From boucherj at prodigy.net  Fri Sep  1 04:25:33 2006
From: boucherj at prodigy.net (Joe Boucher)
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 04:25:33 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Under hood GM TBI ECM's
In-Reply-To: <NFBBKNMKMLDGMHGMDNEIMEFACIAA.gpbeau@cox.net>
Message-ID: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDKEGPELAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>

Did GM ever put an under the hood TBI ECM in a pre-96 V-8 truck?

Don't remember ever hearing of one.

Joe B.


From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Fri Sep  1 09:05:56 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2006 09:05:56 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] search engine for lists
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F02D@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

for members of the DIY list, see below for a link to the archive search
engine. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org 
> [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Gary Evans
> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:16 PM
> To: gmecm at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Modify $8D to work on MPFI 3.1L DIS engine
> 
> 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
> 
> <rant> 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. </rant>.

Sorry, I've dropped the ball on this several times now.  There has been
a search engine for some time, and while the link has been posted a few
times I never put a link on the WWW page.  It's there now, if you go to
the diy_efi or gmecm pages and click "Browse/search the article
archives" you'll get there.

I don't think it's indexing automatically yet, so it doesn't have
Shannen's post below, but I'm checking into that.

--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 spyro at f2s.com  Fri Sep  1 18:41:46 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2006 00:41:46 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301240716@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301240716@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <44F8C53A.2010704@f2s.com>

Steve Ravet wrote:

> Diesel engines have their place towing/hauling, but not in making the
> air any cleaner.  I don't understand how diesel has an image of being
> environmentally friendly.  "Dr. Z" may claim that the Liberty is the
> cleanest diesel ever, but in fact it's dirtier than the jetta.

The 1.0 litre 3 cylinder turbo diesel in my charade kicks out a (very!) 
respectable _real world_ 65MPG on the motorway and 55MPG around town. 
And thats on my somewhat worn out example. When new it did over 75MPG on 
the motorway. It can even make a respectable showing 'off the line' 
since it weighs only 650kg and has a really low ration 1st gear. (ok, so 
after 20MPH most other cars beat it but thats not the point :))

It was the first production diesel car to break 100MPG (30MPH in 5th gear).

If you've found a 1.9 litre diesel with worse emissions than an 8 litre 
petrol engine, I would respectfully suggest that you might have chosen a 
spectacularly crappy example of a diesel engine...


From WSCowell at aol.com  Sat Sep  2 01:37:43 2006
From: WSCowell at aol.com (WSCowell at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 02:37:43 EDT
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
Message-ID: <2d2.d9399cc.322a80b7@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 02/09/2006 00:46:42 GMT Standard Time, spyro at f2s.com  
writes:

If  you've found a 1.9 litre diesel with worse emissions than an 8 litre  
petrol engine, I would respectfully suggest that you might have chosen a  
spectacularly crappy example of a diesel  engine...



Good point there, **plus**:
 
Bio diesel is cheaper than diesel from petroleum, lubricates the engine and  
injection pump better and kicks out greatly reduced emissions of all the nasty 
 stuff:  NOx, S, CO and the harmful carcinogens and particulates.  The  best 
thing is it is totally carbon-neutral - it only puts back into the  atmosphere 
the carbon the plant took out in the first place.  Performance  is totally 
unaffected.
 
So a decently set-up turbo diesel is good news all round.  Let's not  forget 
what JCB achieved just last week at Bonneville (British - hooray!) and  Audi 
at Le Mans either.
 
Poor performance from a diesel?  Wake up and smell the  coffee!


From liberty1 at gmail.com  Sat Sep  2 07:05:53 2006
From: liberty1 at gmail.com (Bobby Yates Emory)
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 08:05:53 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <2d2.d9399cc.322a80b7@aol.com>
References: <2d2.d9399cc.322a80b7@aol.com>
Message-ID: <54b6188b0609020505te9d9d5jc47167f16a414879@mail.gmail.com>

WS,

Most of what you said about pollutants is true, but I thought I remembered
that NOx was slightly worse with SVO and bio-diesel.  Is there some new
research?

Bobby

On 9/2/06, WSCowell at aol.com <WSCowell at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> In a message dated 02/09/2006 00:46:42 GMT Standard Time, spyro at f2s.com
> writes:
>
> If  you've found a 1.9 litre diesel with worse emissions than an 8 litre
> petrol engine, I would respectfully suggest that you might have chosen a
> spectacularly crappy example of a diesel  engine...
>
>
>
> Good point there, **plus**:
>
> Bio diesel is cheaper than diesel from petroleum, lubricates the engine
> and
> injection pump better and kicks out greatly reduced emissions of all the
> nasty
> stuff:  NOx, S, CO and the harmful carcinogens and
> particulates.  The  best
> thing is it is totally carbon-neutral - it only puts back into
> the  atmosphere
> the carbon the plant took out in the first place.  Performance  is totally
> unaffected.
>
> So a decently set-up turbo diesel is good news all round.  Let's
> not  forget
> what JCB achieved just last week at Bonneville (British - hooray!)
> and  Audi
> at Le Mans either.
>
> Poor performance from a diesel?  Wake up and smell the  coffee!
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Toward freedom,

Bobby Yates Emory


From WSCowell at aol.com  Sat Sep  2 12:14:36 2006
From: WSCowell at aol.com (WSCowell at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 13:14:36 EDT
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
Message-ID: <495.8646e45.322b15fc@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 02/09/2006 13:06:37 GMT Standard Time,  liberty1 at gmail.com 
writes:

Most of  what you said about pollutants is true, but I thought I remembered
that NOx  was slightly worse with SVO and bio-diesel.  Is there some  new
research?



Bobby,
 
I don't know what you have seen, and I am going on information from sites  
which look as if they have researched thoroughly.  NOx depends on  combustion 
temperature I believe,  it is hard to imagine combustion temp  going up with 
either SVO or even B100.  Perhaps someone out there can quote  actual comparative 
figures between diesel #1 & #2?
 
Will


From spyro at f2s.com  Sat Sep  2 13:32:31 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2006 19:32:31 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <2d2.d9399cc.322a80b7@aol.com>
References: <2d2.d9399cc.322a80b7@aol.com>
Message-ID: <44F9CE3F.3030206@f2s.com>

WSCowell at aol.com wrote:
>  
> Bio diesel is cheaper than diesel from petroleum, lubricates the engine and  
> injection pump better and kicks out greatly reduced emissions of all the nasty 
>  stuff:  NOx, S, CO and the harmful carcinogens and particulates.  The  best 
> thing is it is totally carbon-neutral - it only puts back into the  atmosphere 
> the carbon the plant took out in the first place.  Performance  is totally 
> unaffected.

I was under the impression that biodiesel caused issues for some IPs? 
too thick to pump or something? Either way I'd like your source on that 
as it sounds like you're pretty clued up on biodiesel and I'd like to 
know more.

> Poor performance from a diesel?  Wake up and smell the  coffee!

Absolutely!  (btw, my last mileage figure as of today... 68.1MPG over 
the last 200 miles :-)) now if I could just work out why its smoking 
when its working hard, I'd be sorted (bet its burnt injectors)


From WSCowell at aol.com  Sat Sep  2 14:02:26 2006
From: WSCowell at aol.com (WSCowell at aol.com)
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 15:02:26 EDT
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
Message-ID: <388.a970631.322b2f42@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 02/09/2006 19:40:11 GMT Standard Time, spyro at f2s.com  
writes:

I was  under the impression that biodiesel caused issues for some IPs? 
too thick  to pump or something? Either way I'd like your source on that 
as it sounds  like you're pretty clued up on biodiesel and I'd like to 
know  more.



Well, I'd say I was an enthusiastic beginner actually.  I've been  
researching this topic carefully on the internet, doing searches all over, but  these 
are some of the sites I have found helpful:
 
_http://www.utahbiodieselsupply.com_ (http://www.utahbiodieselsupply.com) 
 
_http://biodiesel.infopop.cc/eve_ (http://biodiesel.infopop.cc/eve) 
 
_http://www.dancingrabbit.org/biodiesel/_ 
(http://www.dancingrabbit.org/biodiesel/) 
 
_http://www.biodieselcommunity.org/_ (http://www.biodieselcommunity.org/) 
 
and, if you speak or understand German, the following are a particularly  
clued-up bunch of people with many years' experience:
 
_http://www.fmpo.de_ (http://www.fmpo.de) 
 
Straight vegetable oil (SVO) is too thick to go through pumps and filters  
etc as it comes.  Its viscosity is too high.  But heating it, whether  in the 
tank, in the fuel lines, or under the hood in a heated filter casing  and/or 
flat plate heat exchanger (preferably a combination of tese measures), it  is 
then apparently useable without ill effects.  That is, provided you  don't mind 
your exhaust smelling faintly like a McDonald's outlet.  
 
The key thing apparently is to get the temperature up above about  75F.  But 
you MUST flush the fuel lines, filters, injection pump etc  out with diesel 
before shutting down, otherwise you will be trying to  start from cold next time 
on vege oil instead of diesel with the inevitable  disasters.  For this 
reason, SVO conversion kits come with temp-related  interlocks and warning buzzers 
etc.
 
Biodiesel has the same viscosity as petro-diesel and is therefore  
interchangeable with it BUT it "freezes" (e.g. the so-called "cloud point" where  it 
goes cloudy, thick etc) around 32F whereas petro-diesel has a much lower  cloud 
point.
 
For this reason, biodiesel used in cold weather should be "cut" with  
petro-diesel, kerosene, gasoline or similar fuels.  Various groups  report their own 
particular brews and results obtained.  I plan to make and  use biodiesel, 
from waste veg oil (WVO) rather than buy and use SVO.
 
Emissions:  US EPA paper EPA420-P-02-001 (October 2002) concludes  linear 
increases in NOx up to +10% max for 100% biodiesel, less pro-rata  depending on 
the blend.  All other pollutants appear to be markedly  reduced.  These results 
were obtained from a detailed analysis of  heavy-duty diesel engines, not 
fitted with catalytic converters.  Cats  would deal with the NOx I reckon.  There 
does not seem to be a comparable  analysis on the effects of biodiesel in 
light-duty (e.g. car) engines btw.
 
That's all I know so far, but it has lit my fuse I can tell you.   Happy 
Googling!
 
ATB,  Will
 
 


From torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu  Sat Sep  2 16:01:23 2006
From: torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torbj=F6rn_Forsman?=)
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2006 23:01:23 +0200
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <44F9CE3F.3030206@f2s.com>
References: <2d2.d9399cc.322a80b7@aol.com> <44F9CE3F.3030206@f2s.com>
Message-ID: <44F9F123.9020803@gengas.nu>

There are a lot of different fluids that are called biodiesel today. 
Some of them, those produced in a Fischer-Tropsch process, are almost 
100 % equivalent to ordinary petroleum-based diesel fuel. Such biodiesel 
can be used in any diesel engine without modifications or problems.

Another flavor is the RME and similar fuels. This is vegetable oils 
which have been chemically modified "estherized". Top quality RME works 
perfectly in most diesel engines but is said that it might cause higher 
NOx emissions than petroleum based diesel, at least in modern engines 
that are optimized for low emissions. It is also said to deteriorate 
some plastic and rubber materials, but this seems not to be a large 
problem. For example, Volkswagen permits use of RME in all their diesel 
cars from about 2001 on.
Some people have problems with "home made" RME which may be corrosive or 
  dirty.

And last, we have unmodified vegetable oils. This is not a good diesel 
fuel, it often causes cold start problems and may give coke build-up 
around the injectors. But many diesel cars run well on a mixture of 50 % 
vegetable oil and 50 % petroleum based fuel.

