometime in the early '90s, but it's electrically the same. > carburetor. It is much easier to remove the entire factory harness > for the feedback emissions system and use the Painless harness. That > is what I did. The factory ECM harness is accessible by unbolting > and moving the right front inner fender. I have used stock ECM harnesses and the Painless harness, and both are good choices. The stock harness has some rather oddball wiring routing choices, but it's not that bad to use. The Painless harness is nice but doesn't usually contain provisions for AIR, etc. and the instructions with my harness had some bad advice (i.e. hooking up the P/N wire to avoid having to use a VSS sensor is bad advice). The harness itself is pretty decent, though. Jay Vessels 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 27 12:36:15 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 10:36:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: <20060827.113001.-776917.0.dgilbert78@juno.com> Message-ID: <20060827173615.60178.qmail@web80504.mail.yahoo.com> Painless shows a sweet little adapter that looks to solve the TBI retrofit to non-TBI manifold bolt pattern problem: http://www.painlessperformance.com/assets/pdf_catalog/06Catalog_pg26-27.pdf and the part # is PPP-60118 which Summit shows for about $93 and change. If this is workable, it would greatly solve some problems, one could quickly run up nearly that much money if cracking the valley open to swap the manifold, in that you also then need to address thermostat/outlet matching hose to radiator, and a host of other plumbing issues. Hence my reasoning to not change the manifold if possible. Any one have experience/thoughts on this part of the quest? ----- Original Message ---- From: dgilbert78 at juno.com To: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net; gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 10:30:00 AM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm Hello: The bolt pattern for a TBI is quiet a bit different than carb bolt pattern. I know 4.3 and 350 use same TBI unit with the exception of injectors. The 4.3 is basically a short 350 if you want to look at it that way. Even the knock sensors are the same. I think All TBI manifolds will need the 4 center bolt holes machined or adapted because of the different angle of the 4 center bolt holes (2 on either side ) Good Luck with your change over. Darryl.. On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 07:42:03 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod writes: > My objective is simply to get this vehicle to EFI with absolutely as > little modifications as possible. I was under the impression GM's > initial TBI was essentially the next step in evolution from carb to > EFI, transitioning through the CCC (short lived) phase, so a couple > questions come to mind: > Will the throttle body for a TBI directly replace the CCC carb, or > is it absolutely necessary to lift the manifold and replace it? > If I can use the existing manifold, shouldn't all the linkage and > kickdown cables essintially just hook up, > We've a local show and swap event next weekend, so I'd like to have > a 'shopping list' in my pocket of things to try to find. With that > in mind, will the 846 work w/ most any GM throttle body from an > equivalent engine, ie from a truck w/ 305 or can I expand my search > to include throttle body units from the 350 as well. > > Jared, your comments are going a long way toward getting me started. > I'd hope you can either place a link on the twiki or even some of > the write up papers as well, so we capture this. I intend to try to > photo-doc this conversion, I didn't do that on the last one and am > shooting my self. ('83 Jag lumped w/ an '89 IROC Z/28 TPI) > > Again, thanks for the comments from all so far, I hope to keep this > alive long enough to come up w/ my menu and plan. > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Jared Ryan > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 2:21:15 AM > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm > > > I converted a 1984 LG4 305 El Camino to TBI using a Painless harness > > and a 1228746 ECM. I prefer the '746 because it uses an inlet air > temperature sensor and can control valves for an AIR pump. I kept > the > part numbers of what throttle and cruise control brackets work and > other parts. Parts from a '90 R-series Suburban with a 350 fit very > > nicely. > > The 1226865 is for a CCC carburetor, one that has a TPS and a > mixture > control solenoid. It is the ECM my El Camino had with the feedback > > carburetor. It is much easier to remove the entire factory harness > for > the feedback emissions system and use the Painless harness. That is > > what I did. The factory ECM harness is accessible by unbolting and > > moving the right front inner fender. > > The MAP sensor will need to be changed. Unlike the carbureted ECM, > TBI > does not use a BARO sensor (which is under the dashboard above the > glove box, next to the Check Engine light driver). Instead of > driving > the Check Engine light through a driver, the EFI ECM drives it > directly. There are several small things like that, that will need > to > be changed. > > If you are using a TBI manifold and throttle bracket, you will need > the > correct kickdown/TV cable. Again, the part for a '90 R-series > Suburban > with a 350 fits nicely. > > Inline Tube sells the fuel supply line for EFI for the El Camino. > You > will end up installing that and using the stock fuel supply line as > the > return. Outlets that sell restoration parts for the El Camino have > the > correct fuel tank sender that mounts an internal fuel pump, which is > > very helpful, unless you want to use an external pump. > > I remember almost everything about the conversion, but it is better > to > ask specific questions about the conversion to help jog my memory. > I > will help as best I can. > > I will take some pictures of the engine compartment in its current > state and put them on my Web site. The serpentine belt system and > Camaro air cleaner (moves the snorkel to the driver side, much > better > fit with serpentine belts) make it look a little different, but > hopefully it will help and it will show how neatly this conversion > can > be done. Those who are not familiar with this body style do not > realize the significance of what they are looking at. > > 1984 Chevrolet El Camino > GM Goodwrench long block 350 > Crane PowerMax 2032 hydraulic roller cam > Edelbrock 3704 intake manifold > GM serpentine belt conversion > TBI fuel injection > TH-200-4R automatic overdrive > 3.23:1 rear axle with PosiTrac > Hooker AeroChamber muffler > > Passes emissions inspection, 20+ mpg highway, 16 mpg in town with > A/C > on. Not too shabby for an '80s brick. > > ---> Jared Ryan <--- > jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org > > On Aug 26, 2006, at 8:46 PM, dgilbert78 at juno.com wrote: > > > Hello: My 85 elcamino had a 4.3 TBI factory. Removed the 4.3 TBI, > > installed a 350 using the same TBI with 350 injectors. Used same > wiring > > harness with 1227747 ECM and chip from a 87 350 pick up. Because > yours > > is > > a carbed engine I suspect the harness will not work very well. If > you > > have any other questions feel free to ask > > good luck > > Darryl.. > > On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 18:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod > > writes: > >> Getting ready to launch a new project: convert 1985 ElCamino 305 > 4BBL > >> to EFI using TBI > >> > >> The current engine uses a 1226865 ECM to control the engine ?? > which > >> is appears to be a vacuum control carburetor? I am not finding > any > >> reference to information regarding this ECM. I'm sure others > have > >> done this conversion, but here's my draft plan. If anyone has > done > >> this conversion, can they chime in w/ thier comments, please? > >> > >> Use an ECM such as the 747 and a suitable bin, Painless harness, > and > >> the throttle body that 'matches' the bin/ECM chosen. Obviously, > will > >> need to ensure the sensors match, but this engine already has > some > >> in that it is an ECM engine w/ O2, so I assume (dangerously) that > it > >> has coolant, manifold pressure, knock (maybe) already that are > >> suitable. > >> > >> I'm open to suggestions and guidance to kick start me in > selections, > >> unfortuantely most all my experience is w/ the 165 on TPI L98's. > >> > >> Thanks in advance for suggestions. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Gmecm mailing list > >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org > >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 27 12:40:02 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 10:40:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: <20060827144203.29967.qmail@web80511.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060827174002.17825.qmail@web80509.mail.yahoo.com> Some more questions: since I am somewhat unfamiliar, does TBI 'require' a return fuel circuit? Is there a reasonable solution to that part of the equation if so, what is common practice here? From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Sun Aug 27 13:25:44 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 11:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: <44F1BE3B.3060507@vessels-clan.com> Message-ID: <20060827182544.25718.qmail@web80514.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Thanks, Jay. You've answered and confirm'ed some of my base questions. I believe my route at this point is: 1227747 ECM (very common unit) Painless Harness 60101 (they engineered wiring based on a 90 Chevy P/U) Painless TBI adapter 60118 (solves the bolt pattern match issue) Painless VSS Adapter 60115 (gets 2PPM from mechanical speedo cable) TB from same size engine or modify cal on PROM to change inj size PROM from same size engine (I can modify to suit) Sensors/inputs: Knock, TPS, Temp, MAP, Spark, Speed I intend to make a plate to mount fuses, relays, MAP, etc onto to make installation clean, similar to the Painless plate * Knock sensor exists * TPS should be part of the TBI * Coolant sensor (this is still an outstanding question, will the existing one suffice - I think so, if not acquire correct one) * MAP sensor (this is still an outstanding question, will probabally have to acquire correct one) My sources show a valid 90 TBI 305 P/U part # as OEM to be 16137939 but the parts houses show it to be 16137039, so am a little puzzled here * Vehicle has large HEI dizzy, so Painless harness should plug right up * VSS will be from the Painless VSS adapter The last area that I'm not yet sure of is EGR and AIR (not A/C): * I'm hoping the existing EGR controls will adapt to the new ECM w/ no changes, any help/comments here welcomed. * AIR, haven't spent much time under the hood yet, so I don't know what is there in this area if any, may not need to go here at all. We'll wait to figure this one out when I see if the hardware is ther now. If anyone has a good reliable source of pulled TBI's I'd appreciate that, otherwise car-parts.com search has turned up quite a few, and the swap may also discover one, so we'll see there. If I have overlooked something, anyone please comment. I'm on my way on this, it looks like a rather simple project to pull off! ----- Original Message ---- From: Jay Vessels To: Rick McLeod ; gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 10:46:03 AM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm Hi there! > My objective is simply to get this vehicle to EFI with absolutely as > little modifications as possible. I understand that. I did a similar swap on an '85 Caprice, from CCC Q-jet on a 305 to TBI, grabbed from an '87 Caprice 305. It wasn't that bad. The pre-existing dash wiring is nice since with some small changes you can re-use it. The rest of the CCC harness is scrap. The existing O2 sensor can be re-used, as can the knock sensor/module and CCC distributor. > I was under the impression GM's initial TBI was essentially the next > step in evolution from carb to EFI, transitioning through the CCC > (short lived) phase CCC wasn't short-lived enough. It should have never seen the light of day. GM knew how to do EFI before unleashing CCC on the world, and they were doing TBI as early as 1982. TBI is just as valid an EFI system as port injection (MPI/TPI/SFI) and I like it a lot. It has some advantages. Simplicity and compactness come to mind. Port injection certainly brings a lot to the table, but a properly-tuned TBI system isn't bad. Check out the Ultimate TBI stuff going on over at Thridgen.org. > Will the throttle body for a TBI directly replace the CCC carb, or is > it absolutely necessary to lift the manifold and replace it? Stock GM TBI units have three bolts in a roughly triangular pattern, so it will not bolt to a stock intake. You can get/make an adapter plate to put the TBI on a carb. intake. Your other choice is to get a TBI intake. GM used TBI on cars and light trucks from around 1985-mid '90s. Later model (1987+) intakes have the center four bolts angled differently than the older intakes. There are ways around this, none of which are fun. I redrilled a newer intake but was never really happy with it. If I were going to do it again, I'd either get the adapter plate or I'd get something like the Holley 300-49 TBI intake for older heads. Knowing me, I'd probably spring for the Holley ;) > If I can use the existing manifold, shouldn't all the linkage and > kickdown cables essintially just hook up It depends on your donor, but the answer is "probably". When I get parts from a donor, throttle/TV/cruise cables are on the list. > We've a local show and swap event next weekend, so I'd like to have a > 'shopping list' in my pocket of things to try to find. With that in > mind, will the 846 work w/ most any GM throttle body from an > equivalent engine, ie from a truck w/ 305 or can I expand my search > to include throttle body units from the 350 as well. Almost all 2-barrel GM TBIs are the same mechanically and electrically, with the exception being throttle bore size and injector flow rate. 4.3/305/350 all share the same bore, using different injectors. Some 4.3 systems have injectors with two different flow rates, so be careful. The 454 TBI has a larger throttle bore than the 4.3/305/350, and the 2.8 TBI has a smaller bore. If you use a TBI from a different engine size than yours, you'll either need to change the injectors or change the cal to know what injectors you've got. Either choice is pretty simple. The TPS sensor changed physical plug style sometime in the early '90s, but it's electrically the same. > carburetor. It is much easier to remove the entire factory harness > for the feedback emissions system and use the Painless harness. That > is what I did. The factory ECM harness is accessible by unbolting > and moving the right front inner fender. I have used stock ECM harnesses and the Painless harness, and both are good choices. The stock harness has some rather oddball wiring routing choices, but it's not that bad to use. The Painless harness is nice but doesn't usually contain provisions for AIR, etc. and the instructions with my harness had some bad advice (i.e. hooking up the P/N wire to avoid having to use a VSS sensor is bad advice). The harness itself is pretty decent, though. Jay Vessels 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) From jryan at caminofx.org Sun Aug 27 14:47:16 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:47:16 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: <44F1BE3B.3060507@vessels-clan.com> References: <20060827144203.29967.qmail@web80511.mail.yahoo.com> <44F1BE3B.3060507@vessels-clan.com> Message-ID: I need to mention, also, to put any thought of using the stock CCC carburetor harness out of your head. The CCC carburetor and TBI systems are not the same. You will end up using some of the in-dash wiring, and that is fine, but the under-hood part is different. The CCC ECM for carburetors is very, very different from EFI. You will want a 1227747 or 1228746 (I prefer the '746 for the El Camino since it is a car, and the '746 was used in cars, not pickups). The ECMs for carburetors have edge connectors, and those for EFI have pin connectors. That is one example of how different they are. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 27, 2006, at 10:46 AM, Jay Vessels wrote: > Hi there! > >> My objective is simply to get this vehicle to EFI with absolutely as >> little modifications as possible. > > I understand that. I did a similar swap on an '85 Caprice, from CCC > Q-jet on a 305 to TBI, grabbed from an '87 Caprice 305. It wasn't > that bad. The pre-existing dash wiring is nice since with some small > changes you can re-use it. The rest of the CCC harness is scrap. The > existing O2 sensor can be re-used, as can the knock sensor/module and > CCC distributor. > >> I was under the impression GM's initial TBI was essentially the next >> step in evolution from carb to EFI, transitioning through the CCC >> (short lived) phase > > CCC wasn't short-lived enough. It should have never seen the light of > day. GM knew how to do EFI before unleashing CCC on the world, and > they were doing TBI as early as 1982. > > TBI is just as valid an EFI system as port injection (MPI/TPI/SFI) and > I like it a lot. It has some advantages. Simplicity and compactness > come to mind. Port injection certainly brings a lot to the table, but > a properly-tuned TBI system isn't bad. Check out the Ultimate TBI > stuff going on over at Thridgen.org. > >> Will the throttle body for a TBI directly replace the CCC carb, or is >> it absolutely necessary to lift the manifold and replace it? > > Stock GM TBI units have three bolts in a roughly triangular pattern, > so it will not bolt to a stock intake. You can get/make an adapter > plate to put the TBI on a carb. intake. > > Your other choice is to get a TBI intake. GM used TBI on cars and > light trucks from around 1985-mid '90s. Later model (1987+) intakes > have the center four bolts angled differently than the older intakes. > There are ways around this, none of which are fun. I redrilled a > newer intake but was never really happy with it. If I were going to > do it again, I'd either get the adapter plate or I'd get something > like the Holley 300-49 TBI intake for older heads. Knowing me, I'd > probably spring for the Holley ;) > >> If I can use the existing manifold, shouldn't all the linkage and >> kickdown cables essintially just hook up > > It depends on your donor, but the answer is "probably". When I get > parts from a donor, throttle/TV/cruise cables are on the list. > >> We've a local show and swap event next weekend, so I'd like to have a >> 'shopping list' in my pocket of things to try to find. With that in >> mind, will the 846 work w/ most any GM throttle body from an >> equivalent engine, ie from a truck w/ 305 or can I expand my search >> to include throttle body units from the 350 as well. > > Almost all 2-barrel GM TBIs are the same mechanically and > electrically, with the exception being throttle bore size and injector > flow rate. 4.3/305/350 all share the same bore, using different > injectors. Some 4.3 systems have injectors with two different flow > rates, so be careful. The 454 TBI has a larger throttle bore than the > 4.3/305/350, and the 2.8 TBI has a smaller bore. > > If you use a TBI from a different engine size than yours, you'll > either need to change the injectors or change the cal to know what > injectors you've got. Either choice is pretty simple. > > The TPS sensor changed physical plug style sometime in the early '90s, > but it's electrically the same. > >> carburetor. It is much easier to remove the entire factory harness >> for the feedback emissions system and use the Painless harness. That >> is what I did. The factory ECM harness is accessible by unbolting >> and moving the right front inner fender. > > I have used stock ECM harnesses and the Painless harness, and both are > good choices. The stock harness has some rather oddball wiring > routing choices, but it's not that bad to use. The Painless harness > is nice but doesn't usually contain provisions for AIR, etc. and the > instructions with my harness had some bad advice (i.e. hooking up the > P/N wire to avoid having to use a VSS sensor is bad advice). The > harness itself is pretty decent, though. > > 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 > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From jryan at caminofx.org Sun Aug 27 14:54:21 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:54:21 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: <20060827173615.60178.qmail@web80504.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060827173615.60178.qmail@web80504.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: The biggest problem in changing the intake manifold is the spacing of the four bolt holes near the carburetor/TBI pad. Beginning with the 1987 model year, GM changed the angle of these bolts, to make it easier to get a wrench on them. They are at a different angle from the other eight bolts. I ended up drilling them out with a drill press to make a GM TBI manifold fit on an '84 engine. When I replaced the 305, I got a new long block that had the '87-later bolt angle and used an Edelbrock 3704 manifold. Don't worry about the thermostat or anything like that if changing manifolds. It is in the same place. The ECM coolant temperature sensor will screw into the manifold instead of the thermostat housing, or you can put a pipe plug in the manifold and leave it in the thermostat housing. The heater hose will go to an outlet at the back of the manifold instead of the front. None of this is a big deal and it basically falls into place. The biggest issue is the linkage. Instead of hacking something up, I got the brackets and TV cable from a TBI Suburban. You will need to run a new supply line to the fuel tank. It must be 3/8" diameter. The stock line is 5/16" and it will work as the return line. The vapor line will keep its current job. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:36 PM, Rick McLeod wrote: > Painless shows a sweet little adapter that looks to solve the TBI > retrofit to non-TBI manifold bolt pattern problem: > > http://www.painlessperformance.com/assets/pdf_catalog/06Catalog_pg26 > -27.pdf and the part # is PPP-60118 which Summit shows for about $93 > and change. If this is workable, it would greatly solve some problems, > one could quickly run up nearly that much money if cracking the valley > open to swap the manifold, in that you also then need to address > thermostat/outlet matching hose to radiator, and a host of other > plumbing issues. Hence my reasoning to not change the manifold if > possible. > Any one have experience/thoughts on this part of the quest? > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: dgilbert78 at juno.com > To: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net; gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 10:30:00 AM > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm > > > Hello: The bolt pattern for a TBI is quiet a bit different than carb > bolt > pattern. I know 4.3 and 350 use same TBI unit with the exception of > injectors. The 4.3 is basically a short 350 if you want to look at it > that way. Even the knock sensors are the same. I think All TBI > manifolds > will need the 4 center bolt holes machined or adapted because of the > different angle of the 4 center bolt holes (2 on either side ) > Good Luck with your change over. > Darryl.. > On Sun, 27 Aug 2006 07:42:03 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod > writes: >> My objective is simply to get this vehicle to EFI with absolutely as >> little modifications as possible. I was under the impression GM's >> initial TBI was essentially the next step in evolution from carb to >> EFI, transitioning through the CCC (short lived) phase, so a couple >> questions come to mind: >> Will the throttle body for a TBI directly replace the CCC carb, or >> is it absolutely necessary to lift the manifold and replace it? >> If I can use the existing manifold, shouldn't all the linkage and >> kickdown cables essintially just hook up, >> We've a local show and swap event next weekend, so I'd like to have >> a 'shopping list' in my pocket of things to try to find. With that >> in mind, will the 846 work w/ most any GM throttle body from an >> equivalent engine, ie from a truck w/ 305 or can I expand my search >> to include throttle body units from the 350 as well. >> >> Jared, your comments are going a long way toward getting me started. >> I'd hope you can either place a link on the twiki or even some of >> the write up papers as well, so we capture this. I intend to try to >> photo-doc this conversion, I didn't do that on the last one and am >> shooting my self. ('83 Jag lumped w/ an '89 IROC Z/28 TPI) >> >> Again, thanks for the comments from all so far, I hope to keep this >> alive long enough to come up w/ my menu and plan. >> >> >> ----- Original Message ---- >> From: Jared Ryan >> To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 2:21:15 AM >> Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm >> >> >> I converted a 1984 LG4 305 El Camino to TBI using a Painless harness >> >> and a 1228746 ECM. I prefer the '746 because it uses an inlet air >> temperature sensor and can control valves for an AIR pump. I kept >> the >> part numbers of what throttle and cruise control brackets work and >> other parts. Parts from a '90 R-series Suburban with a 350 fit very >> >> nicely. >> >> The 1226865 is for a CCC carburetor, one that has a TPS and a >> mixture >> control solenoid. It is the ECM my El Camino had with the feedback >> >> carburetor. It is much easier to remove the entire factory harness >> for >> the feedback emissions system and use the Painless harness. That is >> >> what I did. The factory ECM harness is accessible by unbolting and >> >> moving the right front inner fender. >> >> The MAP sensor will need to be changed. Unlike the carbureted ECM, >> TBI >> does not use a BARO sensor (which is under the dashboard above the >> glove box, next to the Check Engine light driver). Instead of >> driving >> the Check Engine light through a driver, the EFI ECM drives it >> directly. There are several small things like that, that will need >> to >> be changed. >> >> If you are using a TBI manifold and throttle bracket, you will need >> the >> correct kickdown/TV cable. Again, the part for a '90 R-series >> Suburban >> with a 350 fits nicely. >> >> Inline Tube sells the fuel supply line for EFI for the El Camino. >> You >> will end up installing that and using the stock fuel supply line as >> the >> return. Outlets that sell restoration parts for the El Camino have >> the >> correct fuel tank sender that mounts an internal fuel pump, which is >> >> very helpful, unless you want to use an external pump. >> >> I remember almost everything about the conversion, but it is better >> to >> ask specific questions about the conversion to help jog my memory. >> I >> will help as best I can. >> >> I will take some pictures of the engine compartment in its current >> state and put them on my Web site. The serpentine belt system and >> Camaro air cleaner (moves the snorkel to the driver side, much >> better >> fit with serpentine belts) make it look a little different, but >> hopefully it will help and it will show how neatly this conversion >> can >> be done. Those who are not familiar with this body style do not >> realize the significance of what they are looking at. >> >> 1984 Chevrolet El Camino >> GM Goodwrench long block 350 >> Crane PowerMax 2032 hydraulic roller cam >> Edelbrock 3704 intake manifold >> GM serpentine belt conversion >> TBI fuel injection >> TH-200-4R automatic overdrive >> 3.23:1 rear axle with PosiTrac >> Hooker AeroChamber muffler >> >> Passes emissions inspection, 20+ mpg highway, 16 mpg in town with >> A/C >> on. Not too shabby for an '80s brick. >> >> ---> Jared Ryan <--- >> jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org >> >> On Aug 26, 2006, at 8:46 PM, dgilbert78 at juno.com wrote: >> >>> Hello: My 85 elcamino had a 4.3 TBI factory. Removed the 4.3 TBI, >>> installed a 350 using the same TBI with 350 injectors. Used same >> wiring >>> harness with 1227747 ECM and chip from a 87 350 pick up. Because >> yours >>> is >>> a carbed engine I suspect the harness will not work very well. If >> you >>> have any other questions feel free to ask >>> good luck >>> Darryl.. >>> On Sat, 26 Aug 2006 18:09:25 -0700 (PDT) Rick McLeod >>> writes: >>>> Getting ready to launch a new project: convert 1985 ElCamino 305 >> 4BBL >>>> to EFI using TBI >>>> >>>> The current engine uses a 1226865 ECM to control the engine ?? >> which >>>> is appears to be a vacuum control carburetor? I am not finding >> any >>>> reference to information regarding this ECM. I'm sure others >> have >>>> done this conversion, but here's my draft plan. If anyone has >> done >>>> this conversion, can they chime in w/ thier comments, please? >>>> >>>> Use an ECM such as the 747 and a suitable bin, Painless harness, >> and >>>> the throttle body that 'matches' the bin/ECM chosen. Obviously, >> will >>>> need to ensure the sensors match, but this engine already has >> some >>>> in that it is an ECM engine w/ O2, so I assume (dangerously) that >> it >>>> has coolant, manifold pressure, knock (maybe) already that are >>>> suitable. >>>> >>>> I'm open to suggestions and guidance to kick start me in >> selections, >>>> unfortuantely most all my experience is w/ the 165 on TPI L98's. >>>> >>>> Thanks in advance for suggestions. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gmecm mailing list >>>> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>>> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gmecm mailing list >>> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From jryan at caminofx.org Sun Aug 27 14:57:12 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 14:57:12 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: <20060827174002.17825.qmail@web80509.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060827174002.17825.qmail@web80509.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <16af7e6c105757da340b7656b2485dab@caminofx.org> Yes. I addressed that in another e-mail with the same subject. There must be a return line. You can still get the sender with three connections on it for EFI El Caminos. Remember that there were TBI 4.3L El Caminos made. If you get a new feed line for one of these from Inline Tube, the filter will be right in front of the right rear wheel, protected but easy to reach. The feed line that you have will then be the return line from the throttle body. The stock lines from a Camaro, some fuel injection fuel hose and a tubing bender will come in handy. This is one of the details that is actually relatively easy to work out. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:40 PM, Rick McLeod wrote: > Some more questions: > since I am somewhat unfamiliar, does TBI 'require' a return fuel > circuit? Is there a reasonable solution to that part of the equation > if so, what is common practice here? From tsokorai at minimania.org Sun Aug 27 18:39:45 2006 From: tsokorai at minimania.org (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 19:39:45 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] $8D IAC stalls engine on decel Message-ID: <200608271939.45875.tsokorai@minimania.org> Hi guys! Well, my GM ECMed bimmer is getting almost into a nice shape. Managed to correct the engine cuts @ 2000RPM by starting modifications from the backup bin I had, but I couldn't figure why exactly it was doing that.... anyway... now I have only *one* big driveability problem left: On decels the IAC throttle follower keeps getting the commanded IAC steps down to ZERO. And this happens quite a lot when downshifting, so when it is at zero steps, I push the clutch and I get an instant stall. Any ideas of why is the throttle follower getting the IAC down to zero? Shouldn't it be keeping the minimum at a saner value (learned Keep Alive steps for example)?? -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From davida1 at hiwaay.net Sun Aug 27 18:59:33 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 18:59:33 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] $8D IAC stalls engine on decel References: <200608271939.45875.tsokorai@minimania.org> Message-ID: <012501c6ca34$d9d876b0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> Hey how have you set your minimum airflow setting? Sounds like a problem both my cars have had at one time or another. Engine should idle at base idle fully warmed up A/C off with IAC at 0 steps. Have you a VSS input? Later, David ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." To: Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 6:39 PM Subject: [Gmecm] $8D IAC stalls engine on decel > Hi guys! > > Well, my GM ECMed bimmer is getting almost into a nice shape. Managed to > correct the engine cuts @ 2000RPM by starting modifications from the backup > bin I had, but I couldn't figure why exactly it was doing that.... anyway... > now I have only *one* big driveability problem left: > > On decels the IAC throttle follower keeps getting the commanded IAC steps down > to ZERO. And this happens quite a lot when downshifting, so when it is at > zero steps, I push the clutch and I get an instant stall. > > Any ideas of why is the throttle follower getting the IAC down to zero? > Shouldn't it be keeping the minimum at a saner value (learned Keep Alive > steps for example)?? > > -- > Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From tsokorai at minimania.org Sun Aug 27 19:31:03 2006 From: tsokorai at minimania.org (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 20:31:03 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] $8D IAC stalls engine on decel In-Reply-To: <012501c6ca34$d9d876b0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> References: <200608271939.45875.tsokorai@minimania.org> <012501c6ca34$d9d876b0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> Message-ID: <200608272031.04142.tsokorai@minimania.org> On Sunday 27 August 2006 19:59, David Allen wrote: > Hey how have you set your minimum airflow setting? Sounds like a problem > both my cars have had at one time or another. Engine should idle at base > idle fully warmed up A/C off with IAC at 0 steps. Good point... I haven't set mine... but shouldn't then all the IAC settings be too high after setting the min idle with the throttlebody? > Have you a VSS input? Nope, and that was one of the problems I was thinking about. Tried to follow the IAC code from the ANHT hac, but couldn't figure exactly why with a VSS=0, the throttle follower keeps getting down to 0 anyway. BLM cells don't want to change because of lack of VSS too :( So I'm still trying to figure out how to get a VSS installed. My problem is where to install a VSS ... and what kind of VSS sensor to use. -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From jay at vessels-clan.com Sun Aug 27 19:31:11 2006 From: jay at vessels-clan.com (Jay Vessels) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 20:31:11 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm In-Reply-To: <20060827173615.60178.qmail@web80504.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060827173615.60178.qmail@web80504.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44F2394F.9000002@vessels-clan.com> Hi there! > Painless shows a sweet little adapter that looks to solve the TBI > retrofit to non-TBI manifold bolt pattern problem: http://www.painlessperformance.com/assets/pdf_catalog/06Catalog_pg26-27.pdf > and the part # is PPP-60118 which Summit shows for about $93 and Holley sells an adapter part number 17-41, shown here at Summit Racing for about $43: http://tinyurl.com/g3enj Jay Vessels 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) From jay at vessels-clan.com Sun Aug 27 19:39:40 2006 From: jay at vessels-clan.com (Jay Vessels) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 20:39:40 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm] Message-ID: <44F23B4C.5090007@vessels-clan.com> Hi there! > Painless Harness 60101 (they engineered wiring based on a 90 Chevy P/U) I've got that harness on my S-10 truck. It's decent and easy to install. > Painless TBI adapter 60118 (solves the bolt pattern match issue) Or the Holley 17-41 for cheaper. > Painless VSS Adapter 60115 (gets 2PPM from mechanical speedo cable) You don't need this, most likely, since your car is a CCC car. There should be a VSS mounted in the back of the original speedometer that will work nicely with that 1227747. The Painless harness will also come with an ALDL connector and Check Engine light that you can use if you want, or you can re-use what is already in your car. > * Coolant sensor (this is still an outstanding question, will the > existing one suffice - I think so, if not acquire correct one) If you get the intake and TBI from a donor car/truck, then you'll have most of the sensors, etc. you need including CTS, and EGR stuff. > * MAP sensor (this is still an outstanding question Don't stress over this. Any GM MAP sensor from a non-turbo or non-superhcarged car will work. Find a GM car with fuel injection and take the MAP sensor off of it. Or buy a new one from GM for about $40. > The last area that I'm not yet sure of is EGR and AIR (not A/C): > * I'm hoping the existing EGR controls will adapt to the new ECM w/ no > changes, any help/comments here welcomed. The ECM uses an EGR solenoid to drive the EGR valve. If you find a donor that still has the intake and TBI on it, then you'll likely find the EGR valve and solenoid still on it. AIR is a strange one -- it depends largely on the donor vehicle as much as anything, as GM appears to have tried different strategies on different vehicles. The Painless harness (if it's like mine) will not have any wiring for the AIR system. Depending on how the AIR system is designed on your car, you may be able to just keep what you have. > If anyone has a good reliable source of pulled TBI's I'd appreciate > that, otherwise car-parts.com search has turned up quite a few, and the > swap may also discover one, so we'll see there. If there are any junkyards in your area that let you pull stuff, that's probably the best route. Jay Vessels 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) From davida1 at hiwaay.net Sun Aug 27 19:38:54 2006 From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 19:38:54 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] $8D IAC stalls engine on decel References: <200608271939.45875.tsokorai@minimania.org><012501c6ca34$d9d876b0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> <200608272031.04142.tsokorai@minimania.org> Message-ID: <013001c6ca3a$593b72e0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> > Good point... I haven't set mine... but shouldn't then all the IAC settings be > too high after setting the min idle with the throttlebody? Nope. You want the ECM to be able to add supplimental air to the engine to overcome cold operation and added load such as the A/C but there is no need for the ECM to have the capability to lower idle speed below spec. There are several schools of thought as to min airflow setting technique. The one that works for me is...... Set the idle speed high at minimum airflow screw; then turn off engine and want for ECM to power off. Connect ALDL program. Then re-start and allow engine to be FULLY warmed up. Now lower minimum airflow until you see 4 or 5 IAC counts on the scan data. The reason to start high and then lower the min airflow setting, is to prevent the ECM's IAC throttle-follower function from defeating you. What kind of throttle body are you using? The original Bosch one? >> Have you a VSS input? > Nope, and that was one of the problems I was thinking about. > Tried to follow the IAC code from the ANHT hac, but couldn't figure exactly > why with a VSS=0, the throttle follower keeps getting down to 0 anyway. > BLM cells don't want to change because of lack of VSS too :( > So I'm still trying to figure out how to get a VSS installed. > My problem is where to install a VSS ... and what kind of VSS sensor to use. What kind of VSS did the Bimmer have from the factory? If any? Even if it had one dedicated to the Cruise (or 'tempomat' IIRC) you might be able to adapt this to your system using a divider or buffer of some sort. I have run without a VSS with no stalling issues. Really it is not necessary; but it is nice to have! My EFI Boat has no VSS (BSS?) and it never stalls. Glad your project car is working well! David From jryan at caminofx.org Sun Aug 27 19:49:33 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 19:49:33 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] ? about pre-efi gm ecm] In-Reply-To: <44F23B4C.5090007@vessels-clan.com> References: <44F23B4C.5090007@vessels-clan.com> Message-ID: <06aba9390be2e8cd1c194f2d93fdb892@caminofx.org> Painless sells add-on harnesses for the AIR valves and the EGR purge solenoid. The '746 uses a purge solenoid while the '747 does not, that I have seen. ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On Aug 27, 2006, at 7:39 PM, Jay Vessels wrote: > AIR is a strange one -- it depends largely on the donor vehicle as much > as anything, as GM appears to have tried different strategies on > different vehicles. The Painless harness (if it's like mine) will not > have any wiring for the AIR system. Depending on how the AIR system is > designed on your car, you may be able to just keep what you have. From Cletrac at comcast.net Sun Aug 27 20:12:54 2006 From: Cletrac at comcast.net (Cletrac at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 01:12:54 +0000 Subject: [Gmecm] EFI components Message-ID: <082820060112.29091.44F243160004AAAF000071A322070206530C0E9D9B0A04BC@comcast.net> I am looking for the ECM end connectors and pins for a 16156450 style ECM plus all the engine management sensor connections either bare or with a pigtail. I know I have seen sources but now when I need them I'm at a loss to find them. On the otherhand, I am looking to buy wiring harnesses from a Pontiac Grand Am or similar vehicle with a Quad 4 motor if anyone happens to save such stuff. Thanks Dave Cletrac at comcast.net From rgmecm at yahoo.com Sun Aug 27 20:21:40 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 18:21:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? Message-ID: <20060828012140.78038.qmail@web35915.mail.mud.yahoo.com> When are we going to switch to a forum format vs the mailing list? I got swamped with 30 messages today, and don't like the digest format because it's too slow when you have a problem that needs an immediate answer... Just curious because I know there was some discussion about it... Ryan --------------------------------- Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min. From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Sun Aug 27 20:36:41 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 20:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? Message-ID: Hi Ryan, the majority of the respondants preferred the current email format, so that is what we will be sticking with. Your email software can probably sort list traffic into a different folder based on the [gmecm] that appears in the subject line if that helps. There is a request in to the mailman developers to be able to include, at the bottom of each email, a link to that message in the archives. This allows you to fairly easily go back and pick up the context of a thread, one of the other advantages of the forum. Hopefully this will show up soon. --steve > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 8:22 PM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? > > When are we going to switch to a forum format vs the mailing > list? I got swamped with 30 messages today, and don't like > the digest format because it's too slow when you have a > problem that needs an immediate answer... Just curious > because I know there was some discussion about it... > > Ryan -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Sun Aug 27 20:44:37 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 20:44:37 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] $8D IAC stalls engine on decel Message-ID: > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 6:40 PM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] $8D IAC stalls engine on decel > > Hi guys! > > Well, my GM ECMed bimmer is getting almost into a nice shape. > Managed to correct the engine cuts @ 2000RPM by starting > modifications from the backup bin I had, but I couldn't > figure why exactly it was doing that.... anyway... > now I have only *one* big driveability problem left: > > On decels the IAC throttle follower keeps getting the > commanded IAC steps down to ZERO. And this happens quite a > lot when downshifting, so when it is at zero steps, I push > the clutch and I get an instant stall. > > Any ideas of why is the throttle follower getting the IAC > down to zero? > Shouldn't it be keeping the minimum at a saner value (learned > Keep Alive steps for example)?? Tomas, VSS is part of stall saver, in that while you're driving at highway speed the ECM takes the opportunity to reset the IAC to a known position. You should get it hooked up. But in your case, the ECM commanding IAC to zero, the lack of VSS may not be the problem. What I see on the scan tool is above some speed (30?) the IAC opens significantly from where the idle routine left it. Take a look at the idle strategy document on the gmecm page. It's on the twiki, under "papers written by list members", and has a lot of good information in it. --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From mmansur at hotmail.com Sun Aug 27 21:08:25 2006 From: mmansur at hotmail.com (Mark Mansur) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 19:08:25 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] EFI components References: <082820060112.29091.44F243160004AAAF000071A322070206530C0E9D9B0A04BC@comcast.net> Message-ID: http://www.rosesandwrenches.com/connectors/ -Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 6:12 PM Subject: [Gmecm] EFI components I am looking for the ECM end connectors and pins for a 16156450 style ECM plus all the engine management sensor connections either bare or with a pigtail. I know I have seen sources but now when I need them I'm at a loss to find them. On the otherhand, I am looking to buy wiring harnesses from a Pontiac Grand Am or similar vehicle with a Quad 4 motor if anyone happens to save such stuff. Thanks Dave Cletrac at comcast.net _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From rgmecm at yahoo.com Sun Aug 27 21:27:47 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 19:27:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060828022747.32831.qmail@web35908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> bah... they're just afraid of change. Forums are so infinitely better for all involved. For instance - your ECM explodes into flames, and you need to know soon how to fix it! Post a topic, and have email notification when you get a response. The rest of us don't have our inboxes flooded with 50 "check the fuses" responses. If you're bored on your lunchbreak, check the forum and see if you can give someone a hand. I really do hope we move to a forum. Or - how about just changing the archives a bit to allow posting? Then I just plug in my email, type away and post there! I really could have my cake and eat it too! :-) Ryan Steve Ravet wrote: Hi Ryan, the majority of the respondants preferred the current email format, so that is what we will be sticking with. Your email software can probably sort list traffic into a different folder based on the [gmecm] that appears in the subject line if that helps. There is a request in to the mailman developers to be able to include, at the bottom of each email, a link to that message in the archives. This allows you to fairly easily go back and pick up the context of a thread, one of the other advantages of the forum. Hopefully this will show up soon. --steve > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 8:22 PM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? > > When are we going to switch to a forum format vs the mailing > list? I got swamped with 30 messages today, and don't like > the digest format because it's too slow when you have a > problem that needs an immediate answer... Just curious > because I know there was some discussion about it... > > Ryan -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail. From burntkat at sc.rr.com Sun Aug 27 22:24:00 2006 From: burntkat at sc.rr.com (Burntkat@sc.rr.com) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 23:24:00 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? In-Reply-To: <20060828022747.32831.qmail@web35908.