[Gmecm] Re: Early and Late DIS compatibility (was: ECM Choice: Sequential V6...)

Wed Sep 13 19:54:55 UTC 2006

http://www.t6p.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3482

Bruce did a write up..  Bob

--- Scott Pearson <mrcad472 at iowatelecom.net> wrote:

> The later DIS on the 3800 (88-up) has 3x and 18x
> crank sensors. You'd have 
> to upgrade the crank sensor to use the later (aka
> 'quick start') DIS module.
> 
> Bruce Plecan has this on his GN.
> 
> Scott
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "William Lucke"
> <william.lucke at highspeedlink.net>
> To: <gmecm at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 6:13 PM
> Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Early and Late DIS
> compatibility (was: ECM Choice: 
> Sequential V6...)
> 
> 
> > Ok, from the Turbo Buick forum, I learned that the
> Turbo Buick ECM is the 
> > 1227148 and that the turbo version uses $T31 code
> which is available from 
> > Tunercat.
> >
> > How compatible are the signals of the early and
> late DIS between ignition 
> > module and ECM? What resources are there for
> timing diagrams and 
> > explanations of the early system?
> > What kind of cam sensor does the 7148 expect? What
> kind of cam sensor does 
> > the 3100 have?
> >
> > How easy/hard is the $T31 code to work with?
> >
> >
> > Will
> >
> >
> >> From: William Lucke
> <william.lucke at highspeedlink.net>
> >> Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ECM Choice: Sequential V6,
> hydraulic transmission
> >> with lockup convertor
> >>
> >> A 6000 is a larger, heavier car than Cavlier, is
> all wheel drive and this 
> >> particular one is running reasonably sticky 245
> tires on the front (205's 
> >> on back) that already cost me 1.5-2 mpg compared
> to cheap 195's all 
> >> around.
> >>
> >> If I can hit 25 mpg with the chain ratio change
> (24 is more likely), the 
> >> best that a 16.5 AFR could theoretically do for
> me is 28 mpg. I won't see 
> >> that because the real world isn't theoretical
> ideal (the real world has 
> >> hills that will cause me to get into PE and
> convertor unlock with a 2.39 
> >> final drive).
> >>
> >> As I said before, I can do better than I am, but
> if sequential is worth 
> >> anything at all, I want it. Since my engine will
> come with sequential 
> >> sensors & wiring, actually running that way
> sounds as simple as picking 
> >> the right computer. Would a turbo Buick unit
> accomplish this?
> >>
> >> A '93 Z24 has the TH125? WTF?
> >>
> >> The shutter wheel in the opti-spark distributor
> used on the LT1's is 
> >> quite 8 cylinder specific. I can see code that
> interprets that signal 
> >> being difficult to convert to 6 cylinder
> operation.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Will
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> From: Jay Vessels <jay at vessels-clan.com>
> >>> Subject: Re: [Gmecm] ECM Choice: Sequential V6,
> hydraulic
> >>> transmission, with lockup convertor
> >>>
> >>> Hi there!
> >>>
> >>> Production 3.1V6 Cavalier had either the THM125
> or the Getrag 282 
> >>> 5-speed manual.
> >>>
> >>> Comparing fuel economy numbers across cars and
> drivers is almost 
> >>> impossible, but considering the mileage I got
> from my '94 Z24 
> >>> convertible ($A1/5-speed) and what Dad gets from
> his '93 Z24 convertible 
> >>> ($A1/auto), I will second the notion that decent
> fuel economy (30 MPG 
> >>> highway) can be had from multiport systems.  I'd
> recommend tuning with a 
> >>> wideband O2 sensor, regardless of system, to
> maximize the benefit of 
> >>> whatever system you choose.
> >>>
> >>> As an aside, has anyone used LT1 ('8051) code
> for a non-V8?  Is there a 
> >>> V6 or 4-cylinder version that is as flexible?
> >>>
> >>> Jay Vessels
> >>> 1982 Chevrolet S-10 Sport, 2.8V6 TBI
> >>> 1984 Chevrolet S-10 Blazer Sport, 2.8V6 (TBI
> pending)
> >>>
> >>> William Lucke wrote:
> >>>> I assume that your Cavalier has a 4 speed
> transmission? Do you have 
> >>>> functioning EGR?
> >>>> I'm stuck with a 3 speed AWD that currently
> gets 22 hwy/19 city. 
> >>>> Gearing changes might push me to 24-25. If
> sequential is worth 0.5 mpg, 
> >>>> I want it.
> >>>> I also think the 3100 is a fundamentally
> better/more efficient engine 
> >>>> than the 3.1. With the roller cam and better
> heads/intake, it's 
> >>>> certainly more responsive to boost.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Will
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> From: "Brendan Patten" <bpatten at centurytel.net>
> >>>> Subject: RE: [Gmecm] ECM Choice: Sequential V6,
>    hydraulic 
> >>>> transmission
> >>>>     with lockup convertor
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm getting over 30mph highway with my 3.1L $A1
> Cavalier.  Highway mode
> >>>> fuel AFR 16.5:1 and a bunch of timing added.
> (still no knock)
> >>>>
> >>>> I'm trying to convert to $8D mask on my 3.1L
> right now for more BLM
> >>>> cells. But no sequential.
> >>>>
> >>>> There was also the Turbo Grand Pri in 1989 with
> a 3.1L, $8F mask.  Not
> >>>> sure of how many blm cells there
> >>>>
> >>>> $58 mask could be adopted to a DIS engine,
> you'll get 16 cells and
> >>>> boost, still no sequential.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 