Best regards

Torbj?rn Forsman


Ian Molton wrote:
> WSCowell at aol.com wrote:
> 
>>  
>> Bio diesel is cheaper than diesel from petroleum, lubricates the 
>> engine and  injection pump better and kicks out greatly reduced 
>> emissions of all the nasty  stuff:  NOx, S, CO and the harmful 
>> carcinogens and particulates.  The  best thing is it is totally 
>> carbon-neutral - it only puts back into the  atmosphere the carbon the 
>> plant took out in the first place.  Performance  is totally unaffected.
> 
> 
> I was under the impression that biodiesel caused issues for some IPs? 
> too thick to pump or something? Either way I'd like your source on that 
> as it sounds like you're pretty clued up on biodiesel and I'd like to 
> know more.
> 
>> Poor performance from a diesel?  Wake up and smell the  coffee!
> 
> 
> Absolutely!  (btw, my last mileage figure as of today... 68.1MPG over 
> the last 200 miles :-)) now if I could just work out why its smoking 
> when its working hard, I'd be sorted (bet its burnt injectors)
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 



From liberty1 at gmail.com  Sat Sep  2 16:54:00 2006
From: liberty1 at gmail.com (Bobby Yates Emory)
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 17:54:00 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <44F9F123.9020803@gengas.nu>
References: <2d2.d9399cc.322a80b7@aol.com> <44F9CE3F.3030206@f2s.com>
	<44F9F123.9020803@gengas.nu>
Message-ID: <54b6188b0609021454p58ab3bfdw11cf477c3203a4fd@mail.gmail.com>

Torgjorn,

(sorry about the second O)

I agree with most of what you say, but there have been many reports of
problems with blends.  (The last thing I read implied they had discovered
what caused the problem, but I have not seen confirmation.)

If SVO or WVO is used in a properly revised car, it can work well.  If you
were referring to an unmodified car, you are correct, there can be extreme
problems.  If you are interested in learning more, Elsbett in Germany is the
class act (many others have workable systems.)

Bobby

On 9/2/06, Torbj?rn Forsman <torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu> wrote:
>
> There are a lot of different fluids that are called biodiesel today.
> Some of them, those produced in a Fischer-Tropsch process, are almost
> 100 % equivalent to ordinary petroleum-based diesel fuel. Such biodiesel
> can be used in any diesel engine without modifications or problems.
>
> Another flavor is the RME and similar fuels. This is vegetable oils
> which have been chemically modified "estherized". Top quality RME works
> perfectly in most diesel engines but is said that it might cause higher
> NOx emissions than petroleum based diesel, at least in modern engines
> that are optimized for low emissions. It is also said to deteriorate
> some plastic and rubber materials, but this seems not to be a large
> problem. For example, Volkswagen permits use of RME in all their diesel
> cars from about 2001 on.
> Some people have problems with "home made" RME which may be corrosive or
>   dirty.
>
> And last, we have unmodified vegetable oils. This is not a good diesel
> fuel, it often causes cold start problems and may give coke build-up
> around the injectors. But many diesel cars run well on a mixture of 50 %
> vegetable oil and 50 % petroleum based fuel.
>
> Best regards
>
> Torbj?rn Forsman
>
>
> Ian Molton wrote:
> > WSCowell at aol.com wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Bio diesel is cheaper than diesel from petroleum, lubricates the
> >> engine and  injection pump better and kicks out greatly reduced
> >> emissions of all the nasty  stuff:  NOx, S, CO and the harmful
> >> carcinogens and particulates.  The  best thing is it is totally
> >> carbon-neutral - it only puts back into the  atmosphere the carbon the
> >> plant took out in the first place.  Performance  is totally unaffected.
> >
> >
> > I was under the impression that biodiesel caused issues for some IPs?
> > too thick to pump or something? Either way I'd like your source on that
> > as it sounds like you're pretty clued up on biodiesel and I'd like to
> > know more.
> >
> >> Poor performance from a diesel?  Wake up and smell the  coffee!
> >
> >
> > Absolutely!  (btw, my last mileage figure as of today... 68.1MPG over
> > the last 200 miles :-)) now if I could just work out why its smoking
> > when its working hard, I'd be sorted (bet its burnt injectors)
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Toward freedom,

Bobby Yates Emory


From clair.davis at charter.net  Sat Sep  2 22:33:30 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 22:33:30 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
References: <20060902233906.61212.qmail@web54614.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001001c6cf09$ba5f4960$6501a8c0@davis>

OK, I'm THIS >< CLOSE to firing up my 2-year EFI conversion on my 69
Plymouth Valiant.  I'm using a 7730 ECM, and I've got 99.44% of the wiring
done now, so probably over the next couple of days, I'll be asking some
seemingly goofy questions.

The first, I'll keep simple... does the air temp sensor care where it's
mounted?  Currently, I've got it mounted in the air cleaner assembly I'm
using, a reproduction of the old Mopar "unsilenced" air cleaner that you put
the engine callout plate on back in the day.  Basically, I drilled a hole in
the air cleaner base and mounted the sensor with a short piece of heater
hose.  It's a very tight fit, so the sensor is not about to come out of
place, and there won't be any unfiltered air leaks at this location.
However, I just "re-discovered" a hole in the back of my intake manifold
that might be the right size for the air temp sensor.

Is one of these locations superior to the other from a functionality
standpoint?  It's nothing to plug the hole in the intake, but it might
provide a tidier install and allow me to remove the air cleaner without
having to remember it's hard-wired to the car...

Any advice greatly appreciated,

Clair
FTWTX




From liberty1 at gmail.com  Sun Sep  3 00:03:48 2006
From: liberty1 at gmail.com (Bobby Yates Emory)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 01:03:48 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <54b6188b0609021454p58ab3bfdw11cf477c3203a4fd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2d2.d9399cc.322a80b7@aol.com> <44F9CE3F.3030206@f2s.com>
	<44F9F123.9020803@gengas.nu>
	<54b6188b0609021454p58ab3bfdw11cf477c3203a4fd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54b6188b0609022203s23908015j25cb7324b63756e2@mail.gmail.com>

The URL for Elsbett is:

http://www.elsbett.com/

Then you pick your language.

Bobby

On 9/2/06, Bobby Yates Emory <liberty1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Torgjorn,
>
> (sorry about the second O)
>
> I agree with most of what you say, but there have been many reports of
> problems with blends.  (The last thing I read implied they had discovered
> what caused the problem, but I have not seen confirmation.)
>
> If SVO or WVO is used in a properly revised car, it can work well.  If you
> were referring to an unmodified car, you are correct, there can be extreme
> problems.  If you are interested in learning more, Elsbett in Germany is the
> class act (many others have workable systems.)
>
> Bobby
>
>
> On 9/2/06, Torbj?rn Forsman <torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu> wrote:
> >
> > There are a lot of different fluids that are called biodiesel today.
> > Some of them, those produced in a Fischer-Tropsch process, are almost
> > 100 % equivalent to ordinary petroleum-based diesel fuel. Such biodiesel
> > can be used in any diesel engine without modifications or problems.
> >
> > Another flavor is the RME and similar fuels. This is vegetable oils
> > which have been chemically modified "estherized". Top quality RME works
> > perfectly in most diesel engines but is said that it might cause higher
> > NOx emissions than petroleum based diesel, at least in modern engines
> > that are optimized for low emissions. It is also said to deteriorate
> > some plastic and rubber materials, but this seems not to be a large
> > problem. For example, Volkswagen permits use of RME in all their diesel
> > cars from about 2001 on.
> > Some people have problems with "home made" RME which may be corrosive or
> >
> >   dirty.
> >
> > And last, we have unmodified vegetable oils. This is not a good diesel
> > fuel, it often causes cold start problems and may give coke build-up
> > around the injectors. But many diesel cars run well on a mixture of 50 %
> >
> > vegetable oil and 50 % petroleum based fuel.
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Torbj?rn Forsman
> >
> >
> > Ian Molton wrote:
> > > WSCowell at aol.com wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Bio diesel is cheaper than diesel from petroleum, lubricates the
> > >> engine and  injection pump better and kicks out greatly reduced
> > >> emissions of all the nasty  stuff:  NOx, S, CO and the harmful
> > >> carcinogens and particulates.  The  best thing is it is totally
> > >> carbon-neutral - it only puts back into the  atmosphere the carbon
> > the
> > >> plant took out in the first place.  Performance  is totally
> > unaffected.
> > >
> > >
> > > I was under the impression that biodiesel caused issues for some IPs?
> > > too thick to pump or something? Either way I'd like your source on
> > that
> > > as it sounds like you're pretty clued up on biodiesel and I'd like to
> > > know more.
> > >
> > >> Poor performance from a diesel?  Wake up and smell the  coffee!
> > >
> > >
> > > Absolutely!  (btw, my last mileage figure as of today... 68.1MPG over
> > > the last 200 miles :-)) now if I could just work out why its smoking
> > > when its working hard, I'd be sorted (bet its burnt injectors)
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Diy_efi mailing list
> > > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > > Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > Main WWW page:   http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Toward freedom,
>
> Bobby Yates Emory
>



-- 
Toward freedom,

Bobby Yates Emory


From WSCowell at aol.com  Sun Sep  3 02:07:02 2006
From: WSCowell at aol.com (WSCowell at aol.com)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 03:07:02 EDT
Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: (Was) Is E85 worth it? - Biodiesel etc
Message-ID: <c30.1d66aba.322bd916@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 02/09/2006 22:02:28 GMT Standard Time,  
torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu writes:

There  are a lot of different fluids that are called biodiesel today. 
Some of  them, those produced in a Fischer-Tropsch process, are almost 
100 %  equivalent to ordinary petroleum-based diesel fuel. Such biodiesel 
can be  used in any diesel engine without modifications or  problems.





Thanks for your contributions here Torbjorn, you always have useful things  
to say, your experience is very wide.  I haven't heard of this process in  any 
of my reading so far, I'm sure you are right.
 
   Another flavor is the RME and similar fuels. This is vegetable  oils 
which have been chemically modified "estherized". Top  quality RME works 
perfectly in most diesel engines but is said  that it might cause higher 
NOx emissions than petroleum based  diesel, at least in modern engines 
that are optimized for low  emissions
 
The process is "transesterification".  The oil molecules are converted  from 
glycerides (glycerine molecule on the end of the chain) to esters by  
replacing the glycerine part with alcohol in the presence of a catalyst -  usually 
sodium or potassium hydroxide.  Methanol is the preferred alcohol  apparently.
 
As for NOx emissions, every research paper I have read draws slightly  
different conclusions.  Some say it is increased slightly, some say it is  reduced 
slightly.  All agree that the situation is essentially unchanged,  whereas CO, 
HC, smoke and toxins are greatly reduced in a correctly installed  setup.
 
Yes, old cars using conventional rubber fuel hoses show problems with  
deterioration of the hoses if high concentrations f biodiesel are used.   Most 
diesels from about 1997 on have Viton fuel lines, these are not  attacked.  Viton 
hose is available to replace rubber for any car.
 
Yes, fuel quality is always an issue and the assumption that it has been  
made and stored properly is a "given".  There isn't much information out  there 
yet regarding SVO/WVO in the newer "TDI" direct injection and common rail  
engines.  The alternative fuels community is "working on it"! :-)
 
 
As for SVO, there are too many engines out there running over 200,000 km  
without a hitch for me to believe that it's not a mature technology  already.  
Injector coking of any significance appears to happen only in  engines which are 
fed oil of poor quality or not at the correct  temperature.
 
Looks like this one will run and run..... Thanks Torbjorn!
 