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000001c6ca51$67ce1a80$079fa8c0@brigid> This was voted on in the near past. You should have piped up then. -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 10:28 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? bah... they're just afraid of change. Forums are so infinitely better for all involved. For instance - your ECM explodes into flames, and you need to know soon how to fix it! Post a topic, and have email notification when you get a response. The rest of us don't have our inboxes flooded with 50 "check the fuses" responses. If you're bored on your lunchbreak, check the forum and see if you can give someone a hand. I really do hope we move to a forum. Or - how about just changing the archives a bit to allow posting? Then I just plug in my email, type away and post there! I really could have my cake and eat it too! :-) Ryan From pmkls1 at yahoo.com Sun Aug 27 23:55:48 2006 From: pmkls1 at yahoo.com (Phillip Kuhn) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 21:55:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Where to start????? Message-ID: <20060828045548.33622.qmail@web54602.mail.yahoo.com> Well I have all my hardware for some chip burning but I am confused as to which bin and definition (mask I guess) that I should start with. The vehicle is a n/a nissan 240sx with a ka24e engine which is a port injected and runs a distributor. I have a 730 ecm and was planning on using the $58 code in it. I cant seem to figure which is the "right" definition file and bin file to download. Im using tunerpro rt and a burn1 burner from moates.net . I still have some odds and end pieces to get before actually doing the ecm conversion but I wanted to get comfortable tuning and programming in the meanwhile so as to save downtime after the install. I find it funny that I dont flinch at the thought of the wiring and schematic reading ahead but Im pretty nervous about the programming end of it. As always I appreciate the input, I just wish that I could give back as much advice as I recieve on here. Thanks, Phil __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mmansur at hotmail.com Mon Aug 28 00:08:02 2006 From: mmansur at hotmail.com (Mark Mansur) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:08:02 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] Where to start????? References: <20060828045548.33622.qmail@web54602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: The best defs (IMO) for $58 are here: http://www.nwstp.com/ ...along the left hand nav bar. Paul at nwstp maintains them and is pretty responsive. You might also (eventually) be interested in this: http://www.code59.org/ -M ----- Original Message ----- From: "Phillip Kuhn" To: Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 9:55 PM Subject: [Gmecm] Where to start????? Well I have all my hardware for some chip burning but I am confused as to which bin and definition (mask I guess) that I should start with. The vehicle is a n/a nissan 240sx with a ka24e engine which is a port injected and runs a distributor. I have a 730 ecm and was planning on using the $58 code in it. I cant seem to figure which is the "right" definition file and bin file to download. Im using tunerpro rt and a burn1 burner from moates.net . I still have some odds and end pieces to get before actually doing the ecm conversion but I wanted to get comfortable tuning and programming in the meanwhile so as to save downtime after the install. I find it funny that I dont flinch at the thought of the wiring and schematic reading ahead but Im pretty nervous about the programming end of it. As always I appreciate the input, I just wish that I could give back as much advice as I recieve on here. Thanks, Phil __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From pmkls1 at yahoo.com Mon Aug 28 01:04:23 2006 From: pmkls1 at yahoo.com (Phillip Kuhn) Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 23:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Where to start????? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060828060423.56874.qmail@web54614.mail.yahoo.com> Thanks Mark you are the king truely. I found exactly what I was looking for. Also just a simple question though. How does the ecm know if it is a manual or auto trans as i dont see an option to alter the code or bin i guess ? I am curious because I was going to start with a sy/ty bin and they were all autos and I have a 5 speed in my car. Other than that I believe I am ready to start editing and from there I am sure more questions will arise but Im good for a while now. I almost feel like nuissance with so many questions but I guess thats what the mailing list is for. Thanks again, Phil __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From rgmecm at yahoo.com Mon Aug 28 08:19:27 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 06:19:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? In-Reply-To: <000001c6ca51$67ce1a80$079fa8c0@brigid> Message-ID: <20060828131927.8305.qmail@web35901.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I did! Apparently I missed the part where everybody agreed to stay a mailing list. "Burntkat at sc.rr.com" wrote: This was voted on in the near past. You should have piped up then. -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Hess Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 10:28 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? bah... they're just afraid of change. Forums are so infinitely better for all involved. For instance - your ECM explodes into flames, and you need to know soon how to fix it! Post a topic, and have email notification when you get a response. The rest of us don't have our inboxes flooded with 50 "check the fuses" responses. If you're bored on your lunchbreak, check the forum and see if you can give someone a hand. I really do hope we move to a forum. Or - how about just changing the archives a bit to allow posting? Then I just plug in my email, type away and post there! I really could have my cake and eat it too! :-) Ryan _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger?s low PC-to-Phone call rates. From tsokorai at minimania.org Mon Aug 28 09:53:39 2006 From: tsokorai at minimania.org (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 10:53:39 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] $8D IAC stalls engine on decel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200608281053.39841.tsokorai@minimania.org> On Sunday 27 August 2006 21:44, Steve Ravet wrote: > Tomas, VSS is part of stall saver, in that while you're driving at > highway speed the ECM takes the opportunity to reset the IAC to a known > position. You should get it hooked up. But in your case, the ECM > commanding IAC to zero, the lack of VSS may not be the problem. What I > see on the scan tool is above some speed (30?) the IAC opens > significantly from where the idle routine left it. Take a look at the > idle strategy document on the gmecm page. It's on the twiki, under > "papers written by list members", and has a lot of good information in > it. Thanks, Steve! I already read that paper when I converted my truck to TBI, but does that algorithm still apply to the $8D mask IAC control? -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From tsokorai at minimania.org Mon Aug 28 10:01:39 2006 From: tsokorai at minimania.org (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 11:01:39 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] $8D IAC stalls engine on decel In-Reply-To: <013001c6ca3a$593b72e0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> References: <200608271939.45875.tsokorai@minimania.org> <200608272031.04142.tsokorai@minimania.org> <013001c6ca3a$593b72e0$0700a8c0@yancey.com> Message-ID: <200608281101.39333.tsokorai@minimania.org> On Sunday 27 August 2006 20:38, David Allen wrote: > > Set the idle speed high at minimum airflow screw; then turn off engine and > want for ECM to power off. Connect ALDL program. > Then re-start and allow engine to be FULLY warmed up. > Now lower minimum airflow until you see 4 or 5 IAC counts on the scan data. I'll try that, thanks. > > The reason to start high and then lower the min airflow setting, is to > prevent the ECM's IAC throttle-follower function from defeating you. > > What kind of throttle body are you using? The original Bosch one? The original that came with the BMW. I adapted it for a TPS from a GM TBI and adapted a V6 IAC & housing to be externally attached with hoses to the TB's idle bypass attachments. The only way to set the minimum airflow is by means of the throttle stop on this TB. > > What kind of VSS did the Bimmer have from the factory? If any? Even if it None, mechanical speedo. The E21 is as simple as a car can get ;) > had one dedicated to the Cruise (or 'tempomat' IIRC) you might be able to > adapt this to your system using a divider or buffer of some sort. Maybe the E30 series has a VSS I can adapt .... > > I have run without a VSS with no stalling issues. Really it is not > necessary; but it is nice to have! My EFI Boat has no VSS (BSS?) and it > never stalls. Well, I think the minimum airflow will do the trick ... but I still think the code should get sanity checks, and not let the IAC get to zero. > > Glad your project car is working well! In part because of you, thanks for the ideas! :) -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From perlon at passagen.se Mon Aug 28 12:11:04 2006 From: perlon at passagen.se (Per Lonnborg) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 19:11:04 +0200 (CEST) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? Message-ID: <20197161.1156785064945.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps11.sth.basefarm.net> dennysweet at charter.net wrote at 2006-aug-22 05:20: >Tuned Port Injection is pretty impressive to look at but you cant get a lot of power >after 5500 rpm and you lose a great amount of torque on the lower end of the RPM >scale. Chris Reynolds [red83brick at yahoo.com] wrote at 2006-aug-22 17:01: >The problem with TPI is the runners are setup to resonate at around 3,000 RPM, >which greatly improves torque there. The throttle response will be slightly better >than the TBI setup, but you will lose a ton of low-speed torque, which is everything >in a heavy suburban. Hello! I just want to ask again if the two statements above is "true" about TPI vs. TBI. I know (and probably everyone else too) that a stock TPI will lose its power above 5500 rpm due to intake runner diameter and lenght, thats a fact. But I was quite surprised that TPI also would lose torque in the lower rpm, compared to a TBI system? Arent those long, thin runners perfect for low- and middle rpm? /Per From Terminal_Crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk Mon Aug 28 12:05:28 2006 From: Terminal_Crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk (Terminal Crazy) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 18:05:28 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] ABS & Data Stream Reader Update (Beta Tester Rqd) Message-ID: <4e5d92d464Terminal_Crazy@sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk> OK due to the massive response (nil) I've added a couple of data streams. I'm still looking for a Beta Tester for this software. Please get in touch if interested. Please read my earlier post if your unsure what I'm going on about! DSReader should now be able to send receive/receive messages for the following streams. A286 95_FBody_ABS A278 95_FBody_3_4L_V6 A274 94-5_FBody_LT1_Auto A273 94-5_FBody_LT1_M6 A242 95_FBody_DERM_SIR (also covers many others) I will look at other streams if anyone is interested. TIA Terminal Crazy terminal_crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk -- Mitch - 1995 Z28 LT1 M6 terminal_crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk Lancashire England http://www.sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk/terminal_crazy/ From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Mon Aug 28 12:55:16 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2006 10:55:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? In-Reply-To: <20197161.1156785064945.JavaMail.apache@eni-cpps11.sth.basefarm.net> Message-ID: <20060828175516.86559.qmail@web80515.mail.scd.yahoo.com> I just lent out my authoratative book on SBC's, by Lingenfelter, but I seem to recall he dub'ded the TPI as a tow truck motor, meaning it made gobs of torque off idle to the limit of the runners at just under 4000, and from my seat of the pants w/ the 3 I've tuned, that is absolutely true. My Vette will run down the road at 1100 RPM quite happy, will pull hills, and all, cruises very nicely at 70+ knocking down 33+ MPG, since it's sitting right smak on the bottom 1/3 of the toruqe curve, it still pulls strong without having to downshift. I've not been in a TBI car that does that, but the TBI's gennerally will rev higher so are better on track either stratght or twisty. But stoplight to stoplight, give me a well tuned TPI and I'll twist axles with it. ----- Original Message ---- From: Per Lonnborg To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 12:11:04 PM Subject: Re: Re: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? dennysweet at charter.net wrote at 2006-aug-22 05:20: >Tuned Port Injection is pretty impressive to look at but you cant get a lot of power >after 5500 rpm and you lose a great amount of torque on the lower end of the RPM >scale. Chris Reynolds [red83brick at yahoo.com] wrote at 2006-aug-22 17:01: >The problem with TPI is the runners are setup to resonate at around 3,000 RPM, >which greatly improves torque there. The throttle response will be slightly better >than the TBI setup, but you will lose a ton of low-speed torque, which is everything >in a heavy suburban. Hello! I just want to ask again if the two statements above is "true" about TPI vs. TBI. I know (and probably everyone else too) that a stock TPI will lose its power above 5500 rpm due to intake runner diameter and lenght, thats a fact. But I was quite surprised that TPI also would lose torque in the lower rpm, compared to a TBI system? Arent those long, thin runners perfect for low- and middle rpm? /Per _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From robert.sjodin at scania.com Tue Aug 29 01:24:38 2006 From: robert.sjodin at scania.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Sj=F6din_Robert?=) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 08:24:38 +0200 Subject: [Gmecm] ABS & Data Stream Reader Update (Beta Tester Rqd) In-Reply-To: <4e5d92d464Terminal_Crazy@sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk> Message-ID: <02A3C863F485574985DC489CE97DA40C02542C2A@sesoexmb02.scania.se> I could test your software if you add A134 (90-91 Y ABS). Please tell a little more about your program. Could it for expamle scan and read fault codes of the CCM (A111)? Rob -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Terminal Crazy Sent: den 28 augusti 2006 19:05 To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: [Gmecm] ABS & Data Stream Reader Update (Beta Tester Rqd) OK due to the massive response (nil) I've added a couple of data streams. I'm still looking for a Beta Tester for this software. Please get in touch if interested. Please read my earlier post if your unsure what I'm going on about! DSReader should now be able to send receive/receive messages for the following streams. A286 95_FBody_ABS A278 95_FBody_3_4L_V6 A274 94-5_FBody_LT1_Auto A273 94-5_FBody_LT1_M6 A242 95_FBody_DERM_SIR (also covers many others) I will look at other streams if anyone is interested. TIA Terminal Crazy terminal_crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk -- Mitch - 1995 Z28 LT1 M6 terminal_crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk Lancashire England http://www.sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk/terminal_crazy/ _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From mrcad472 at iowatelecom.net Tue Aug 29 09:16:49 2006 From: mrcad472 at iowatelecom.net (Scott Pearson) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 09:16:49 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? References: <20060828012140.78038.qmail@web35915.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004901c6cb75$c6e20070$6601a8c0@DELL3G> If gm ecm went forum, everyone would just complete the migration to thirdgen.org.... I go to forums now and then, but the old text email system works just fine. Tends to keep the s/n ratio down and no silly smiley faces. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Hess" To: Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 8:21 PM Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? > When are we going to switch to a forum format vs the mailing list? I got > swamped with 30 messages today, and don't like the digest format because > it's too slow when you have a problem that needs an immediate answer... > Just curious because I know there was some discussion about it... > > Ryan > > > --------------------------------- > Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great > rates starting at 1?/min. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From john.c.mccracken at comcast.net Tue Aug 29 09:49:28 2006 From: john.c.mccracken at comcast.net (john.c.mccracken at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 14:49:28 +0000 Subject: [Gmecm] '7747 chip source Message-ID: <082920061449.24108.44F453F80001DC0900005E2C2200734830020A050C0E9D0C0C03D20CD202080106@comcast.net> Friends, Would someone remind me of the chip part no. for a '7747 ECU and where I can get a couple of new ones? Thanks, John From jonnbell at gmail.com Tue Aug 29 10:04:10 2006 From: jonnbell at gmail.com (jb) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 10:04:10 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? In-Reply-To: <004901c6cb75$c6e20070$6601a8c0@DELL3G> References: <20060828012140.78038.qmail@web35915.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <004901c6cb75$c6e20070$6601a8c0@DELL3G> Message-ID: <40407c390608290804l43c389aava5807c09a2975c33@mail.gmail.com> and no posting, reposting, and rereposting of 1024x768 jpgs just to comment on them On 8/29/06, Scott Pearson wrote: > If gm ecm went forum, everyone would just complete the migration to > thirdgen.org.... > > I go to forums now and then, but the old text email system works just fine. > Tends to keep the s/n ratio down and no silly smiley faces. > > From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Tue Aug 29 10:55:35 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 08:55:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] '7747 chip source In-Reply-To: <082920061449.24108.44F453F80001DC0900005E2C2200734830020A050C0E9D0C0C03D20CD202080106@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20060829155535.57493.qmail@web80514.mail.scd.yahoo.com> I'm also looking for a cheap source of 'reliable' quality ECMs of 7747 type, some of the local area shops have had a history of bad units and not standing behind them :-( for returns ----- Original Message ---- From: john.c.mccracken at comcast.net To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 9:49:28 AM Subject: [Gmecm] '7747 chip source Friends, Would someone remind me of the chip part no. for a '7747 ECU and where I can get a couple of new ones? Thanks, John _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From Terminal_Crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk Tue Aug 29 11:54:34 2006 From: Terminal_Crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk (Terminal Crazy) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 17:54:34 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] ABS & Data Stream Reader Update (Beta Tester Rqd) In-Reply-To: <02A3C863F485574985DC489CE97DA40C02542C2A@sesoexmb02.scania.se> References: <4e5d92d464Terminal_Crazy@sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk> <02A3C863F485574985DC489CE97DA40C02542C2A@sesoexmb02.scania.se> Message-ID: <4e5e15ab3bTerminal_Crazy@sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk> On 29 Aug, Sj?din Robert wrote: > I could test your software if you add A134 (90-91 Y ABS). > Please tell a little more about your program. Could it for expamle scan > and read fault codes of the CCM (A111)? > Rob Hi, thanks for the reply. I think it would, but I'll have to have a proper look at the Data Streams. I'll upload the html info I have to my website so you can see what it does later tonight. -- Mitch - 1995 Z28 LT1 M6 terminal_crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk Lancashire England http://www.sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk/terminal_crazy/ From abrown02000 at yahoo.com Tue Aug 29 13:45:54 2006 From: abrown02000 at yahoo.com (allen brown) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:45:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? In-Reply-To: <004901c6cb75$c6e20070$6601a8c0@DELL3G> Message-ID: <20060829184554.63825.qmail@web51306.mail.yahoo.com> :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) Al Scott Pearson wrote: If gm ecm went forum, everyone would just complete the migration to thirdgen.org.... I go to forums now and then, but the old text email system works just fine. Tends to keep the s/n ratio down and no silly smiley faces. Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ryan Hess" To: Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 8:21 PM Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? > When are we going to switch to a forum format vs the mailing list? I got > swamped with 30 messages today, and don't like the digest format because > it's too slow when you have a problem that needs an immediate answer... > Just curious because I know there was some discussion about it... > > Ryan > > > --------------------------------- > Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great > rates starting at 1?/min. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail. From donsauman at cythera.net Tue Aug 29 18:22:45 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 07:22:45 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? In-Reply-To: <004901c6cb75$c6e20070$6601a8c0@DELL3G> References: <20060828012140.78038.qmail@web35915.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <004901c6cb75$c6e20070$6601a8c0@DELL3G> Message-ID: <44F4CC45.3070906@cythera.net> Good point Scott :-) Don Scott Pearson wrote: >If gm ecm went forum, everyone would just complete the migration to >thirdgen.org.... > >I go to forums now and then, but the old text email system works just fine. >Tends to keep the s/n ratio down and no silly smiley faces. > >Scott > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Ryan Hess" >To: >Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 8:21 PM >Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? > > > > >>When are we going to switch to a forum format vs the mailing list? I got >>swamped with 30 messages today, and don't like the digest format because >>it's too slow when you have a problem that needs an immediate answer... >>Just curious because I know there was some discussion about it... >> >>Ryan >> >> >>--------------------------------- >>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great >>rates starting at 1?/min. >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From donsauman at cythera.net Tue Aug 29 18:25:48 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 07:25:48 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? In-Reply-To: <20060829184554.63825.qmail@web51306.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060829184554.63825.qmail@web51306.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44F4CCFC.3080901@cythera.net> That was cruel and inhumane. allen brown wrote: >:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) > > ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) > > :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) > > Al > >Scott Pearson wrote: > If gm ecm went forum, everyone would just complete the migration to >thirdgen.org.... > >I go to forums now and then, but the old text email system works just fine. >Tends to keep the s/n ratio down and no silly smiley faces. > >Scott > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Ryan Hess" >To: >Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 8:21 PM >Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? > > > > >>When are we going to switch to a forum format vs the mailing list? I got >>swamped with 30 messages today, and don't like the digest format because >>it's too slow when you have a problem that needs an immediate answer... >>Just curious because I know there was some discussion about it... >> >>Ryan >> >> >>--------------------------------- >>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great >>rates starting at 1?/min. >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > >--------------------------------- >Do you Yahoo!? > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail. >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From donsauman at cythera.net Tue Aug 29 18:28:47 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 07:28:47 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] '7747 chip source In-Reply-To: <082920061449.24108.44F453F80001DC0900005E2C2200734830020A050C0E9D0C0C03D20CD202080106@comcast.net> References: <082920061449.24108.44F453F80001DC0900005E2C2200734830020A050C0E9D0C0C03D20CD202080106@comcast.net> Message-ID: <44F4CDAF.2000202@cythera.net> 2732a I believe. Salvage sources may be good. We have a place here in Western Australia that was still selling them last time I checked. Limited number of manufacturers though. Don john.c.mccracken at comcast.net wrote: >Friends, > >Would someone remind me of the chip part no. for a '7747 ECU and where I can get a couple of new ones? > >Thanks, >John >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > -- Don Sauman Cythera Communication 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From nick_cooper at yahoo.com Tue Aug 29 18:57:07 2006 From: nick_cooper at yahoo.com (Nick Cooper) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:57:07 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? In-Reply-To: <20060828175516.86559.qmail@web80515.mail.scd.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Along these same lines, has anyone got any experience with the LT1 &/or Ramjet intakes as compared to the TPI? I'm wondering if either of these intakes makes much better top end power on a 383? Nick -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Rick McLeod Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 1:55 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Re: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? I just lent out my authoratative book on SBC's, by Lingenfelter, but I seem to recall he dub'ded the TPI as a tow truck motor, meaning it made gobs of torque off idle to the limit of the runners at just under 4000, and from my seat of the pants w/ the 3 I've tuned, that is absolutely true. My Vette will run down the road at 1100 RPM quite happy, will pull hills, and all, cruises very nicely at 70+ knocking down 33+ MPG, since it's sitting right smak on the bottom 1/3 of the toruqe curve, it still pulls strong without having to downshift. I've not been in a TBI car that does that, but the TBI's gennerally will rev higher so are better on track either stratght or twisty. But stoplight to stoplight, give me a well tuned TPI and I'll twist axles with it. ----- Original Message ---- From: Per Lonnborg To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 12:11:04 PM Subject: Re: Re: [Gmecm] TBI - TPI swap ?? dennysweet at charter.net wrote at 2006-aug-22 05:20: >Tuned Port Injection is pretty impressive to look at but you cant get a lot of power >after 5500 rpm and you lose a great amount of torque on the lower end of the RPM >scale. Chris Reynolds [red83brick at yahoo.com] wrote at 2006-aug-22 17:01: >The problem with TPI is the runners are setup to resonate at around 3,000 RPM, >which greatly improves torque there. The throttle response will be slightly better >than the TBI setup, but you will lose a ton of low-speed torque, which is everything >in a heavy suburban. Hello! I just want to ask again if the two statements above is "true" about TPI vs. TBI. I know (and probably everyone else too) that a stock TPI will lose its power above 5500 rpm due to intake runner diameter and lenght, thats a fact. But I was quite surprised that TPI also would lose torque in the lower rpm, compared to a TBI system? Arent those long, thin runners perfect for low- and middle rpm? /Per _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From b.shaw at comcast.net Tue Aug 29 19:06:00 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:06:00 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] 88 Buick 3.8L V6 Message-ID: <44F4D668.7060903@comcast.net> Sorry for the off topic question again, but I'm in the garage about to put the heads back on. Anyone here know if these head bolts are reusable or torque-to-yield? Also, does anyone know the torque specs for these head bolts? Thanks, Bill From sfeaver at magma.ca Tue Aug 29 20:00:26 2006 From: sfeaver at magma.ca (Scott Feaver) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:00:26 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] 88 Buick 3.8L V6 References: <44F4D668.7060903@comcast.net> Message-ID: <003501c6cbcf$afa17260$0601a8c0@scott> Yes they are torque-to-yield.. I just put my heads back on a couple of nights ago on a 89 Lesabre with a Vin C 3.8L.. I have to double check in a few minutes for you, but I thought I'd post this right now anyhow. I believe the spec was to 35 lb-ft, then 130 degrees, and then 30 more on all. In about half an hour I can get at my service book to confirm but I think thats right. Do you need the tightening sequence also? Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill - Comcast" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:06 PM Subject: [Gmecm] 88 Buick 3.8L V6 > Sorry for the off topic question again, but I'm in the garage about to > put the heads back on. Anyone here know if these head bolts are > reusable or torque-to-yield? Also, does anyone know the torque specs > for these head bolts? > > Thanks, > > Bill > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From b.shaw at comcast.net Tue Aug 29 20:12:13 2006 From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:12:13 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] 88 Buick 3.8L V6 In-Reply-To: <003501c6cbcf$afa17260$0601a8c0@scott> References: <44F4D668.7060903@comcast.net> <003501c6cbcf$afa17260$0601a8c0@scott> Message-ID: <44F4E5ED.4090608@comcast.net> Thanks Scott. The sequence is just a criss-cross pattern, isn't it? I suppose I'll need it but it's less time critical now since I need to get new head bolts. That'll be tomorrow. Best, Bill Scott Feaver wrote: > Yes they are torque-to-yield.. I just put my heads back on a couple of > nights ago on a 89 Lesabre with a Vin C 3.8L.. > > I have to double check in a few minutes for you, but I thought I'd post this > right now anyhow. > > I believe the spec was to 35 lb-ft, then 130 degrees, and then 30 more on > all. > > In about half an hour I can get at my service book to confirm but I think > thats right. Do you need the tightening sequence also? > > Scott > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill - Comcast" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:06 PM > Subject: [Gmecm] 88 Buick 3.8L V6 > > > >> Sorry for the off topic question again, but I'm in the garage about to >> put the heads back on. Anyone here know if these head bolts are >> reusable or torque-to-yield? Also, does anyone know the torque specs >> for these head bolts? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Bill >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From sfeaver at magma.ca Tue Aug 29 20:12:55 2006 From: sfeaver at magma.ca (Scott Feaver) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:12:55 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] 88 Buick 3.8L V6 References: <44F4D668.7060903@comcast.net> <003501c6cbcf$afa17260$0601a8c0@scott> Message-ID: <004701c6cbd1$6deb2c10$0601a8c0@scott> Bill- I just looked at your pictures, your engine isnt the same as mine so ignore what I posted! In a few minutes I'll fire up Mitchells and get you the proper info. Looks like you have a Vin 3 motor, is that correct? Scott ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Feaver" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 9:00 PM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] 88 Buick 3.8L V6 > Yes they are torque-to-yield.. I just put my heads back on a couple of > nights ago on a 89 Lesabre with a Vin C 3.8L.. > > I have to double check in a few minutes for you, but I thought I'd post this > right now anyhow. > > I believe the spec was to 35 lb-ft, then 130 degrees, and then 30 more on > all. > > In about half an hour I can get at my service book to confirm but I think > thats right. Do you need the tightening sequence also? > > Scott > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill - Comcast" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 8:06 PM > Subject: [Gmecm] 88 Buick 3.8L V6 > > > > Sorry for the off topic question again, but I'm in the garage about to > > put the heads back on. Anyone here know if these head bolts are > > reusable or torque-to-yield? Also, does anyone know the torque specs > > for these head bolts? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Bill > > _______________________________________________ > > Gmecm mailing list > > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > From lwester at lincsat.com Tue Aug 29 20:56:08 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:56:08 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? References: <20060829184554.63825.qmail@web51306.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001e01c6cbd7$7c881ca0$0200a8c0@WESTER2> Except from that guy ! LOL.... I'd hate to see this change to a forum...I'd never be back. LW. ----- Original Message ----- From: "allen brown" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 12:45 PM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? > :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) > > ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) > > :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) > > Al > > Scott Pearson wrote: > If gm ecm went forum, everyone would just complete the migration to > thirdgen.org.... > > I go to forums now and then, but the old text email system works just > fine. > Tends to keep the s/n ratio down and no silly smiley faces. > > Scott > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Ryan Hess" > To: > Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 8:21 PM > Subject: [Gmecm] When are we going to switch to a forum? > > >> When are we going to switch to a forum format vs the mailing list? I got >> swamped with 30 messages today, and don't like the digest format because >> it's too slow when you have a problem that needs an immediate answer... >> Just curious because I know there was some discussion about it... >> >> Ryan >> >> >> --------------------------------- >> Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great >> rates starting at 1?/min. >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From lwester at lincsat.com Tue Aug 29 20:57:06 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 19:57:06 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] '7747 chip source References: <082920061449.24108.44F453F80001DC0900005E2C2200734830020A050C0E9D0C0C03D20CD202080106@comcast.net> <44F4CDAF.2000202@cythera.net> Message-ID: <002501c6cbd7$9e6341b0$0200a8c0@WESTER2> We've been buying 27C32 NAT's out of Japan. Haven't found a cheaper source yet. I'll see if I can find the link...they deliver pretty quick. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Don Sauman" To: Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 5:28 PM Subject: Re: [Gmecm] '7747 chip source > 2732a I believe. Salvage sources may be good. We have a place here in > Western Australia that was still selling them last time I checked. Limited > number of manufacturers though. > > Don > > john.c.mccracken at comcast.net wrote: > >>Friends, >> >>Would someone remind me of the chip part no. for a '7747 ECU and where I >>can get a couple of new ones? >> >>Thanks, >>John >>_______________________________________________ >>Gmecm mailing list >>Gmecm at diy-efi.org >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> > > -- > Don Sauman > Cythera Communication > 35 Asteroid Way > Carlisle 6101 > Western Australia > > P: 08 9361 0337 > F: 08 9361 0581 > M: 0427 389 547 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From lwester at lincsat.com Tue Aug 29 21:01:23 2006 From: lwester at lincsat.com (Programmer) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 20:01:23 -0600 Subject: [Gmecm] Needing a bin file Message-ID: <007201c6cbd8$365ee140$0200a8c0@WESTER2> Guys....needing a 1993 4.3VIN"Z" stick truck bin file. PROM # 16179122 or # 16186401 (BDDJ--most current) -- or close facsimile of one. There was one in incoming, but it looks corrupted. Appears to have left the planet. Lyndon www.ecmprogrammer.com Westers Garage 218 Centre Street Tilley, Alberta T0J 3K0 1-888-937-8371 403-377-CARS From sam_reed at yahoo.com Tue Aug 29 23:07:13 2006 From: sam_reed at yahoo.com (Sam Reed) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 21:07:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum Message-ID: <20060830040713.24055.qmail@web50203.mail.yahoo.com> My $0.02: as a digest this thing is almost impossible to read, with everyone's headers and footers the garbage/signal ratio is about 80:1, and if I want to look up something it takes forever. In a forum everything would be neatly organized for later retrieval and would be much easier to read. If someone were to start their own ECM tuning forum, that would be great, and I'm sure everyone would use it. Digest v. forum is like carburetion v. EFI... From bcroe at juno.com Tue Aug 29 23:31:25 2006 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 23:31:25 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] '7747 chip source Message-ID: <20060829.233126.764.1.bcroe@juno.com> I have a lot of 2732As (somewhere in moving), what are they going for now? Bruce Roe 30 Aug 2006 Don Sauman writes: > 2732a I believe. Salvage sources may be good. We have a place here in > > Western Australia that was still selling them last time I checked. > Limited number of manufacturers though. > > Don > > john.c.mccracken at comcast.net wrote: > > >Friends, > > > >Would someone remind me of the chip part no. for a '7747 ECU and > where I can get a couple of new ones? > > > >Thanks, > >John From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Wed Aug 30 02:33:09 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 08:33:09 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum References: <20060830040713.24055.qmail@web50203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <010f01c6cc07$06401c20$020101c0@gandalf> What I like about list Email is that I can easily file useful messages, on my own PC, for future offline reference. Robin From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Wed Aug 30 02:38:53 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 08:38:53 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum References: <20060830040713.24055.qmail@web50203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <011d01c6cc07$933a32a0$020101c0@gandalf> FWIW... What I like about list Email is that I can easily file useful messages, on my own PC, for future offline reference. Also, I don't have to repeatedly download loads of pictures and other stuff when I want to read new messages. My Email client s/w moves all list mail to its own folder. List traffic is only a few Emails per day (I receive 5x as much spam), so deleting unwanted messages, by subject, is as easy as pressing a key. Robin From kenneth.zink at hotmail.com Wed Aug 30 07:37:59 2006 From: kenneth.zink at hotmail.com (Kenneth Zink) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 07:37:59 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum Message-ID: With a forum, you can search the old topics and see all replies. I have my own personal website with a forum that everyone is welcome to use. http://hellcatracing.kicks-ass.net Kenneth R Zink II > From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk> To: gmecm at diy-efi.org> Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 08:33:09 +0100> > What I like about list Email is that I can easily file useful messages, on> my own PC, for future offline reference.> > Robin> > _______________________________________________> Gmecm mailing list> Gmecm at diy-efi.org> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From burntkat at sc.rr.com Wed Aug 30 16:13:49 2006 From: burntkat at sc.rr.com (Burntkat@sc.rr.com) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 17:13:49 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum In-Reply-To: <20060830040713.24055.qmail@web50203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000001c6cc79$30aad910$079fa8c0@brigid> Observations: Use of a simple global search expression is quite handy with things as they are. Your points about forums are valid- except most forums search engines absolutely SUCK. Also, when- not if- the forum software crashes, your data is lost. Who's going to mind the forum? This has already been put to vote. Democracy ruled. -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Sam Reed Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 12:07 AM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum My $0.02: as a digest this thing is almost impossible to read, with everyone's headers and footers the garbage/signal ratio is about 80:1, and if I want to look up something it takes forever. In a forum everything would be neatly organized for later retrieval and would be much easier to read. If someone were to start their own ECM tuning forum, that would be great, and I'm sure everyone would use it. Digest v. forum is like carburetion v. EFI... _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Wed Aug 30 17:44:36 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 18:44:36 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others Message-ID: <44F614D4.2000003@highspeedlink.net> My experience with TPI is that it has tremendous low RPM torque. I'm wondering evidence people who claim otherwise are basing their claims on... Also, someone asked how TPI compared to a couple of other manifolds. Due to a bug in my email program (Thunderbird), I can't reply to that message. From what I've heard, the Holley Stealth Ram (HSR) is currently the hot setup for replacing a TPI with something more high RPM oriented, but not as much so as a Mini-Ram. Will From rgmecm at yahoo.com Wed Aug 30 19:27:58 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 17:27:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum In-Reply-To: <000001c6cc79$30aad910$079fa8c0@brigid> Message-ID: <20060831002758.37093.qmail@web35905.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Data is lost? I'm on probably 20 forums for everything from v6's to engineering. Of those 20, one forum has a problem with going down occasionally. There has NEVER been a loss of data or posts on ANY of the forums in the 10+ years I've been on them. Never. Conversely, I have had emails get lost. I have no idea how that happens, but apparently it does. It might be 1/100th of 1%, but it's there. Who's going to mind it? Whoever wants to. Nominate a couple admins. I'll do it without hesitation. It's no surprise thirdgen gets soooo many people from other backgrounds. "How do I tune my $DF code?" "I'm running an MG with a 3.4DOHC, which binary do I need?" Probably 20% of the posts there are not thirdgen related, which I think goes to show the number of people who want a general GM tuning/PROM/ECM/EFI forum. What I was sort of surprised of, was the number of people who have heard of this list, but don't sign up because they hate "spam". In that case, emails they'd rather not receive. Everybody is happy now only because it's no work to keep it the way it is, and to be honest I think everybody is afraid of change. "Burntkat at sc.rr.com" wrote: Observations: Use of a simple global search expression is quite handy with things as they are. Your points about forums are valid- except most forums search engines absolutely SUCK. Also, when- not if- the forum software crashes, your data is lost. Who's going to mind the forum? This has already been put to vote. Democracy ruled. -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Sam Reed Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 12:07 AM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum My $0.02: as a digest this thing is almost impossible to read, with everyone's headers and footers the garbage/signal ratio is about 80:1, and if I want to look up something it takes forever. In a forum everything would be neatly organized for later retrieval and would be much easier to read. If someone were to start their own ECM tuning forum, that would be great, and I'm sure everyone would use it. Digest v. forum is like carburetion v. EFI... _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business. From red83brick at yahoo.com Wed Aug 30 20:52:53 2006 From: red83brick at yahoo.com (Chris Reynolds) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 18:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others In-Reply-To: <44F614D4.2000003@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <20060831015253.30789.qmail@web61012.mail.yahoo.com> Dyno test on 7 different swaps. Dual plane manifolds give more torque down between idle-2,200 rpm than the TPI setup, then out pull it again over 4,500. William Lucke wrote: My experience with TPI is that it has tremendous low RPM torque. I'm wondering evidence people who claim otherwise are basing their claims on... Also, someone asked how TPI compared to a couple of other manifolds. Due to a bug in my email program (Thunderbird), I can't reply to that message. From what I've heard, the Holley Stealth Ram (HSR) is currently the hot setup for replacing a TPI with something more high RPM oriented, but not as much so as a Mini-Ram. Will _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. From doug at chaserace.com Thu Aug 31 01:59:46 2006 From: doug at chaserace.com (Doug Chase) Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 23:59:46 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum In-Reply-To: <20060831002758.37093.qmail@web35905.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <015301c6cccb$0cb36a70$2f01a8c0@computer> I've seen this discussion come up on many mailing lists and what usually happens is this: 1) Somebody suggests moving to a forum 2) Lots of debate, with a large contingent (usually including the list owner) wanting to stay as a mailing list. 3) Eventually somebody on the forum side of the debate goes ahead and starts a forum on their own. 4a) People migrate to the forum. or 4b) The forum never really catches on and most people stay on the list. I've seen both 4a) and 4b) happen. The only way to find out is for somebody to start a forum. I've never seen a "let's switch to a forum" discussion actually end up in an official switch of a mailing list into a forum (but that doesn't mean it's never happened). Doug Chase www.chaserace.com 425-269-5636 -----Original Message----- From: Ryan Hess Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 5:28 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: RE: [Gmecm] Re: Digest v. Forum Data is lost? I'm on probably 20 forums for everything from v6's to engineering. Of those 20, one forum has a problem with going down occasionally. There has NEVER been a loss of data or posts on ANY of the forums in the 10+ years I've been on them. Never. Conversely, I have had emails get lost. I have no idea how that happens, but apparently it does. It might be 1/100th of 1%, but it's there. Who's going to mind it? Whoever wants to. Nominate a couple admins. I'll do it without hesitation. It's no surprise thirdgen gets soooo many people from other backgrounds. "How do I tune my $DF code?" "I'm running an MG with a 3.4DOHC, which binary do I need?" Probably 20% of the posts there are not thirdgen related, which I think goes to show the number of people who want a general GM tuning/PROM/ECM/EFI forum. What I was sort of surprised of, was the number of people who have heard of this list, but don't sign up because they hate "spam". In that case, emails they'd rather not receive. Everybody is happy now only because it's no work to keep it the way it is, and to be honest I think everybody is afraid of change. From ne14roxcj at gmail.com Thu Aug 31 09:13:09 2006 From: ne14roxcj at gmail.com (Beau Blankenship) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 09:13:09 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others In-Reply-To: <20060831015253.30789.qmail@web61012.