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

Re: P&H Injector Interface/Accel VIC



Now I know you guys are more the do-it-yourself types, that's great and this
device does have a price, but is an immediate option for those more in a
hurry.  Accel offers a device that attaches to your ECM that not only allows
running P&H squirters but also allows single injector tuning (SFI like but
better?).  The item is a VIC (variable injector controller) and here is the
data:

ACCEL INTRODUCES VARIABLE INJECTOR CONTROLLER (VIC) ACCEL now offers an
option for existing DFI systems (read on before you guys blast me, it works
on GM ECMs too!) that allows individual cylinder fuel control, and the
ability to use high flow, low impedance injectors with the standard DFI
batch fire ECU.

The Variable Injector Controller (VIC), will also work with the following
ECU's:
. 1991 or earlier GM batch fire ECU
. 1993 or earlier Ford Batch Fire ECU
. Haltech Batch fire
. Motec batch fire
The Variable Injector Controller (VIC) is sold complete with a plug in
harness for use with DFI batch fire ECU's, and allows individual cylinder
fuel to be trimmed by up to 25% by adjusting one of the eight injector
control knobs mounted on the module. No need for a laptop computer for
tuning individual cylinder fuel trim. Variable injector controller (VIC)
74070

Runs around $400 I think, if the price does not bother you, or you just need
it, then price it out from your local supplier.

Here is the link for those who gotta see a pic:
http://www.mrgasket.com/dfinew.htm

Jeff M



> On Fri, 19 May 2000 14:39:24 -0400, Len sabatine <sabatine@epix.net>
> wrote:
>
> > This sounds like some very useful work ; cost effective and painless
> >  upgrading for retrofit projects. Add to that your not contemplating
> >  wearing a gun belt and mask for these relatively low cost items. Cool.
>
> Alright, thank you for the comment.
>
> Here's something more to contemplate on the topic. The "jumper" method
> is just one way to deal with getting the P&H drivers in-circuit. There
> be substantial tradeoffs.
>
> Injector drivers, even P&H ones, have to dissipate some modest amount of
> heat. The connectors for the Sat injectors usually are a pretty good run
> of harness out from the ECU box to the engine top. So the "jumper"
> method would want to have the modules near the injectors, so you didn't
> create a much longer run by connecting the original connectors to a box
> somewhere on the firewall, and then back up/out to the injectors again.
> That's gonna require that the interface module have some robust heat
> transfer capacity.
>
> BUT, let's face it, anyone doing this with an OEM controller (switching
> to P&H injectors, that is), is probly capable of putting a splice in the
> harness after the injector wires exit the ECU, going over to the
> injector interface module, and then hooking up the existing injector
> wires to the output of the module. Then, you don't need the "jumper" nor
> the special connectors, plus the interface now lives inside the cabin
> somewhere, and therefore needs somewhat less cooling wherewithal, and
> needn't be hermetic.
>
> If we took the "jumper" approach, and the modules would hafta have some
> clunky fins and live atop the engine, would that make you want to opt
> instead for the perhaps less convenient but cleaner method of splicing
> into the existing wire near the ECU instead? Makes the packaging/thermal
> design considerably easier/smaller, and avoids the special connectors,
> but isn't quite as slam-dunk convenient as plugNplay.
>
> What say ye, gentlemen? Which passes muster in the sanity check?
>
> Gar






----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without the quotes)
in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org