Will


From davida1 at hiwaay.net  Sun Sep  3 08:18:32 2006
From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 08:18:32 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
References: <20060902233906.61212.qmail@web54614.mail.yahoo.com>
	<001001c6cf09$ba5f4960$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <002b01c6cf5b$9e0e2ae0$16ce5245@yancey.com>

  Clair, in the air filter base exactly where you describe is where the factory intended, on a TBI setup on a 305. The MPFI system from a 2.8 V6 it was also in the airbox, pushed into a rubber grommet.
  As far as I know all the fuel-injected GM cars with an IAT sensor have this mounted on the air intake before the throttle.  Wouldn't the fact that the air in the manifold has gone through a pressure drop at the throttle, lead to a lower reading than the ECM is wanting?
  How did you put a tuned port setup on a Mopar engine?  This has got to be interesting! Do you have pictures? Good luck firing this beast up!
  Hope this helps!
David

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Clair Davis" <clair.davis at charter.net>
To: "diy_efi" <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 10:33 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location


> OK, I'm THIS >< CLOSE to firing up my 2-year EFI conversion on my 69
> Plymouth Valiant.  I'm using a 7730 ECM, and I've got 99.44% of the wiring
> done now, so probably over the next couple of days, I'll be asking some
> seemingly goofy questions.
> 
> The first, I'll keep simple... does the air temp sensor care where it's
> mounted?  Currently, I've got it mounted in the air cleaner assembly I'm
> using, a reproduction of the old Mopar "unsilenced" air cleaner that you put
> the engine callout plate on back in the day.  Basically, I drilled a hole in
> the air cleaner base and mounted the sensor with a short piece of heater
> hose.  It's a very tight fit, so the sensor is not about to come out of
> place, and there won't be any unfiltered air leaks at this location.
> However, I just "re-discovered" a hole in the back of my intake manifold
> that might be the right size for the air temp sensor.
> 
> Is one of these locations superior to the other from a functionality
> standpoint?  It's nothing to plug the hole in the intake, but it might
> provide a tidier install and allow me to remove the air cleaner without
> having to remember it's hard-wired to the car...
> 
> Any advice greatly appreciated,
> 
> Clair
> FTWTX
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>


From b.shaw at comcast.net  Sun Sep  3 08:21:28 2006
From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast)
Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2006 09:21:28 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
In-Reply-To: <001001c6cf09$ba5f4960$6501a8c0@davis>
References: <20060902233906.61212.qmail@web54614.mail.yahoo.com>
	<001001c6cf09$ba5f4960$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <44FAD6D8.4010501@comcast.net>

In the air cleaner is fine.  In the manifold would heat the sensor and 
give a higher reading.

Bill

Clair Davis wrote:
> OK, I'm THIS >< CLOSE to firing up my 2-year EFI conversion on my 69
> Plymouth Valiant.  I'm using a 7730 ECM, and I've got 99.44% of the wiring
> done now, so probably over the next couple of days, I'll be asking some
> seemingly goofy questions.
>
> The first, I'll keep simple... does the air temp sensor care where it's
> mounted?  Currently, I've got it mounted in the air cleaner assembly I'm
> using, a reproduction of the old Mopar "unsilenced" air cleaner that you put
> the engine callout plate on back in the day.  Basically, I drilled a hole in
> the air cleaner base and mounted the sensor with a short piece of heater
> hose.  It's a very tight fit, so the sensor is not about to come out of
> place, and there won't be any unfiltered air leaks at this location.
> However, I just "re-discovered" a hole in the back of my intake manifold
> that might be the right size for the air temp sensor.
>
> Is one of these locations superior to the other from a functionality
> standpoint?  It's nothing to plug the hole in the intake, but it might
> provide a tidier install and allow me to remove the air cleaner without
> having to remember it's hard-wired to the car...
>
> Any advice greatly appreciated,
>
> Clair
> FTWTX
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>   



From mfrels at ix.netcom.com  Sun Sep  3 08:51:11 2006
From: mfrels at ix.netcom.com (Mike Frels)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 08:51:11 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
Subject: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
Message-ID: <23882652.1157291472068.JavaMail.root@elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

In the bottom back of the Plenum is where GM located the IAT Sensor on TPI engines. I have seen many threads on different lists on the pros and cons of relocating the sensor to the airbox but nothing conclusive on benefits. The most recent discussions of the last few years have been about using later model non-tpi plastic bodied sensors that don't have the suffering of heat soak like the brass bodied ones in the original tpi setup. Sorry but I can't supply any part numbers for you. I bought one several years back to try but I have since misplaced it while sorting out problems with a 305/350 swap.

Being closet mopar freak from the 60s and 70s I am interested in what you have done also.

Mike



-----Original Message-----
>From: David Allen <davida1 at hiwaay.net>
>Sent: Sep 3, 2006 8:18 AM
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
>
>  Clair, in the air filter base exactly where you describe is where the factory intended, on a TBI setup on a 305. The MPFI system from a 2.8 V6 it was also in the airbox, pushed into a rubber grommet.
>  As far as I know all the fuel-injected GM cars with an IAT sensor have this mounted on the air intake before the throttle.  Wouldn't the fact that the air in the manifold has gone through a pressure drop at the throttle, lead to a lower reading than the ECM is wanting?
>  How did you put a tuned port setup on a Mopar engine?  This has got to be interesting! Do you have pictures? Good luck firing this beast up!
>  Hope this helps!
>David
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Clair Davis" <clair.davis at charter.net>
>To: "diy_efi" <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 10:33 PM
>Subject: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
>
>
>> OK, I'm THIS >< CLOSE to firing up my 2-year EFI conversion on my 69
>> Plymouth Valiant.  I'm using a 7730 ECM, and I've got 99.44% of the wiring
>> done now, so probably over the next couple of days, I'll be asking some
>> seemingly goofy questions.
>> 
>> The first, I'll keep simple... does the air temp sensor care where it's
>> mounted?  Currently, I've got it mounted in the air cleaner assembly I'm
>> using, a reproduction of the old Mopar "unsilenced" air cleaner that you put
>> the engine callout plate on back in the day.  Basically, I drilled a hole in
>> the air cleaner base and mounted the sensor with a short piece of heater
>> hose.  It's a very tight fit, so the sensor is not about to come out of
>> place, and there won't be any unfiltered air leaks at this location.
>> However, I just "re-discovered" a hole in the back of my intake manifold
>> that might be the right size for the air temp sensor.
>> 
>> Is one of these locations superior to the other from a functionality
>> standpoint?  It's nothing to plug the hole in the intake, but it might
>> provide a tidier install and allow me to remove the air cleaner without
>> having to remember it's hard-wired to the car...
>> 
>> Any advice greatly appreciated,
>> 
>> Clair
>> FTWTX



From clair.davis at charter.net  Sun Sep  3 10:57:17 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 10:57:17 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
References: <23882652.1157291472068.JavaMail.root@elwamui-sweet.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <000601c6cf71$a1e2fea0$6501a8c0@davis>

Mike,
I noticed that the plastic-body sensors are common on most new cars, and
thought about using one of those, but not knowing for sure what their range
was, and knowing FOR SURE I'd have to rewire the connector (on the ones I
saw - Dodge Neon), I decided to stick with what I had.

The heat soak issue Bill mentioned and the pressure drop issue David
mentioned are good points.  Best to keep the thing where it was in the
original application and try to remember to unplug the sensor before yanking
the air cleaner housing off...

Looks like I'll keep it simple and plug that hole.  Glad I re-discovered it
before I tried to fire the thing up...

Clair

BTW, I'll make a separate post on some of the project details.




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike Frels" <mfrels at ix.netcom.com>
To: "David Allen" <davida1 at hiwaay.net>; <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 8:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location


> In the bottom back of the Plenum is where GM located the IAT Sensor on TPI
engines. I have seen many threads on different lists on the pros and cons of
relocating the sensor to the airbox but nothing conclusive on benefits. The
most recent discussions of the last few years have been about using later
model non-tpi plastic bodied sensors that don't have the suffering of heat
soak like the brass bodied ones in the original tpi setup. Sorry but I can't
supply any part numbers for you. I bought one several years back to try but
I have since misplaced it while sorting out problems with a 305/350 swap.
>
> Being closet mopar freak from the 60s and 70s I am interested in what you
have done also.
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: David Allen <davida1 at hiwaay.net>
> >Sent: Sep 3, 2006 8:18 AM
> >To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
> >
> >  Clair, in the air filter base exactly where you describe is where the
factory intended, on a TBI setup on a 305. The MPFI system from a 2.8 V6 it
was also in the airbox, pushed into a rubber grommet.
> >  As far as I know all the fuel-injected GM cars with an IAT sensor have
this mounted on the air intake before the throttle.  Wouldn't the fact that
the air in the manifold has gone through a pressure drop at the throttle,
lead to a lower reading than the ECM is wanting?
> >  How did you put a tuned port setup on a Mopar engine?  This has got to
be interesting! Do you have pictures? Good luck firing this beast up!
> >  Hope this helps!
> >David
> >
> >----- Original Message ----- 
> >From: "Clair Davis" <clair.davis at charter.net>
> >To: "diy_efi" <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> >Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 10:33 PM
> >Subject: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
> >
> >
> >> OK, I'm THIS >< CLOSE to firing up my 2-year EFI conversion on my 69
> >> Plymouth Valiant.  I'm using a 7730 ECM, and I've got 99.44% of the
wiring
> >> done now, so probably over the next couple of days, I'll be asking some
> >> seemingly goofy questions.
> >>
> >> The first, I'll keep simple... does the air temp sensor care where it's
> >> mounted?  Currently, I've got it mounted in the air cleaner assembly
I'm
> >> using, a reproduction of the old Mopar "unsilenced" air cleaner that
you put
> >> the engine callout plate on back in the day.  Basically, I drilled a
hole in
> >> the air cleaner base and mounted the sensor with a short piece of
heater
> >> hose.  It's a very tight fit, so the sensor is not about to come out of
> >> place, and there won't be any unfiltered air leaks at this location.
> >> However, I just "re-discovered" a hole in the back of my intake
manifold
> >> that might be the right size for the air temp sensor.
> >>
> >> Is one of these locations superior to the other from a functionality
> >> standpoint?  It's nothing to plug the hole in the intake, but it might
> >> provide a tidier install and allow me to remove the air cleaner without
> >> having to remember it's hard-wired to the car...
> >>
> >> Any advice greatly appreciated,
> >>
> >> Clair
> >> FTWTX
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



From clair.davis at charter.net  Sun Sep  3 12:19:02 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 12:19:02 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar Small Block EFI Project
Message-ID: <000c01c6cf7d$0dcc6b00$6501a8c0@davis>

For a brief recap on the project, I'll include some links to photos I've
collected over the last couple of years.  No formal web page yet, I've only
gotten as far as uploading the photos.  Goal is to have a fun daily driver
with old-school style and modern reliability and handling.  She'll also see
a few autocrosses every year.

Here's the car, a 1969 Plymouth Valiant 2-door post sedan:
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/In_The_Park2-PS-Clipped.JPG

Engine is a low-compression 340ci/5.6L V-8 from the early 70's, freshened up
by me in the late 90's.  In carbureted form, it makes 260 hp and 290 lb-ft
of torque at the rear wheels.  Runs just fine on 89 octane, and might
tolerate 87, but I haven't tried.
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/340/72tweaked340-Chassis-640.jpg

The nuts and bolts are that I've got a '730 ECM & wiring harness, a pile of
GM sensors, a pile of Mopar sensors, and a pile of Mopar hard parts, and
I've been working to make those three piles in to one coherent package.