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44f6ee7e.6db05884.51fd.73da@mx.gmail.com> Some folks here may remember, I just made that switch from TBI on a Performer intake to basically stock TPI with LT1 injectors. The TBI was the Pro-Jection TB (2" bores) run by a GM '7747. I can honestly say that the TBI had noticeably more power in the higher RPMs. Highway driving was really fun at times. BUT, it was kind of sluggish around town and had a hell of a time holding its speed on the highway with the boat hooked up (unless, of course, the speed was 90mph). Then came a motor swap. Basically the same 350, bored, flat-top pistons, small-runner small-valve heads, etc. The cams were a little different (TBI motor had a large 218/226 cam and the TPI got a 206/214). The TPI motor has plenty of low-end torque to pull the boat at any highway speed in OD. But those long steep hills on the way to the Brady Mountain Marina require a very generous right foot in 2nd gear. I would never trade the TPI for another TBI in my daily driver. If I were building a racecar, I would probably not use the TPI due to its lack of high-rpm power. But for my Blazer, I have to agree with William. The TPI has plenty of low RPM torque and only falls short of the TBI over 4000-4500 RPM "in my experience." I tend to not trust manufacturer's dyno tests and claims, because their engine is not what is in my truck. Both types of GM EFI have their benefits, but I would NOT say that the TPI has any problem with low RPM torque. Beau Blankenship -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Chris Reynolds Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 8:53 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others Dyno test on 7 different swaps. Dual plane manifolds give more torque down between idle-2,200 rpm than the TPI setup, then out pull it again over 4,500. William Lucke wrote: My experience with TPI is that it has tremendous low RPM torque. I'm wondering evidence people who claim otherwise are basing their claims on... Also, someone asked how TPI compared to a couple of other manifolds. Due to a bug in my email program (Thunderbird), I can't reply to that message. From what I've heard, the Holley Stealth Ram (HSR) is currently the hot setup for replacing a TPI with something more high RPM oriented, but not as much so as a Mini-Ram. Will _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done faster. _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net Thu Aug 31 09:59:42 2006 From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 07:59:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others In-Reply-To: <44f6ee7e.6db05884.51fd.73da@mx.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20060831145942.52206.qmail@web80506.mail.yahoo.com> and as I've said before, the 3 I am intamately familiar with will snap you head at low rpm romps, I'll take TPI around town any day, love my daily driver IROC! ----- Original Message ---- From: Beau Blankenship To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:13:09 AM Subject: RE: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others snip'd... I would never trade the TPI for another TBI in my daily driver. snip'd From red83brick at yahoo.com Thu Aug 31 10:36:55 2006 From: red83brick at yahoo.com (Chris Reynolds) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others In-Reply-To: <20060831145942.52206.qmail@web80506.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060831153655.94640.qmail@web61023.mail.yahoo.com> 350, 8.5:1 compression, Swirl Ports, Peanut Roller cam, Edelbrock 3704 Intake, Stock TBI unit, Full length headers 1 1/2" x 3", 2.5" Y into single 3" cat, single 3" in/ Dual 2 1/2" out muffler. 700r4 with the stock 1,800 rpm converter, 4,500 RPM WOT shifts, and 3.08 gears. DIY eprom tuning on the EBL. The 5,500 lbs Van accelerating 0-90 with TBI. It has plenty of snap and pulls my 24 foot boat easily. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEeZ5ruugWA&mode=related&search= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX5Av4pS1RA&mode=related&search= Its TBI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-rApoA_BDc On a side note, to the man that switched to TPI along with the cam swap. The 12* @ .050 cam duration less made alot more difference than the TBI to TPI did. That is somewhere around 30 ft/lbs @ 1,500 rpm or so just from the cam. Rick McLeod wrote: and as I've said before, the 3 I am intamately familiar with will snap you head at low rpm romps, I'll take TPI around town any day, love my daily driver IROC! ----- Original Message ---- From: Beau Blankenship To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:13:09 AM Subject: RE: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others snip'd... I would never trade the TPI for another TBI in my daily driver. snip'd _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out. From papegoj at telia.com Thu Aug 31 11:04:49 2006 From: papegoj at telia.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C5ke_Georgsson?=) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:04:49 +0200 Subject: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others In-Reply-To: <44f6ee7e.6db05884.51fd.73da@mx.gmail.com> References: <44f6ee7e.6db05884.51fd.73da@mx.gmail.com> Message-ID: <44F708A1.8040300@telia.com> Beau Blankenship wrote: >Some folks here may remember, I just made that switch from TBI on a >Performer intake to basically stock TPI with LT1 injectors. The TBI was the >Pro-Jection TB (2" bores) run by a GM '7747. I can honestly say that the >TBI had noticeably more power in the higher RPMs. Highway driving was really >fun at times. BUT, it was kind of sluggish around town and had a hell of a >time holding its speed on the highway with the boat hooked up (unless, of >course, the speed was 90mph). Then came a motor swap. Basically the same >350, bored, flat-top pistons, small-runner small-valve heads, etc. The cams >were a little different (TBI motor had a large 218/226 cam and the TPI got a >206/214). The TPI motor has plenty of low-end torque to pull the boat at any >highway speed in OD. But those long steep hills on the way to the Brady >Mountain Marina require a very generous right foot in 2nd gear. I would >never trade the TPI for another TBI in my daily driver. If I were building a >racecar, I would probably not use the TPI due to its lack of high-rpm power. >But for my Blazer, I have to agree with William. The TPI has plenty of low >RPM torque and only falls short of the TBI over 4000-4500 RPM "in my >experience." I tend to not trust manufacturer's dyno tests and claims, >because their engine is not what is in my truck. Both types of GM EFI have >their benefits, but I would NOT say that the TPI has any problem with low >RPM torque. > >Beau Blankenship > >-----Original Message----- >From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf >Of Chris Reynolds >Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 8:53 PM >To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others > >Dyno test on 7 different swaps. Dual plane manifolds give more torque down >between idle-2,200 rpm than the TPI setup, then out pull it again over >4,500. > >William Lucke wrote: My experience with >TPI is that it has tremendous low RPM torque. I'm >wondering evidence people who claim otherwise are basing their claims on... > >Also, someone asked how TPI compared to a couple of other manifolds. Due >to a bug in my email program (Thunderbird), I can't reply to that >message. From what I've heard, the Holley Stealth Ram (HSR) is currently >the hot setup for replacing a TPI with something more high RPM oriented, >but not as much so as a Mini-Ram. > >yiihaaa il think il has thrown cas on an burning fire .. lot?s of comments and it splits the community in 2 > well has any one been using the Accel DFI Pro-Ram Fuel Injection Systems for Small Block Chevy http://store.summitracing.com/partdetail.asp?autofilter=1&part=ACC%2D77142&N=700+400020+4294925239+4294853151+115&autoview=sku its got lots of bennefits on the calibrateoption comperd to using a stock ecm 8 if u havent got any material to remapp it ) >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > >--------------------------------- > All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done >faster. >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > > > From papegoj at telia.com Thu Aug 31 11:17:55 2006 From: papegoj at telia.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C5ke_Georgsson?=) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:17:55 +0200 Subject: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others In-Reply-To: <44F708A1.8040300@telia.com> References: <44f6ee7e.6db05884.51fd.73da@mx.gmail.com> <44F708A1.8040300@telia.com> Message-ID: <44F70BB3.2020908@telia.com> YIIIHHHAAA!!!! >> il think il has thrown gas on an burning fire .. lot?s of comments >> and it splits the community in 2 > > well has any one been using the Accel DFI Pro-Ram Fuel Injection > Systems for Small Block Chevy > > http://store.summitracing.com/partdetail.asp?autofilter=1&part=ACC%2D77142&N=700+400020+4294925239+4294853151+115&autoview=sku > > its got lots of bennefits on the calibrateoption comperd to using a > stock ecm 8 if u havent got any material to remapp it ) > >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >> --------------------------------- >> All-new Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get things done >> faster. >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gmecm mailing list >> Gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm >> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm >> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm > > From ne14roxcj at gmail.com Thu Aug 31 12:19:05 2006 From: ne14roxcj at gmail.com (Beau Blankenship) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 12:19:05 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others In-Reply-To: <20060831153655.94640.qmail@web61023.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <44f71a10.205a8c76.53eb.ffffaa44@mx.gmail.com> Well, it sounds like you have a great setup in your van. I never meant to imply that the TBI is in any way inferior to the TPI. Nor did I mean that the TBI could not be made to work very well in a daily driver/racecar/ 4x4/van... I only meant to debate the statement that the switch to TPI would cause a loss of torque. I don't even recall who made that statement. Yes, I know that the cam made a lot of difference in my case, but the difference in drivability cannot be attributed solely to the cam (in my case). I don't even claim to have put my truck on a dyno and run numbers between multiple combinations. I don't have access to that kind of thing. All I can say is what my truck drives like with two different injection systems on two somewhat different engines. I could comment on the Edelbrock 600cfm I had on there before I switched to the TBI, but that would be inappropriate on this list. So did you mean that you have had 7 different engine/induction combinations in your daily driven(?) van? And pulled the same 24' boat with those combinations? Or is that just engines you've built and tested on a dyno? Beau -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Chris Reynolds Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 10:37 AM To: Rick McLeod; gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others 350, 8.5:1 compression, Swirl Ports, Peanut Roller cam, Edelbrock 3704 Intake, Stock TBI unit, Full length headers 1 1/2" x 3", 2.5" Y into single 3" cat, single 3" in/ Dual 2 1/2" out muffler. 700r4 with the stock 1,800 rpm converter, 4,500 RPM WOT shifts, and 3.08 gears. DIY eprom tuning on the EBL. The 5,500 lbs Van accelerating 0-90 with TBI. It has plenty of snap and pulls my 24 foot boat easily. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEeZ5ruugWA&mode=related&search= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX5Av4pS1RA&mode=related&search= Its TBI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-rApoA_BDc On a side note, to the man that switched to TPI along with the cam swap. The 12* @ .050 cam duration less made alot more difference than the TBI to TPI did. That is somewhere around 30 ft/lbs @ 1,500 rpm or so just from the cam. Rick McLeod wrote: and as I've said before, the 3 I am intamately familiar with will snap you head at low rpm romps, I'll take TPI around town any day, love my daily driver IROC! ----- Original Message ---- From: Beau Blankenship To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:13:09 AM Subject: RE: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others snip'd... I would never trade the TPI for another TBI in my daily driver. snip'd _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Stay in the know. Pulse on the new Yahoo.com. Check it out. _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Thu Aug 31 16:35:14 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 17:35:14 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others Message-ID: <44F75612.6060108@highspeedlink.net> Is this compared to similarly built engines with TPI intakes or stock engines with TPI's? TPI's are MUCH more sensitive to cam selection than short runner manifolds (like dual plane TBI setups). Will > From: Chris Reynolds > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others > > 350, 8.5:1 compression, Swirl Ports, Peanut Roller cam, Edelbrock 3704 Intake, Stock TBI unit, Full length headers 1 1/2" x 3", 2.5" Y into single 3" cat, single 3" in/ Dual 2 1/2" out muffler. 700r4 with the stock 1,800 rpm converter, 4,500 RPM WOT shifts, and 3.08 gears. DIY eprom tuning on the EBL. > > The 5,500 lbs Van accelerating 0-90 with TBI. It has plenty of snap and pulls my 24 foot boat easily. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UEeZ5ruugWA&mode=related&search= > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PX5Av4pS1RA&mode=related&search= > > Its TBI > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-rApoA_BDc > > On a side note, to the man that switched to TPI along with the cam swap. The 12* @ .050 cam duration less made alot more difference than the TBI to TPI did. That is somewhere around 30 ft/lbs @ 1,500 rpm or so just from the cam. > Rick McLeod wrote: > and as I've said before, the 3 I am intamately familiar with will snap you head at low rpm romps, I'll take TPI around town any day, love my daily driver IROC! > > > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Beau Blankenship > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:13:09 AM > Subject: RE: [Gmecm] TPI vs TBI & others > > > snip'd... > > I would never trade the TPI for another TBI in my daily driver. > > snip'd From bpatten at centurytel.net Thu Aug 31 20:46:37 2006 From: bpatten at centurytel.net (Brendan Patten) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 20:46:37 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Modify $8D to work on MPFI 3.1L DIS engine In-Reply-To: <20060831015253.30789.qmail@web61012.