[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Snap On Scan Tool



I think you mis-understood. The cartridge "cases" were replaced,
cable "connectors" were replaced. Still using em for experiments.
Scan tool itself remained unchanged.
Lyndon.
-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Piccioni <piccioni@cadvision.com>
To: 'gmecm@efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu' <gmecm@efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu>
Date: January 13, 2000 11:06 PM
Subject: RE: Snap On Scan Tool


>Any chance you would part with a case & cable ?
>
>/marc
>
>----------
>From: Programmer[SMTP:nwester@eidnet.org]
>Sent: January 5, 1980 7:22 PM
>To: gmecm@efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu
>Subject: Re: Snap On Scan Tool
>
>I don't know guys--something is goofy here. I've got the old Mt2500,
>non backlit, and I've got OBD2 stuff I do all the time. I've got the 99
>cartridge coming this month, too--and have been using the 98 since it came
>out.
>
>I do know that the boards that the chips came with in 1997 (or was it '96?
>Could have even been earlier) were different--we changed boards and chips.
I
>still have the old cases and ALDL connectors that changed with the
>upgrade--which was included at no additional cost.
>
>Lyndon.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Walter Sherwin <wsherwin@idirect.com>
>To: gmecm@efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu <gmecm@efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu>
>Date: January 12, 2000 4:32 PM
>Subject: Re: Snap On Scan Tool
>
>
>>
>>
>>>I have the same scantool from Snap-On that does not have the backlight.
>To
>>>update mine from 91 to '99 w/ OBD2 adapters was about $200.  All it was
is
>>>a single module that contains GM, Ford and Chrysler in the same
cartridge.
>>>
>>>L8r
>>>TM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Is there a particular phone number that a person can call, or an
individual
>>that you can recommend,  for such a conversion?    I have a '93 MT2500 &
>'93
>>combo cartridge.  When I wanted to upgraded mine to gain OBDII
>compatability
>>I was told by my Snap-Off rep that I had to exchange my complete unit for
a
>>backlit version at a cost of several times what you have mentioned above?
>>
>>Walt.
>>
>
>
>
>
>