Mopar Performance makes, or made, an EFI-ready single plane intake for the
Magnum V-8 trucks to replace the restrictive beer-barrel intake manifold,
using all the OEM Magnum fuel goodies - rails, injectors, sensors, throttle
body, etc.  This is the intake I have:
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/upgrades/efi/M1_Magnum_Intake-01.JPG

Distributor is a no-advance unit from a late-1980's "Lean Burn" carbureted
small block:
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/upgrades/efi/Reluctor_Pickup-01.JPG

Throttle body is also a Mopar Performance piece, 1000cfm 4V, billet
aluminum, all the Magnum sensors (TPS, MAP, IAC).
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/upgrades/efi/Throttle%20Body.JPG

I still have to wire up the coil & mount the 8-pin HEI ignition control
unit, but that's about it for wiring.  That's also where I've got a couple
remaining questions, but I'll get to those later.  I'm really looking
forward to getting the old girl back on the road, and then seeing how far I
can tune the EFI to improve the package.

Clair
Fort Worth, TX



From davida1 at hiwaay.net  Sun Sep  3 13:05:40 2006
From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 13:05:40 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar Small Block EFI Project
References: <000c01c6cf7d$0dcc6b00$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <004001c6cf83$9669a850$16ce5245@yancey.com>

  Thanks for the pictures!  That clears up my confusion, I had thought you had somehow adapted a small-block Chevy intake manifold to a Mopar engine!  
  You'll not be disappointed with it- every swap I have done has done nothing but improve the engine's reliability and performance.
  With full control over the engine, you'll definately have an easy time exceeding the stock carb'ed power level.  Oh, the joys of real-time tuning!
  It looks like the Mopar TB uses the same stepping-motor IAC valve as Rochester did.  That will be a blessing for your retrofit.  Is the throttle position sensor also adaptable to the Delco computer?
  That's a fine looking car, by the way.
David



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Clair Davis" <clair.davis at charter.net>
To: "diy_efi" <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:19 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar Small Block EFI Project


> For a brief recap on the project, I'll include some links to photos I've
> collected over the last couple of years.  No formal web page yet, I've only
> gotten as far as uploading the photos.  Goal is to have a fun daily driver
> with old-school style and modern reliability and handling.  She'll also see
> a few autocrosses every year.
> 
> Here's the car, a 1969 Plymouth Valiant 2-door post sedan:
> http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/In_The_Park2-PS-Clipped.JPG
> 
> Engine is a low-compression 340ci/5.6L V-8 from the early 70's, freshened up
> by me in the late 90's.  In carbureted form, it makes 260 hp and 290 lb-ft
> of torque at the rear wheels.  Runs just fine on 89 octane, and might
> tolerate 87, but I haven't tried.
> http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/340/72tweaked340-Chassis-640.jpg
> 
> The nuts and bolts are that I've got a '730 ECM & wiring harness, a pile of
> GM sensors, a pile of Mopar sensors, and a pile of Mopar hard parts, and
> I've been working to make those three piles in to one coherent package.
> 
> Mopar Performance makes, or made, an EFI-ready single plane intake for the
> Magnum V-8 trucks to replace the restrictive beer-barrel intake manifold,
> using all the OEM Magnum fuel goodies - rails, injectors, sensors, throttle
> body, etc.  This is the intake I have:
> http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/upgrades/efi/M1_Magnum_Intake-01.JPG
> 
> Distributor is a no-advance unit from a late-1980's "Lean Burn" carbureted
> small block:
> http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/upgrades/efi/Reluctor_Pickup-01.JPG
> 
> Throttle body is also a Mopar Performance piece, 1000cfm 4V, billet
> aluminum, all the Magnum sensors (TPS, MAP, IAC).
> http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/upgrades/efi/Throttle%20Body.JPG
> 
> I still have to wire up the coil & mount the 8-pin HEI ignition control
> unit, but that's about it for wiring.  That's also where I've got a couple
> remaining questions, but I'll get to those later.  I'm really looking
> forward to getting the old girl back on the road, and then seeing how far I
> can tune the EFI to improve the package.
> 
> Clair
> Fort Worth, TX
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>


From davida1 at hiwaay.net  Sun Sep  3 17:59:10 2006
From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 17:59:10 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] 2732 direct EEPROM / Flash replacement
Message-ID: <005e01c6cfac$95f16e70$16ce5245@yancey.com>

  Hey, does anyone know what chip (if any) is a pin-compatible EEPROM or Flash chip to replace a 2732 EPROM used in a 7747 ECM?  I have searched the archive (thanks for getting this feature woking!!) and only found more confusion and conflicting information.
  I'm looking to replace it with something that will not need to be UV erased, and will not require any funky adapter to fit into my ECM.
  Thanks,
David



From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Sun Sep  3 20:21:20 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 18:21:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <2d2.d9399cc.322a80b7@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20060904012120.4082.qmail@web32211.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- WSCowell at aol.com wrote:

> The best thing is it is totally carbon-neutral - it
> only puts back into the atmosphere the carbon the
> plant took out in the first place. 

That can just as easily be said for dino oil -- he
carbon was in the form of living things, and was then
converted into a fuel, from which the carbon was
liberated via combustion.  Dino oil's carbon is just
out of the "active cycle" for a while longer than that
from biodiesel.

Regarding emissions, it all depends on what you
consider.  There's no question that there are some
areas where diesel emits a great deal more pollution
than gasoline engines (and fuel economy is NOT an
indicator of emissions -- motorcycles usually get 50+
mpg, but they have many times the emissions of a
comparable new car PER MILE).  And what are we gauging
by?  Diesel particulate seems to have much more of a
concern regarding health issues for people vs. most of
what comes out a car tailpipe.

It ends up being apples and oranges, and you have to
decide on which side of those lines you wish your
solution to fall.  Gasoline is better in some ways,
diesel in others.  YMMV.

| Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne)       Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)|
| "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it  |
|   didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to.   |
|  They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. |
|   The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun   |
|     had come up again."                    -Kurt Vonnegut     |
| M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com -  http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze |

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From ebuckler at icehouse.net  Sun Sep  3 23:19:56 2006
From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 21:19:56 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?  Speed factor?
References: <20060904012120.4082.qmail@web32211.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01f801c6cfd9$61384b90$0300a8c0@clive>

-- motorcycles usually get 50+
> mpg, but they have many times the emissions of a
> comparable new car PER MILE).

I haven't seen anyone put SPEED into this set of equations yet: If we 
average 90 mph instead of 60 mph, we instantly reduce the average TIME of 
emissions by 1/3.  If mpg did not drop by 1/3, the difference is a net gain 
in reduced emissions.   I wonder if the judge will believe me when I tell 
him I was just trying to make the planet a better place by keeping the air a 
little cleaner?  [:oj
Ernie B. 



From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Mon Sep  4 00:33:51 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 22:33:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?  Speed factor?
In-Reply-To: <01f801c6cfd9$61384b90$0300a8c0@clive>
Message-ID: <20060904053351.53667.qmail@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- Ernest Buckler <ebuckler at icehouse.net> wrote:

> I haven't seen anyone put SPEED into this set of
> equations yet: If we average 90 mph instead of 60
> mph, we instantly reduce the average TIME of 
> emissions by 1/3.  If mpg did not drop by 1/3, the
> difference is a net gain in reduced emissions.

Sorry, your math is wrong.  :)  We covered the same
distance, and used the same amount of gas doing so;
therefore, the emissions are the same.  If you go
faster, you just produce them more quickly.

If what you said was in fact the case, we'd use less
and less gas per mile the faster we went.  I can
personally attest that this is, sadly, not the case.  ;)

| Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne)       Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)|
| "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it  |
|   didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to.   |
|  They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. |
|   The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun   |
|     had come up again."                    -Kurt Vonnegut     |
| M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com -  http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze |

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From ebuckler at icehouse.net  Mon Sep  4 01:00:02 2006
From: ebuckler at icehouse.net (Ernest Buckler)
Date: Sun, 3 Sep 2006 23:00:02 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?  Speed factor?
References: <20060904053351.53667.qmail@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <02ad01c6cfe7$5cf430e0$0300a8c0@clive>


----- Original Message ----- >> I haven't seen anyone put SPEED into this 
set of
>> equations yet: If we average 90 mph instead of 60
>> mph, we instantly reduce the average TIME of
>> emissions by 1/3.  If mpg did not drop by 1/3, the
>> difference is a net gain in reduced emissions.
>
> Sorry, your math is wrong.  :)  We covered the same
> distance, and used the same amount of gas doing so;
> therefore, the emissions are the same.  If you go
> faster, you just produce them more quickly.
>
> If what you said was in fact the case, we'd use less
> and less gas per mile the faster we went.  I can
> personally attest that this is, sadly, not the case.  ;)
>
Dang, so I STILL don't have a good excuse for speeding...sigh.
Ernie 



From joelori at earthlink.net  Mon Sep  4 19:38:08 2006
From: joelori at earthlink.net (Joseph Obernberger)
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 20:38:08 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?  Speed factor?
In-Reply-To: <02ad01c6cfe7$5cf430e0$0300a8c0@clive>
References: <20060904053351.53667.qmail@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<02ad01c6cfe7$5cf430e0$0300a8c0@clive>
Message-ID: <44FCC6F0.4040106@earthlink.net>

Up to a point - I mean, you certainly don't get the best gas mileage at 
0 MPH!  There is some speed where a vehicle (probably different for 
every vehicle) gets the best gas mileage.  I would at least expect it to 
be in the top gear, and probably at a speed where the throttle is open 
enough to minimize pumping loss, and at the same time maintain closed 
loop operation.
Somehow I doubt it's 55MPH - probably significantly faster for most 
modern cars.  The whole idea of reducing the speed limit to increase 
fuel economy is bogus.

Joe
http://www.lovehorsepower.com


Ernest Buckler wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message ----- >> I haven't seen anyone put SPEED into 
> this set of
>>> equations yet: If we average 90 mph instead of 60
>>> mph, we instantly reduce the average TIME of
>>> emissions by 1/3.  If mpg did not drop by 1/3, the
>>> difference is a net gain in reduced emissions.
>>
>> Sorry, your math is wrong.  :)  We covered the same
>> distance, and used the same amount of gas doing so;
>> therefore, the emissions are the same.  If you go
>> faster, you just produce them more quickly.
>>
>> If what you said was in fact the case, we'd use less
>> and less gas per mile the faster we went.  I can
>> personally attest that this is, sadly, not the case.  ;)
>>
> Dang, so I STILL don't have a good excuse for speeding...sigh.
> Ernie
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>


From jimkyser at ieee.org  Mon Sep  4 21:02:03 2006
From: jimkyser at ieee.org (Jim Kyser)
Date: Mon, 04 Sep 2006 21:02:03 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?  Speed factor?
In-Reply-To: <44FCC6F0.4040106@earthlink.net>
References: <20060904053351.53667.qmail@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<02ad01c6cfe7$5cf430e0$0300a8c0@clive>
	<44FCC6F0.4040106@earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <44FCDA9B.4050800@ieee.org>

I would expect that it is lower than 55 for most larger vehicles. 
Somewhere in high gear where the engine can move the car without 
lugging. I would guess more like 45 for many vehicles. The reason I 
suspect it's lower than 55 is wind resistance. It increases as a square 
of speed, so it increases pretty quickly as speed goes up, especially on 
vehicles with large frontal areas.