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000201c6cd68$76bb0a20$6400a8c0@p42000> Okay, I want to run the ever popular $8D code on my 1990 Cavalier 3.1L I have been looking at the stock files for each and this is what I have found I am going from $88 code ATMF to $8D AUJP I think my main problem areas are the ignition control. The First thing I have done, is compared a $88 Cavalier to a $88 Camaro, both are 3.1L MPFI, but Camaro uses a distributor, cavalier is DIS ignition. This is what I have found different: Initial Spark Advance: F-Body = 9.8 Deg, Cavalier = 59.8 Deg Initial Time Out Spark Bias: F-Body = 0.0 Deg, Cavalier = 35.2 Deg Main Spark Advance Vs. MAP Vs. RPM The F-Body has up to 20 degrees more timing in 40kpa 1400 to 1800 rpm, and an average 12 degrees more timing from 20-55 kpa, 800 to 2800 rpm 80+ KPA areas are within 4 degrees on both vehicles. Is there a reason the spark is not cranked up more on the DIS engines? Or is added some other way on another table? Now the questions I have about going to $8D $8D has a constant: Maximum Spark Advance. - AUJP stock is 41.8 Deg, how does this value effect if I put Initial Spark Advance at 59.8 Deg????? There is no MAX SPARK ADVANCE on the $88 to compare it to. $8D does not have Initial Time Out Spark Bias, this seems to be something major different between the two $88 vehicles, but no setting to change on $8D If I knew better what Initial Time Out Spark Bias does and how it relates with Initial Spark Advance, I could learn how to go into the code and find what I need to change. Anyone know much about the DIS ignition control compared to distributor? Thanks... Brendan www.lt1swap.com From gary at garyandliz.com Thu Aug 31 21:15:41 2006 From: gary at garyandliz.com (Gary Evans) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 19:15:41 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] Modify $8D to work on MPFI 3.1L DIS engine In-Reply-To: <000201c6cd68$76bb0a20$6400a8c0@p42000> References: <000201c6cd68$76bb0a20$6400a8c0@p42000> Message-ID: <1272054b5f6f0cc63529c0dff225f022@garyandliz.com> On Aug 31, 2006, at 6:46 PM, Brendan Patten wrote: > Okay, I want to run the ever popular $8D code on my 1990 Cavalier 3.1L Ah, see this is where a forum format (or at least a search function!) would be immensely helpful. This subject was just covered in detail a while back and I spent the last 20 minutes looking all over the place for the relevant post. . Anyway, here it is in all its glory. I found it very enlightening and it answers a lot of your questions I think. If you get it working, let us know. I would like to do the same on my car but have not gotten around to trying it yet... Gary Evans 1977 Jaguar XJ12 > ============= > From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com > Subject: [Gmecm] converting dist and DIS > Date: February 23, 2006 6:05:31 PM PST > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Reply-To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > > I got a note from a former list member (Shannen Durphey) just today > regarding the difference in code between DIS and distributor. It > includes a bin for a 2.2L motor, which I've placed in the uploads > directory called 2pt2_dis.bin. Enjoy, > > --steve > > I've attached a calibration (2pt2_dis.bin) which I wonder if you'd be > kind enough to forward to the list ftp site, along with a general post > to the list. This calibration may be of interest to some. It's a $58 > calibration for a 1994 2.2 PFI turbo engine. The engine and most of > the > fuel system are stock. Pertinent details are DIS, T25 turbo (non > intercooled), 8psi, and (4) 55#/hr TBI injectors. Base fuel pressure > is > about 14 psi, with the injectors firing in quasi-asynchronous mode at > idle and under most light throttle conditions. The ecm has been > modified with (2) upgraded injector drivers to handle the additional > current requirements of the TBI injectors. The vehicle is driven daily > and has been for several years, making a few long trips including one > 1800 mile jaunt to the middle of the country and back. > It is, in short, reliable and consistent. > > I'm surprised that the question of DIS / distributor swaps hasn't been > answered by the gmecm list. I see from time to time people making > inquiries of varying depth as to the requirements to make it happen. > Although it took me years of work, I'd expect that someone else would > have determined the answer by now. Guess not. > > Anyone who has suspected the answer lies with the "reference angle" is > partly correct. This angle is usually from 0 to 10 degrees in a > distributor based calibration. DIS angles are 33 degrees for the > Buick v6 system, and 60 degrees for the more common 7 notch system > found > on many 4 and 6 cylinder engines. > > In order to deliver correct spark advance, the ecm must know at what > point, in crankshaft degrees, the reference pulse occurs. The total > timing is a combination of reference angle and additional delivered > angle. The additional angle is determined by subtraction: Desired > timing minus reference angle = delivered timing. Since the ecm cannot > measure crank position directly, it uses the # of cylinders constant, > the time between reference pulses, and the base angle to convert > additional degrees calculated above into a "wait time." In the end, > the > correct spark timing is delivered by counting off "wait time" > after the reference pulse. > > After the delivered timing is calculated, but before it's delivered to > the ignition hardware, it is tested to ensure it conforms to the > physical limitations of the ignition system it is intended for. Both > maximum and minimum advance values must conform to prevent accidental > ignition in the wrong cylinder. These limits are called out as > "maximum > spark advance relative to reference" and "maximum spark retard relative > to reference" in most disassemblies found on the 'net. > A check of a stock $58 calibration shows fairly typical 4 cylinder > distributor based limits: 60 degrees maximum advance and 3.52 degrees > maximum retard. > > From here we should sidestep to a discussion of just how the terms > "advance" and "retard" are understood by most readers. It seems fairly > apparent that the timing values above allow a range of 63.52 degrees. > This range, of course, is from maximum retard (less than zero, ATDC) to > maximum advance (more than zero, BTDC). But is this really correct? > Maybe the range is only 56.48 degrees, from +3.52 degrees to +60 > degrees. But if "maximum retarded spark" is positive, what ensures > that > "advanced spark" is also positive? Or maybe those limits are > interpreted completely wrong... maybe they mean "maximum retard at any > given time", in other words, maybe they represent the maximum change in > timing allowed at any given calculation??? After all, if timing was at > 60 degrees BTDC, and it's now at 56.48 degrees, isn't the new value > "retarded" from the previous? The final answer is that the creator of, > and definitely the reader of the disassembly might be better off to > call > these values "maximum timing value" and "minimum timing value" with no > reference to the condition of advance > or retard. With maximum timing of 60 deg and minimum timing of 3.52 > deg, the total range is 56.48 deg. > > Now back to the DIS conversion. Past attempts, at least those posted, > focused on changing the reference angle in th ecalibration to match the > ignition system in use. This typically resulted in a "locked" > timing value which was generally somewhere around 0 - 5 deg BTDC. > Let's look at why this happened. We'll pick an arbitrary desired > timing > value of 20 deg BTDC. As in a real example posted to this list, we'll > replace the distributor based reference angle of 6 degrees with a DIS > friendly 60 deg value. Here's the gist of what happens: > > Ecm performs magic and arrives at desired timing 20 deg BTDC. > > Desired timing - reference angle = delivered timing > 20deg - 60deg = -40deg > > Check ignition system limits: > Is -40 delivered timing greater than maximum allowed value of 60? > No: leave delivered timing alone > > Is -40 delivered less than mimium allowed value of 3.52? > yes: Set delivered timing to minimum allowed value of 3.52 > > Hmmm... So for any value of desired timing up to a ghastly 63.52 deg > BTDC, this calibration applies sanity checks and corrects the value to > a > positive 3.52 degrees. Timing is essentially "locked" and no amount of > MAP, RPM, temp, or TPS changes can dislodge it. Obviously we need to > use some limits more appropriate to the DIS ignition system. A simple > check of Rob Rauscher's extremely helpful $A1 disassembly shows a > maximum value of -9.9 deg and a minimum value of -70 deg. Be > warned: These are 16 bit 2's complement numbers. They appear in a > binary as $FFE4 and $FF39, respectively. > > There have been no additional changes necessary in the DIS swaps I'm > aware of. Some people have chosen different limits for their > calibrations. I'm using limits closer to the original distributor > based > values. Dwell calculations are left untouched as the DIS module > handles > dwell independently of the ECM. Timing tables do not have to be > reworked because of a DIS swap, although they will need to match the > needs of the engine they are applied to. > > And a final note: It is not desirable to offset a crank position > sensor > -60 deg to to allow an unmodified distributor calibration to be used > with the 7 notch DIS system. During cranking and at any time the 5V > bypass line is held low, ignition pulses are delivered to the coils 60 > deg. retarded from the reference pulse. These pulses will be delivered > 60 deg ATDC with an offset crank sensor. Starting will be extremely > difficult, requiring large amounts of fuel and quite possibly > backfiring > severely through the exhaust. There is no need to alter the original > relationship between the crank sensor and notch position to convert > between DIS and distributor calibrations. > > Have fun. > > Shannen > > -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments > are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the > intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not > disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or > store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > =========== From jay at vessels-clan.com Thu Aug 31 21:19:26 2006 From: jay at vessels-clan.com (Jay Vessels) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 22:19:26 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Modify $8D to work on MPFI 3.1L DIS engine In-Reply-To: <000201c6cd68$76bb0a20$6400a8c0@p42000> References: <000201c6cd68$76bb0a20$6400a8c0@p42000> Message-ID: <44F798AE.5040607@vessels-clan.com> Hi there! Brendan Patten wrote: > Okay, I want to run the ever popular $8D code on my 1990 Cavalier 3.1L A quick note -- the $A1 code ('91-'94 3.1V6 VIN T) would be an easier choice, and I suspect almost a drop-in. The biggest changes I can think of would be to EGR type and VSS type/calibration. There is support out there for that mask, too. Just trying to save you some work. > This is what I have found different: > > Initial Spark Advance: > F-Body = 9.8 Deg, Cavalier = 59.8 Deg > > Initial Time Out Spark Bias: > F-Body = 0.0 Deg, Cavalier = 35.2 Deg Yup, that sounds about right. Look to recent posts by Shannen talking about what changes between a distributor and a DIS system, but if I remember correctly the biggest changes are to the initial spark advance and the bounds checks. Shannen's post was much more thorough. > If I knew better what Initial Time Out Spark Bias does and how it > relates with Initial Spark Advance, I could learn how to go into the > code and find what I need to change. Your answers may be in the $A1 code. Search for 727_730_A1.pdf or something very similar to that on incoming. BFUZ is the latest $A1/manual trans/Federal code for the '94 Z24 and would probably contain answers to your DIS parameter questions. Jay Vessels 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI pending) From rgmecm at yahoo.com Thu Aug 31 21:26:13 2006 From: rgmecm at yahoo.com (Ryan Hess) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 19:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Modify $8D to work on MPFI 3.1L DIS engine In-Reply-To: <000201c6cd68$76bb0a20$6400a8c0@p42000> Message-ID: <20060901022613.58897.qmail@web35906.mail.mud.yahoo.com> The obvious question to ask, is why? Seems like a lot of work for nothing to gain... Are you trying to find more tuning support or something? I'd suggest asking your questions at 60degreev6.com if so... To answer some of your questions, there are values in there that you need to change that you do not have. Or maybe you called them different things, I'm not entirely sure. The spark reference angle will need to be changed. This is basically a reference to where TDC is compared to your reference signal. The min/max spark advance are features your DIS brick set. I think there's some others, but I forget. It would be best to copy the fueling and timing tables over... Ryan Brendan Patten wrote: Okay, I want to run the ever popular $8D code on my 1990 Cavalier 3.1L I have been looking at the stock files for each and this is what I have found I am going from $88 code ATMF to $8D AUJP I think my main problem areas are the ignition control. The First thing I have done, is compared a $88 Cavalier to a $88 Camaro, both are 3.1L MPFI, but Camaro uses a distributor, cavalier is DIS ignition. This is what I have found different: Initial Spark Advance: F-Body = 9.8 Deg, Cavalier = 59.8 Deg Initial Time Out Spark Bias: F-Body = 0.0 Deg, Cavalier = 35.2 Deg Main Spark Advance Vs. MAP Vs. RPM The F-Body has up to 20 degrees more timing in 40kpa 1400 to 1800 rpm, and an average 12 degrees more timing from 20-55 kpa, 800 to 2800 rpm 80+ KPA areas are within 4 degrees on both vehicles. Is there a reason the spark is not cranked up more on the DIS engines? Or is added some other way on another table? Now the questions I have about going to $8D $8D has a constant: Maximum Spark Advance. - AUJP stock is 41.8 Deg, how does this value effect if I put Initial Spark Advance at 59.8 Deg????? There is no MAX SPARK ADVANCE on the $88 to compare it to. $8D does not have Initial Time Out Spark Bias, this seems to be something major different between the two $88 vehicles, but no setting to change on $8D If I knew better what Initial Time Out Spark Bias does and how it relates with Initial Spark Advance, I could learn how to go into the code and find what I need to change. Anyone know much about the DIS ignition control compared to distributor? Thanks... Brendan www.lt1swap.com _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm --------------------------------- Get your email and more, right on the new Yahoo.com From bpatten at centurytel.net Thu Aug 31 22:08:49 2006 From: bpatten at centurytel.net (Brendan Patten) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 22:08:49 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Modify $8D to work on MPFI 3.1L DIS engine In-Reply-To: <44F798AE.5040607@vessels-clan.com> Message-ID: <000301c6cd73$f5a51e10$6400a8c0@p42000> I actually have already done A1 for support on FREE Scan Mostly I just want to do it to see if I can and to learn the differences in the ignitions. I already have TTS Datamaster for $8D, would be nice to not have to buy another one - say for turbo grand prix would be an easy route. Turbo are my eventual plans...if I can get $8D to work, $58 would be very close. -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Jay Vessels Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:19 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Modify $8D to work on MPFI 3.1L DIS engine Hi there! Brendan Patten wrote: > Okay, I want to run the ever popular $8D code on my 1990 Cavalier 3.1L A quick note -- the $A1 code ('91-'94 3.1V6 VIN T) would be an easier choice, and I suspect almost a drop-in. The biggest changes I can think of would be to EGR type and VSS type/calibration. There is support out there for that mask, too. Just trying to save you some work. > This is what I have found different: > > Initial Spark Advance: > F-Body = 9.8 Deg, Cavalier = 59.8 Deg > > Initial Time Out Spark Bias: > F-Body = 0.0 Deg, Cavalier = 35.2 Deg Yup, that sounds about right. Look to recent posts by Shannen talking about what changes between a distributor and a DIS system, but if I remember correctly the biggest changes are to the initial spark advance and the bounds checks. Shannen's post was much more thorough. > If I knew better what Initial Time Out Spark Bias does and how it > relates with Initial Spark Advance, I could learn how to go into the > code and find what I need to change. Your answers may be in the $A1 code. Search for 727_730_A1.pdf or something very similar to that on incoming. BFUZ is the latest $A1/manual trans/Federal code for the '94 Z24 and would probably contain answers to your DIS parameter questions. 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 Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm From bpatten at centurytel.net Thu Aug 31 23:42:10 2006 From: bpatten at centurytel.net (Brendan Patten) Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 23:42:10 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Modify $8D to work on MPFI 3.1L DIS engine - It RUNS In-Reply-To: <000301c6cd73$f5a51e10$6400a8c0@p42000> Message-ID: <000401c6cd80$ffd25440$6400a8c0@p42000> Okay, I did a little work to my $8D bin. I found this from a 8D Disassembly: L8025: FCB 17 ; INITIAL SPARK ADV, 6 DEG L8026: FDB 0119 ; 39 DEG (MAX SA ADDED TO INITIAL) L8028: FDB FFF5 ; 65525 (MAX SA RETARDED FOR KNOCK) 3.5 DEG AT 8025 I put in AA 59.8 AT 8026 I put in FFE4 -10 AT 8028 I put in FF39 -70 It started up and ran, now it did throw a cod 51 eprom error, would this set limp home and bypass my program and rely on the netres? May try again, not sure checksum was right when I burned. Its late, I'll play with this more tomorrow, thanks for the feedback, I think I'll have this figured out soon. -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behal