Jim Kyser

Joseph Obernberger wrote:
> Up to a point - I mean, you certainly don't get the best gas mileage at 
> 0 MPH!  There is some speed where a vehicle (probably different for 
> every vehicle) gets the best gas mileage.  I would at least expect it to 
> be in the top gear, and probably at a speed where the throttle is open 
> enough to minimize pumping loss, and at the same time maintain closed 
> loop operation.
> Somehow I doubt it's 55MPH - probably significantly faster for most 
> modern cars.  The whole idea of reducing the speed limit to increase 
> fuel economy is bogus.
> 
> Joe
> http://www.lovehorsepower.com


From spyro at f2s.com  Tue Sep  5 03:28:37 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 09:28:37 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?  Speed factor?
In-Reply-To: <44FCDA9B.4050800@ieee.org>
References: <20060904053351.53667.qmail@web32210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<02ad01c6cfe7$5cf430e0$0300a8c0@clive>	<44FCC6F0.4040106@earthlink.net>
	<44FCDA9B.4050800@ieee.org>
Message-ID: <44FD3535.90405@f2s.com>

Jim Kyser wrote:
> I would expect that it is lower than 55 for most larger vehicles. 
> Somewhere in high gear where the engine can move the car without 
> lugging. I would guess more like 45 for many vehicles. The reason I 
> suspect it's lower than 55 is wind resistance. It increases as a square 
> of speed, so it increases pretty quickly as speed goes up, especially on 
> vehicles with large frontal areas.

On my daihatsu its at approximately 30MPH in 5th gear. But thats a 
small, reasonably airodynamic little hatchback, with a nice little 
torquey diesel. The design was the firt to hit 100MPG under those 
conditions.



From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep  5 07:47:23 2006
From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 05:47:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?  E85 <> always 85%
In-Reply-To: <44FD3535.90405@f2s.com>
Message-ID: <20060905124723.28054.qmail@web80512.mail.yahoo.com>

one other little E85 tidbit:
 
E85 fuel is not always an 85% blend of ethanol and petrol.
 
Here in my state, which is aggressive in deployment of E85 (why I don't yet understand) is that the product E85 is pump labeled "Blended Gasoline w/ NOT LESS THAN 70% Ethanol" which I understand to mean that it can contain between 70% and 85% and be sold as E85 product.
 
What does this mean? To those of you who are doing a duel fuel static tune, you may not get the expected results w/ every tank full of E85 due to the stated production variances!
 
Just a little discovery over the holiday while filling up.

From don.broadus at exeloncorp.com  Tue Sep  5 08:46:26 2006
From: don.broadus at exeloncorp.com (don.broadus at exeloncorp.com)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 08:46:26 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar Small Block EFI Project
Message-ID: <F4F253665838734F841C5B2C63B72F941ACAEF@CCCMSXCH01.energy.power.corp>

Looks Great !  Keep up the good work.

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
Behalf Of Clair Davis
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 12:19 PM
To: diy_efi
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar Small Block EFI Project


For a brief recap on the project, I'll include some links to photos I've
collected over the last couple of years.  No formal web page yet, I've only
gotten as far as uploading the photos.  Goal is to have a fun daily driver
with old-school style and modern reliability and handling.  She'll also see
a few autocrosses every year.

Here's the car, a 1969 Plymouth Valiant 2-door post sedan:
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/In_The_Park2-PS-Clipped.JPG

Engine is a low-compression 340ci/5.6L V-8 from the early 70's, freshened up
by me in the late 90's.  In carbureted form, it makes 260 hp and 290 lb-ft
of torque at the rear wheels.  Runs just fine on 89 octane, and might
tolerate 87, but I haven't tried.
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/340/72tweaked340-Chassis-640.jpg

The nuts and bolts are that I've got a '730 ECM & wiring harness, a pile of
GM sensors, a pile of Mopar sensors, and a pile of Mopar hard parts, and
I've been working to make those three piles in to one coherent package.

Mopar Performance makes, or made, an EFI-ready single plane intake for the
Magnum V-8 trucks to replace the restrictive beer-barrel intake manifold,
using all the OEM Magnum fuel goodies - rails, injectors, sensors, throttle
body, etc.  This is the intake I have:
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/upgrades/efi/M1_Magnum_Intake-01.JPG

Distributor is a no-advance unit from a late-1980's "Lean Burn" carbureted
small block:
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/upgrades/efi/Reluctor_Pickup-01.JPG

Throttle body is also a Mopar Performance piece, 1000cfm 4V, billet
aluminum, all the Magnum sensors (TPS, MAP, IAC).
http://users2.ev1.net/~clairdavis/webimages/69sedan/upgrades/efi/Throttle%20Body.JPG

I still have to wire up the coil & mount the 8-pin HEI ignition control
unit, but that's about it for wiring.  That's also where I've got a couple
remaining questions, but I'll get to those later.  I'm really looking
forward to getting the old girl back on the road, and then seeing how far I
can tune the EFI to improve the package.

Clair
Fort Worth, TX

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

-----------------------------------------
**************************************************
This e-mail and any of its attachments may contain Exelon
Corporation proprietary information, which is privileged,
confidential, or subject to copyright belonging to the Exelon
Corporation family of Companies.
This e-mail is intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to which it is addressed.  If you are not the intended
recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation
to the contents of and attachments to this e-mail is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful.  If you have received this e-mail
in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently
delete the original and any copy of this e-mail and any printout.
Thank You.
**************************************************



From davida1 at hiwaay.net  Tue Sep  5 10:37:31 2006
From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 10:37:31 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Allison transmission code reader
Message-ID: <014e01c6d101$3f4978f0$16ce5245@yancey.com>

Hey, all I've got a 2006 model off-highway vehicle, with a 6-speed Allison transmission.  This has a stand-alone transmission controller.  Anyone have any code-reading advice, or know of a commercially-available tool for reading the trouble codes on this unit.
Thanks,
David


From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Tue Sep  5 11:16:54 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 11:16:54 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F3CB@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org 
> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of WSCowell at aol.com
> Sent: Saturday, September 02, 2006 1:38 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
> 
>  
> In a message dated 02/09/2006 00:46:42 GMT Standard Time, 
> spyro at f2s.com
> writes:
> 
> If  you've found a 1.9 litre diesel with worse emissions than 
> an 8 litre petrol engine, I would respectfully suggest that 
> you might have chosen a spectacularly crappy example of a 
> diesel  engine...

That may be.  There aren't (fortunately IMO) a lot of passenger car
diesels to chose from here in the US, so I picked the Jetta.  It is, in
fact, the only diesel passenger car I can name off the top of my head.
Maybe European spec diesels are better.  Here's a homework assignment
for the Eurpoean diesel fans.  Go to the European equivalent of the US
EPA and find the certified emission levels for the least polluting
diesels, then come back here and let us know what models they are and
how well they do.  Also, I think it was a 6.0L or 5.3L SUV I compared
to, not an 8.0L SUV.  I don't think you can get an 8 liter light truck
or SUV,  even in the US :-)

> 
> 
> 
> Good point there, **plus**:
>  
> Bio diesel is cheaper than diesel from petroleum, lubricates 
> the engine and injection pump better and kicks out greatly 
> reduced emissions of all the nasty
>  stuff:  NOx, S, CO and the harmful carcinogens and 
> particulates.  

NOx comes from the N2 and O2 in the atmosphere, not the fuel.  It's
produced by the high diesel combustion temperatures, which in turn come
from the high compression ratio.  Maybe biodiesel affects this but it's
not obvious to me.  Can you document the claims for reduced pollution
from particulates?

As far as being cheaper, that only means that the tax/subsidy ratio is
different for biodiesel than regular diesel.  There is nothing like a
free market in energy, anywhere on the earth, so the "price" of energy,
especially when used to compare one energy source to another, is
meaningless.

> The  best thing is it is totally 
> carbon-neutral - it only puts back into the  atmosphere the 
> carbon the plant took out in the first place.  Performance  
> is totally unaffected.

Leaving aside that human contributions to atmospheric carbon don't
matter in the slightest, the carbon in refined diesel wasn't channeled
in from the asteroid belt, it came from the earth same as all the other
carbon.

>  
> So a decently set-up turbo diesel is good news all round.  
> Let's not  forget what JCB achieved just last week at 
> Bonneville (British - hooray!) and  Audi at Le Mans either.
>  
> Poor performance from a diesel?  Wake up and smell the  coffee!

I never commented on the performance of a diesel, just it's polluting
nature.

> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 


The 2006 ARM Developers' Conference, October 3-5, Santa Clara, US 
Join ARM and its technology and tools Partners from around the world at the only industry event for developers of ARM PoweredR solutions. 
http://www.arm.com/developersconference/


-- 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 rwhughe at oplink.net  Tue Sep  5 13:28:50 2006
From: rwhughe at oplink.net (Robert W Hughes)
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 13:28:50 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?  Speed factor?
In-Reply-To: <20060905170016.B8224624C53@mail.oplnk.net>
References: <20060905170016.B8224624C53@mail.oplnk.net>
Message-ID: <44FDC1E2.9090603@oplink.net>

> Up to a point - I mean, you certainly don't get the best gas mileage at 
> 0 MPH!  There is some speed where a vehicle (probably different for 
> every vehicle) gets the best gas mileage.  I would at least expect it to 
> be in the top gear, and probably at a speed where the throttle is open 
> enough to minimize pumping loss, and at the same time maintain closed 
> loop operation.
> Somehow I doubt it's 55MPH - probably significantly faster for most 
> modern cars.  The whole idea of reducing the speed limit to increase 
> fuel economy is bogus.

Internal combustion engines do not have the same type of torque curve as 
a rubber band so the simplistic slow down and save does not work. When 
the 55mph limit first went into effect in 1974 I was driving a 1965 
Corvair Corsa with 4 carburetors and some modifications. At 70 I had 
been averaging 27mpg, at 55 I averaged 25mpg. As a slightly later 
example my 1987 Fiero V6 normally got 27mpg at 55. One day I made a trip 
at an average of 80mph and got 31mpg. I suspect that for a given body 
and engine size, gearing and breathing characteristics (camshaft) 
determine the road speed for best gas mileage and it is not always the 
speed desired by the anti-destination league.
-- 
Robert W. Hughes (Bob)
BackYard Engineering
29:40.237N, 95:28.726W or perhaps 30:55.265N, 95:20.590W
Houston, Texas "The city with too much Oxygen"
rwhughe at oplink.net



From airhawk at hawkgt.net  Tue Sep  5 13:32:23 2006
From: airhawk at hawkgt.net (AirHawk)
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 14:32:23 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F3CB@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F3CB@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <WorldClient-F200609051432.AA32230004@hawkgt.net>

> how well they do.  Also, I think it was a 6.0L or 5.3L SUV I compared
> to, not an 8.0L SUV.  I don't think you can get an 8 liter light truck
> or SUV,  even in the US :-)

Until '03 or '04, you could get the HD-8.0L V-10 in the Dodge Ram 
2500/3500. It's been replaced by the 5.7L Hemi (or is it 6.0 for the 
heavier truck? - mem'ry here). 
You can obtain the current 8.0+L Viper engine in the Dodge Ram SRT-10 
(1500) right now, but that thing is basically worthless for anything but 
going-fast. 




From galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep  5 17:31:02 2006
From: galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net (Jason McNamara)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 15:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <WorldClient-F200609051432.AA32230004@hawkgt.net>
Message-ID: <20060905223102.97605.qmail@web81201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

GM has had the 8.1L Big block since 2001 in the
suburban/tahoe/silverado/express van.  I don't know if
they are currently avialable.

I know a guy that had a one ton with one, about 12mpg
unloaded, 6mpg loaded with 30,000 pounds on a trailer.
 Truck was modified.  Same guy is now driving a newer
duramax pulling that same trailer and getting 20 mpg.

Some info on the 8.1 can be found here a few bullet
points down.

http://www.mortec.com/notepg1.htm

--- AirHawk <airhawk at hawkgt.net> wrote:

> > how well they do.  Also, I think it was a 6.0L or
> 5.3L SUV I compared
> > to, not an 8.0L SUV.  I don't think you can get an
> 8 liter light truck
> > or SUV,  even in the US :-)
> 
> Until '03 or '04, you could get the HD-8.0L V-10 in
> the Dodge Ram 
> 2500/3500. It's been replaced by the 5.7L Hemi (or
> is it 6.0 for the 
> heavier truck? - mem'ry here). 
> You can obtain the current 8.0+L Viper engine in the
> Dodge Ram SRT-10 
> (1500) right now, but that thing is basically
> worthless for anything but 
> going-fast. 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe:
> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 



From spyro at f2s.com  Tue Sep  5 17:46:04 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 23:46:04 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F3CB@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F3CB@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <44FDFE2C.10705@f2s.com>

Steve Ravet wrote:

> That may be.  There aren't (fortunately IMO) a lot of passenger car
> diesels to chose from here in the US, so I picked the Jetta.  It is, in
> fact, the only diesel passenger car I can name off the top of my head.
> Maybe European spec diesels are better.  Here's a homework assignment
> for the Eurpoean diesel fans.

Not got the time for homework assignments, but I can tell you this:

Diesels produce more particulates, however most of them are 10 microns 
or so in size wheras those from petrol engines are more like 1 micron.

the body is much less able to handle the smaller particles.

Diesels produce 30-40% less C02

Diesels produce nearly no CO, and even with cats, petrols arent good - 
esp. as cats take a while to warm up and hurt fuel consumption...

Modern diesels do produce more NOx however after 50,000 miles they 
produce less than a petrol on average, so over the lifetime of the car 
there is little difference.

Diesels dont produce significant HC emmissions.

Just because you can SEE the particle emissions doesnt mean diesels are 
worse.

heck, NOx emissions are far more visible when they cause smog...

>>The  best thing is it is totally 
>>carbon-neutral - it only puts back into the  atmosphere the 
>>carbon the plant took out in the first place.  Performance  
>>is totally unaffected.
> 
> Leaving aside that human contributions to atmospheric carbon don't
> matter in the slightest, the carbon in refined diesel wasn't channeled
> in from the asteroid belt, it came from the earth same as all the other
> carbon.

yes but its been trapped out of circulation for milennia.

> I never commented on the performance of a diesel, just it's polluting
> nature.

Well you should probably check up on that before commenting more because 
to summarise:

CO2 is 30-40% lower
CO is nonexistant
NOx is essentially the same in a modern diesel over the lifetime of the car
HC is nonexistant
Particulates whilst there is more, is in larger particles more easily 
handles by the body.


From wopontour at hotmail.com  Tue Sep  5 19:07:38 2006
From: wopontour at hotmail.com (WopOnTour)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 18:07:38 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Allison transmission code reader
References: <014e01c6d101$3f4978f0$16ce5245@yancey.com>
Message-ID: <BAY122-DAV43B643E68F641A29FE0B5BA310@phx.gbl>

Try here
http://www.autotap.com/press_releases/news_allison_palm.html
Regards
WOT
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Allen" <davida1 at hiwaay.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>; "GM-ECM" <gmecm at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 9:37 AM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Allison transmission code reader


Hey, all I've got a 2006 model off-highway vehicle, with a 6-speed Allison 
transmission.  This has a stand-alone transmission controller.  Anyone have 
any code-reading advice, or know of a commercially-available tool for 
reading the trouble codes on this unit.
Thanks,
David
_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Tue Sep  5 22:00:45 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 22:00:45 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F571@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

> > I never commented on the performance of a diesel, just it's 
> polluting 
> > nature.
> 
> Well you should probably check up on that before commenting 
> more because to summarise:
> 
> CO2 is 30-40% lower
> CO is nonexistant
> NOx is essentially the same in a modern diesel over the 
> lifetime of the car HC is nonexistant Particulates whilst 
> there is more, is in larger particles more easily handles by the body.

Thanks for the summary.  You may have missed the beginning of the thread
where I posted certification levels for the 2006 VW Jetta.  There are 3
non pickup diesel vehicles available in the US, the Jetta, MB E320, and
Jeep Liberty.  Here are the Jetta and MB numbers, and a Honda for
comparison.

	Jetta		MB E320	Accord
CO	.11		.1		.3
NOx	.55		.39		.01
HC	.824		.76		.01
part	.069		.064		NA

I didn't put in the V8 SUV, it would be too embarrassing.  How do you
clean up the emissions from your diesel Jetta?  Buy a gas Suburban and
use it to tow your Jetta around town.  You'll be faster, cleaner, and a
lot more stylish.

The above numbers come straight from the tab delimited file for 2006
here:

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/crttst.htm

This file lists certification levels (in grams/mile), not actual test
results.  Certification levels model emissions over time by applying an
additive and a multiplicative factor to the actual test result.  In this
case the time is the usable life of the vehicle, defined as 120K miles
for gas vehicles but only 100K miles for diesel.  These spreadsheets
used to list the test result in addition to the cert level, but
apparently don't anymore.

The EPA doesn't test gas engines for particulate pollution, and this is
frankly the first time that I've heard that gas engines have particulate
emissions.  I'm not an expert, though, do you have a reference for what
kinds and sizes of particulates are created by gas engines?

I'm willing to be convinced that VW and MB are unloading their crappy
diesels over here, saving their clean ones for Europeans.  I know cars
have to meet emissions standards over there, who can point us to the
agency that does certification, and their online results?

regards,
--steve


The 2006 ARM Developers' Conference, October 3-5, Santa Clara, US 
Join ARM and its technology and tools Partners from around the world at the only industry event for developers of ARM PoweredR solutions. 
http://www.arm.com/developersconference/


-- 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 bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au  Tue Sep  5 22:25:09 2006
From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche)
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 11:25:09 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F571@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F571@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <200609061125.09795@death.2.spammers>

On Wednesday 06 September 2006 11:00, Steve Ravet wrote:

> I'm willing to be convinced that VW and MB are unloading their crappy
> diesels over here, saving their clean ones for Europeans.  I know cars

The problem is the diesel fuel. Until the diesel gets clean enough
to run through the modern injection systems, the older,
distributor-pump and solenoid common-rail systems are the best
thing available for use on the continent.

The fuel is going to get cleaner shortly, IIRC within a year or two.

Australia got sufficiently clean (ULS) diesel about two years ago
and diesel car sales have rocketed, especially since the ~50%
increase in fuel prices at the pump over the same period. European
turbo-diesels, be they unit-injector or common-rail are very
popular. The next generation of diesel injectors, piezo-electric are
just coming on-stream now in Europe with lower emissions, improved
driveability and lower "diesel" noise.

Particulate filters are available on a range of European
turbo-diesels as an option. Some European governments provide tax
benefits when working filters are fitted.

BTW: modern diesels use (perhaps cooled) EGR to reduce combustion
temperatures and hence the formation of NOx. Remaining NOx can be
"trapped" by storage catalysts that are purged periodically by a
short "rich" cycle. An oxydation catalyst converts HC and CO from
periodic/partial rich running, to water and CO2.

> have to meet emissions standards over there, who can point us to the
> agency that does certification, and their online results?

You cannot mix-n-match emissions measured according to different
standards. The EU driving cycle is very different to the US EPA's.
See your Bosch Automotive Handbook.




From airhawk at hawkgt.net  Tue Sep  5 22:34:49 2006
From: airhawk at hawkgt.net (The AirHawk)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 22:34:49 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: WAS: E85 worth it? NOW: Diesel Emissions
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F571@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <003701c6d165$6cee3390$0202a8c0@MajorDisaster>

> > I never commented on the performance of a diesel, just it's
> polluting
> > nature.
>
> Well you should probably check up on that before commenting
> more because to summarise:

The advent of low-sulfur diesel *may* bring with it better/cleaner diesel engines, but I can't seem 
to find anything on light-duty trucks and cars, merely HD (>8500GVWR) diesels and the new 
requirements set to go in effect in '07.

One site: http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.html (Scroogle on "2007 Diesel Emissions" for a 
whole slew of sites)

There are current (heavy truck) emissions standards in several tables on this site.

Here's a file that explains the newer diesel emissions-equipment "processes" and inner workings: 
http://www.isuzucv.com/images/engines/EmissionsBro_Isuzu.pdf

As my company lives-and-dies by Heavy Trucks, this has been of great interest even to those of us 
within Cobb-Vantress not directly affected by the laws.

Seems it's going to be a bumpy ride for the U.S. transportation industry for the next two or three 
years, as many manufacturers are notorious about "missed-deadlines".

-Scott C. 




From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Tue Sep  5 23:01:59 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 21:01:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <44FDFE2C.10705@f2s.com>
Message-ID: <20060906040159.40262.qmail@web32208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- Ian Molton <spyro at f2s.com> wrote:

> Well you should probably check up on that before
> commenting more because 
> to summarise:

> CO2 is 30-40% lower
> CO is nonexistant

> NOx is essentially the same in a modern diesel over
> the lifetime of the car

That doesn't seem to be the case compared to gasoline
engines: 
<http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/big_rig_cleanup/diesel-engines-and-public-health.html>

"Diesel engines emit large quantities of particulate
matter (called PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), the
latter a precursor to particulates and smog.
Collectively, diesel-powered vehicles account for
nearly half of all nitrogen oxides and more than
two-thirds of all particulates from US
transportation."

> HC is nonexistant

> Particulates whilst there is more, is in larger
> particles more easily handles by the body.

These two statements contradict each other.  Soot is
made of H/C/O particulate; therefore HC cannot be
non-existent if there is soot (and there is plenty in
diesels -- more than 10x as much as with gasoline
engines given today's emissions standards in the US).

<http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/big_rig_cleanup/life-of-soot-diesel-pollution-emissions-and-health-effects.html>

As to the particulates not being as bad for you, that
does not seem to be the case, either: 
<http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/big_rig_cleanup/sick-of-soot-solutions-to-californias-diesel-pollution.html>

"Diesel soot, or particulate matter (PM), is a
dangerous pollutant that can penetrate deep into the
lungs. People exposed to diesel soot can suffer from
severe respiratory and cardiovascular illnesses,
chronic bronchitis, cancer, and premature death."

"In 2000, the California Air Resources Board (CARB)
estimated that diesel PM was responsible for 70
percent of the state?s risk of cancer from airborne
toxics (CARB, 2000c)...  In 2004 alone, diesel
pollution will cause an estimated 3,000 premature
deaths in California?greater than the estimated 2,300
annual homicides in the state.  In addition, diesel
exhaust will cause an estimated 2,700 cases of chronic
bronchitis and about 4,400 hospital admissions
(including emergency room, or ER, visits) for
cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses every year.
The cost of these health impacts is $21.5 billion per
year."

Also, great informational source found at
<http://www.swri.org/3pubs/ttoday/Spring06/PDFs/Particulars.pdf>

It shows that the main particulate base is composed ot
nanoparticles between 10-40 nm in diameter; various
processes then agglomerate these with moisture, etc.
to form larger particles.  However, it would appear
that there are still plenty of the smaller particles,
especially when there is not an abundance of excess HC
(full-throttle operation); this would make those who
live near freeways in additional danger due to the
high levels of nanoparticles emitted when compared to
automobile exhaust (see the next PDF link for
confirmation of this suspicion of mine).  The graphs,
by the way, show nanoparticles as being nearly 50% of
the tailpipe emissions of current diesel engines,
which I would say make them a significant concern when
compared to the much lower soot numbers for
gasoline-powered vehicles.

"All particles emitted from diesel engines are in the
respirable size range. The greatest numbers of
particles tend to concentrate in the ?ultrafine? range
of 3?100 nm in diameter..."

Obviously a Powerpoint presentation without most of
what would pass for text in an article, but still with
some useful info, especially in the graphs: 
<http://www.osti.gov/fcvt/deer2005/mcdonald.pdf>

"Exposure Atmospheres in Both Cases were Mostly Gases
and Vapors (urban legends suggest otherwise)"

As I'd mentioned earlier in the thread, a lot depends
on what emissions you're speaking of. 
Gasoline-powered ICEs have far higher concentrations
of volatile organics in the exhaust, ones that are
extremely hazardous to air-breathing creatures; "With
the exception of select classes of organics, the
gasoline atmosphere has much higher volatile organics,
including ?air toxics?".

So, ultimately, it's a thorny issue, and not an easy
one to address is any simple terms.  Diesels have been
allowed much more lax emissions regs, and therefore
are producing far more emissions (this is USA data,
not Europe).  There's a REASON the feds are mandating
a 90% reduction in emissions for diesels starting next
year; it's because they pollute so damned much, and
have had so little emissions technology applied to
them at this point in mass production.

| Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne)       Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)|
| "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it  |
|   didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to.   |
|  They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. |
|   The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun   |
|     had come up again."                    -Kurt Vonnegut     |
| M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com -  http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze |

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From diyefi at symons.net.au  Tue Sep  5 23:02:02 2006
From: diyefi at symons.net.au (Ant)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 13:32:02 +0930
Subject: [Diy_efi] later model 4 cyl coil pack pinouts?
Message-ID: <1157515323.17538.58.camel@ant.internal>

Im currently in the process of fitting a delco ECU to my 4 cyl holden
gemini with a isuzu G200W engine. So far, so good. I appear to have
everything I need and logically it all makes sense. However I can not
find the pin outs for the coil pack I have imported.

It is a later style coilpack as used on:

1997-02 CHEVY CAVALIER 2.2L
97-2000 HOMBRE
97-03 S10 S15 SONOMA 2.2L PICK UP
97-02 PONTIAC SUNFIRE 2.2L

A picture of the connector is here:

http://www.symons.net.au/coilpack/coilpack_connector.jpg

Ive sussed out the acdelco part number for the connectors are 

PT205 for the 2 pin and PT787 for the 6 pin and have them ordered. 

However Im stuck on the pinouts. I cant find any wiring diagrams or
coilpack info for any of these vehicles in these years. Is anyone able
to help?

Also if anyone can confirm that I can drive this coil pack from a hall
effect sensor in the dizzy (which will otherwise be unused), with 90
degree notches, and an extra one at 10 degrees before TDC that'd be
great. I Know the ECU is expecting that.

Thanks,
Ant



From spyro at f2s.com  Wed Sep  6 08:20:53 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 14:20:53 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F571@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F571@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <44FECB35.7070003@f2s.com>

Steve Ravet wrote:
>>>I never commented on the performance of a diesel, just it's 

> Thanks for the summary.  You may have missed the beginning of the thread
> where I posted certification levels for the 2006 VW Jetta.  There are 3
> non pickup diesel vehicles available in the US, the Jetta, MB E320, and
> Jeep Liberty.  Here are the Jetta and MB numbers, and a Honda for
> comparison.
> 
> 	Jetta		MB E320	Accord
> CO	.11		.1		.3
> NOx	.55		.39		.01
> HC	.824		.76		.01
> part	.069		.064		NA

I notice you seem to not care that the 'NA' excludes particles more than 
1um in size then - of which petrol engines produce plenty, and also that 
the CO2 is massively less in diesels?

Ok heres the results for the VW Lupo 1.2 ('99 model) on normal diesel 
(not the shit you get in the USA) and the 4.2l V8 audi A8 diesel

        Lupo 1.2   Audi A8 4.2
CO     0.22       0.09
NOx    0.12       0.13
T.HC   0.01       NA (as in _zero_)
Part   0.018      0.0006  (yes, thats three zeros after the dp.)
CO2    47.2       154.6

I think its safe to say that on all but NOx, the audi smashed the Hondas 
figures... it probably performs better than that V8 SUV you mentioned 
too. 326BHP and 480 ft-lb torque from 1600-3500 RPM...

Interestingly, at least here in the EU, Honda are heavily pushing... 
you guessed it - diesel technology!

Media quotes for the _3.0_ audi TDI include "One danger for Audi is that 
the A8 3.0 TDI suddenly makes the 3.0-litre and 3.7-litre petrol models 
look utterly superfluous"

> I didn't put in the V8 SUV, it would be too embarrassing.  How do you
> clean up the emissions from your diesel Jetta?

Buy a 'proper' diesel and run it on decent fuel?

Sadly vege oil is better than the crud that oozes out of USA diesel pumps...

> This file lists certification levels (in grams/mile),

I've converted my units to the bastard unit of g/mile from g/km so they 
are a direct comparison. why do people insist on mixing metric and 
imperial units?!

 > In this
> case the time is the usable life of the vehicle, defined as 120K miles
> for gas vehicles but only 100K miles for diesel.

Ludicrous! the average (decent) diesel will run for 300K miles easy. 
Theres a reason why most taxis over here run diesels and I have not sat 
in one (locally) thats done under 200K!

Diesels are well renouned for being far more robust than petrols, with 
the exception of those that were built from a petrol engine with 
injectors stuck into them.

> The EPA doesn't test gas engines for particulate pollution, and this is
> frankly the first time that I've heard that gas engines have particulate
> emissions.

So you're unaware that in the past petrol engines required regular 
'de-coking' then?

Sure, they are better now, but they do emit particles - just ones small 
enough to not be obviously visible.

> who can point us to the
> agency that does certification, and their online results?

The Euro 5 standard is just starting to become the current goal at this 
time. Google will throw up plenty of links.


From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Wed Sep  6 08:51:33 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 08:51:33 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F5B4@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

> 
> You cannot mix-n-match emissions measured according to 
> different standards. The EU driving cycle is very different 
> to the US EPA's.
> See your Bosch Automotive Handbook.

Granted, but presumably diesel and gas numbers from the EU are
comparable to each other, as a way of seeing how clean diesels are over
there.

By the way, Ian, thanks for digging up and posting those numbers.  I
said I was willing to be convinced that VW and MB were sending their
crappy diesels over here, it looks like that's the case.  I look forward
to the day when buses and dump trucks don't trail thick black clouds
behind them, they've avoided their share of the cost of pollution (and
road maintenance) for too long.

--steve



The 2006 ARM Developers' Conference, October 3-5, Santa Clara, US 
Join ARM and its technology and tools Partners from around the world at the only industry event for developers of ARM PoweredR solutions. 
http://www.arm.com/developersconference/


-- 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 spyro at f2s.com  Wed Sep  6 11:21:13 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 17:21:13 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F5B4@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F5B4@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <44FEF579.90405@f2s.com>

Steve Ravet wrote:

> Granted, but presumably diesel and gas numbers from the EU are
> comparable to each other, as a way of seeing how clean diesels are over
> there.

And, of course, this is really only the first generation of widely 
available 'clean diesels' - given another 10 years Im sure they'll be 
even better...

Even now, the total environmental cost (inc. manufacture and disposal) 
of a small electric/diesel hybrid is actually less than a hydrogen fuel 
cell/electric hybrid, which is pretty amazing really given the 'direct 
conversion' nature of a fuel cell...

No surprise we arent seeing more fuel-cell powered cars out there - 
although I'd be really interested to see what becomes of the prototype 
diesel powered (not hydrogen) fuel cell I saw a few years back - I 
firmly believe hydrogen powered cars will never make it because hydrogen 
is just too damn dangerous.

> By the way, Ian, thanks for digging up and posting those numbers.  I
> said I was willing to be convinced that VW and MB were sending their
> crappy diesels over here, it looks like that's the case.

No problem. Just didnt have the time the other day.


From airhawk at hawkgt.net  Wed Sep  6 13:03:08 2006
From: airhawk at hawkgt.net (AirHawk)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 14:03:08 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <44FEF579.90405@f2s.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F5B4@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
	<44FEF579.90405@f2s.com>
Message-ID: <WorldClient-F200609061403.AA03080013@hawkgt.net>

> No surprise we arent seeing more fuel-cell powered cars out there - 
> although I'd be really interested to see what becomes of the prototype 
> diesel powered (not hydrogen) fuel cell I saw a few years back - I 
> firmly believe hydrogen powered cars will never make it because
> hydrogen 
> is just too damn dangerous.

Personally, *I* believe that hydrogen-powered vehicles will never make 
it, NOT because of the danger (really not any more-so than gasoline) - 
but because Hydrogen is just too damn hard to produce cheaply, and 
contain and handle easily. (I won't even go into the "energy-in, energy-
out argument)

You buy a tank of hydrogen, you think you're gonna have it for a good 
long while? Not likely. It "finds ways" out of its containers. "I will 
not be restrained!"  ;^D

-Scott C.




From spyro at f2s.com  Wed Sep  6 13:29:57 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 19:29:57 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <WorldClient-F200609061403.AA03080013@hawkgt.net>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F5B4@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>	<44FEF579.90405@f2s.com>
	<WorldClient-F200609061403.AA03080013@hawkgt.net>
Message-ID: <44FF13A5.4080509@f2s.com>

AirHawk wrote:

> Personally, *I* believe that hydrogen-powered vehicles will never make 
> it, NOT because of the danger (really not any more-so than gasoline) - 
> but because Hydrogen is just too damn hard to produce cheaply, and 
> contain and handle easily. (I won't even go into the "energy-in, energy-
> out argument)

Er. isnt that what I just said?

Look at the average state of your typical family car. there always 
_something_ wrong. Heck, _I_ look after my car and even so its usually 
got some minor niggle or other once every few months...

> You buy a tank of hydrogen, you think you're gonna have it for a good 
> long while? Not likely. It "finds ways" out of its containers. "I will 
> not be restrained!"  ;^D

now put your slightly badly maintained hydrogen powered vehicle in a 
garage, combine that with hydrogens ability to _very_ quickly diffuse in 
air, and I expect you'd be in for a good few nasty 'blow the roof off 
your house' type explosions a year.

And what about in an accident? sure, petrol can escape and burn, but it 
rarely explodes. Put a bit of hydrogen into the cab of a vehicle and 
ignite it (with say, a spark from a jumper - thats all it takes) and 
you've got an explosion that will potentially liquidise the occupants.

All this talk of 'gels' that release hydrogen is all very well but at 
the end of the day they have to release the stuff fast enough to run the 
car and thats fast enough to be an explosion risk.

I dont know about the USA but over here hydrogen is transported in 
individual cylinders, in a _very_ solid steel frame, and the 
transporters arent even allowed to park in a warehouse, much less decant 
the stuff in them, for fear of the consequences.

No, hydrogen isnt a viable fuel unless you're a spaceman.

Just MHO.


From airhawk at hawkgt.net  Wed Sep  6 14:18:43 2006
From: airhawk at hawkgt.net (AirHawk)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 15:18:43 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <44FF13A5.4080509@f2s.com>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F5B4@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>	<44FEF579.90405@f2s.com>
	<WorldClient-F200609061403.AA03080013@hawkgt.net>
	<44FF13A5.4080509@f2s.com>
Message-ID: <WorldClient-F200609061518.AA18430017@hawkgt.net>

> I dont know about the USA but over here hydrogen is transported in 
> individual cylinders, in a _very_ solid steel frame, and the 
> transporters arent even allowed to park in a warehouse, much less
> decant the stuff in them, for fear of the consequences.
> 
> No, hydrogen isnt a viable fuel unless you're a spaceman.
> 
> Just MHO.

It's transported on trucks that resemble a "bundle of pipes". I always 
assumed because of extreme high-pressure/extreme low-temperatures (in the 
case of liquified gas). A single pressure-vessel storing it would have to 
be so prohibitively thick-walled, that the GVWR would be above the max-
allowed on US highways (80,000lb for 18-wheeled tractor-trailers, I 
*think* it's 65,000 for 3 or 4-axle trucks). Several small-diameter 
vessels can have proportionally-thinner walls (but very thick, 
nonetheless).

I have no knowledge of any laws prohibiting parking in enclosed areas. 
Not to say they're not in place, I just don't know anything about them.

-Scott




From spyro at f2s.com  Wed Sep  6 15:39:52 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 21:39:52 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <20060904012120.4082.qmail@web32211.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20060904012120.4082.qmail@web32211.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <44FF3218.7030008@f2s.com>

Adam Wade wrote:
> Dino oil's carbon is just
> out of the "active cycle" for a while longer than that
> from biodiesel.

Surely you arent going to suggest that one should liberate all the 
trapped carbon with carefree abandon?


From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net  Wed Sep  6 15:54:09 2006
From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod)
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 13:54:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <20060905223102.97605.qmail@web81201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20060906205409.91228.qmail@web80504.mail.yahoo.com>

I'd sure like to know what he's doing to get 20 on a d-max loaded to that weight, i've a d-max in a 2500 and get 16 best on hiway unloaded?


----- Original Message ----
From: Jason McNamara <galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net>
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2006 5:31:02 PM
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?


GM has had the 8.1L Big block since 2001 in the
suburban/tahoe/silverado/express van.  I don't know if
they are currently avialable.

I know a guy that had a one ton with one, about 12mpg
unloaded, 6mpg loaded with 30,000 pounds on a trailer.
Truck was modified.  Same guy is now driving a newer
duramax pulling that same trailer and getting 20 mpg.

Some info on the 8.1 can be found here a few bullet
points down.

http://www.mortec.com/notepg1.htm

--- AirHawk <airhawk at hawkgt.net> wrote:

> > how well they do.  Also, I think it was a 6.0L or
> 5.3L SUV I compared
> > to, not an 8.0L SUV.  I don't think you can get an
> 8 liter light truck
> > or SUV,  even in the US :-)
> 
> Until '03 or '04, you could get the HD-8.0L V-10 in
> the Dodge Ram 
> 2500/3500. It's been replaced by the 5.7L Hemi (or
> is it 6.0 for the 
> heavier truck? - mem'ry here). 
> You can obtain the current 8.0+L Viper engine in the
> Dodge Ram SRT-10 
> (1500) right now, but that thing is basically
> worthless for anything but 
> going-fast. 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe:
> http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

From five10man at commspeed.net  Wed Sep  6 16:13:05 2006
From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 14:13:05 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <44FF3218.7030008@f2s.com>
References: <20060904012120.4082.qmail@web32211.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<44FF3218.7030008@f2s.com>
Message-ID: <44FF39E1.3010301@commspeed.net>

The countries who have seen the most growth in demand for liberation of 
carbon (China, India) have seen high growth in improvement in the 
standard of living of their walking carbon containers as well.  Human 
improvement and energy demand are inexorably entangled.  The "industrial 
revolution" happened due to the development of steam power.  Viewed from 
space, the places with a high standard of living sparkle.  The places 
catching up are smudged.  The places hope hasn't reached yet are dark.

Surely you aren't going to suggest that we stuff every "extra" living 
person into a cave and tell him/her to die because someone with spare 
time and an axe to grind has decided that there isn't enough energy for 
them to thrive?

TomV "Conservation, not containment"

Ian Molton wrote:

> Adam Wade wrote:
>
>> Dino oil's carbon is just
>> out of the "active cycle" for a while longer than that
>> from biodiesel.
>
>
> Surely you arent going to suggest that one should liberate all the 
> trapped carbon with carefree abandon?
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>


From steve at donegan.org  Wed Sep  6 17:30:09 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 15:30:09 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] New guy on board - and my personal DIY project
Message-ID: <1157581809.23059.10.camel@perky.donegan.org>

I just joined the list today. I am assisting a friend in building an EFI
setup for an old V4 SAAB, am building one from scratch for my
supercharged Mustang (1985 vintage) and am designing one from scratch to
'fool' the stock ECM in my 1998 LS1 Camaro to do what I want it to do.

The last project is one that may interest you. As of this AM I sent a
PCB fab order for 20 prototypes for my first piece of the design. The
little 3 inch by 1.5 inch board collects wideband O2 data, GM MAF
(frequency based) data, and 4 other optional Analog inputs, has a little
20 MIPS microcontroller on it, and if you tell it a goal it reads the
MAF/O2, determines how much to adjust the signal, and lies to the stock
ECM - i.e. if you set 15.7:1 AFR as a goal (economy) the unit reads the
MAF gms/sec frequency and the O2 sensor and adjusts it's MAF output
frequency to the ECM to fool it into leaning the mixture appropriately.

It will shortly read the MAP sensor and do the equivalent lying to the
ECM - as the stock ECM cross checks sensor data to detect errors.

This is just the first little board in a distributed computing ECM
design that can be used as a stand-alone (like a Megasquirt) or to make
a stock ECM do what you want it to do.

Very fun to be able to enjoy my motorhead, electronics, engineering and
programming skills/hobbies all at the same time.
-- 
"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
criminals."-- John Tandervold



From five10man at commspeed.net  Wed Sep  6 19:35:57 2006
From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 17:35:57 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] later model 4 cyl coil pack pinouts?
In-Reply-To: <1157515323.17538.58.camel@ant.internal>
References: <1157515323.17538.58.camel@ant.internal>
Message-ID: <44FF696D.7000308@commspeed.net>

According to Mitchell On-Demand, for a '98 Cavalier:

Connector C1
A 450 GND
B 233 IGN

Connector C2
A 574 CKP SIG
B 423 IGN CTRL A
C 406 IGN CTRL B
D 430 REF SIG
E 573 CKP SIG
F 453 REF LOW

A and E go directly to the CKP and are purple and yellow on this car.  
B, C, D, and F go to or from the PCM.

Hope this helps,
TomV



Ant wrote:

>Im currently in the process of fitting a delco ECU to my 4 cyl holden
>gemini with a isuzu G200W engine. So far, so good. I appear to have
>everything I need and logically it all makes sense. However I can not
>find the pin outs for the coil pack I have imported.
>
>It is a later style coilpack as used on:
>
>1997-02 CHEVY CAVALIER 2.2L
>97-2000 HOMBRE
>97-03 S10 S15 SONOMA 2.2L PICK UP
>97-02 PONTIAC SUNFIRE 2.2L
>
>A picture of the connector is here:
>
>http://www.symons.net.au/coilpack/coilpack_connector.jpg
>
>Ive sussed out the acdelco part number for the connectors are 
>
>PT205 for the 2 pin and PT787 for the 6 pin and have them ordered. 
>
>However Im stuck on the pinouts. I cant find any wiring diagrams or
>coilpack info for any of these vehicles in these years. Is anyone able
>to help?
>
>Also if anyone can confirm that I can drive this coil pack from a hall
>effect sensor in the dizzy (which will otherwise be unused), with 90
>degree notches, and an extra one at 10 degrees before TDC that'd be
>great. I Know the ECU is expecting that.
>
>Thanks,
>Ant
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>
>  
>


From boucherj at prodigy.net  Wed Sep  6 21:22:35 2006
From: boucherj at prodigy.net (Joe Boucher)
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 21:22:35 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] New guy on board - and my personal DIY project
In-Reply-To: <1157581809.23059.10.camel@perky.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDIENCELAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>

This is cool.  What does it take to reprogram the board?

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 5:30 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: [Diy_efi] New guy on board - and my personal DIY project


I just joined the list today. I am assisting a friend in building an EFI
setup for an old V4 SAAB, am building one from scratch for my
supercharged Mustang (1985 vintage) and am designing one from scratch to
'fool' the stock ECM in my 1998 LS1 Camaro to do what I want it to do.

The last project is one that may interest you. As of this AM I sent a
PCB fab order for 20 prototypes for my first piece of the design. The
little 3 inch by 1.5 inch board collects wideband O2 data, GM MAF
(frequency based) data, and 4 other optional Analog inputs, has a little
20 MIPS microcontroller on it, and if you tell it a goal it reads the
MAF/O2, determines how much to adjust the signal, and lies to the stock
ECM - i.e. if you set 15.7:1 AFR as a goal (economy) the unit reads the
MAF gms/sec frequency and the O2 sensor and adjusts it's MAF output
frequency to the ECM to fool it into leaning the mixture appropriately.

It will shortly read the MAP sensor and do the equivalent lying to the
ECM - as the stock ECM cross checks sensor data to detect errors.

This is just the first little board in a distributed computing ECM
design that can be used as a stand-alone (like a Megasquirt) or to make
a stock ECM do what you want it to do.

Very fun to be able to enjoy my motorhead, electronics, engineering and
programming skills/hobbies all at the same time.
-- 
"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
criminals."-- John Tandervold

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi


From steve at donegan.org  Wed Sep  6 21:41:52 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 19:41:52 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] New guy on board - and my personal DIY project
In-Reply-To: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDIENCELAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>
References: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDIENCELAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>
Message-ID: <1157596912.25028.18.camel@perky.donegan.org>

Well - at present to really reprogram the board (at a code level) it
would require a PIC programmer of some type. I use a USB attached one I
bought a long time ago :-) You would also need a compiler that costs a
few hundred $ - for the moment I'll keep my prototype code to myself -
once it flies 100% I'll open source it.

To tell it to seek a goal - that will be done via either the RS232
channel or the SPI or I2C channels from my core brain for this project -
which is a 60+ MIPS ARM microcontroller (how can you call something
micro when it's 32 bits, and has vastly more CPU/RAM/etc than the
computer on the Space Shuttle?) For the basis of my first prototypes
I'll be putting together a simple RS232 protocol - commands to the board
and data back from the board - should make it usable as a data logger
even if it is not playing games with the stock ECM :-)

A note on my background - I was born in 1956. I have been doing
electronics, cars, programming and bit-level device drivers and network
code since I was 15 - ie Haight Ashbury/Vietnam days. 

I intend each of my little boards to be stand-alone (ie use your laptop
to tell it what to do or log it's data) and integrate with my ECM when I
get that done - it currently is an ARM 32 bit unit running a real time
OS called FreeRTOS - the Olimec ARM prototype board cost a whopping 70$.
That guy's job will be to take the inputs that are already
pre-conditioned and issue orders back to the peripheral boards - being a
'dinosaur' I would say I modeled this system on the original IBM 360
mainframe - a core brain with peripheral brains (channel attached
controllers in that era) to distribute the work.


On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 21:22 -0500, Joe Boucher wrote:
> This is cool.  What does it take to reprogram the board?
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
> Behalf Of Steven P. Donegan
> Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2006 5:30 PM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: [Diy_efi] New guy on board - and my personal DIY project
> 
> 
> I just joined the list today. I am assisting a friend in building an EFI
> setup for an old V4 SAAB, am building one from scratch for my
> supercharged Mustang (1985 vintage) and am designing one from scratch to
> 'fool' the stock ECM in my 1998 LS1 Camaro to do what I want it to do.
> 
> The last project is one that may interest you. As of this AM I sent a
> PCB fab order for 20 prototypes for my first piece of the design. The
> little 3 inch by 1.5 inch board collects wideband O2 data, GM MAF
> (frequency based) data, and 4 other optional Analog inputs, has a little
> 20 MIPS microcontroller on it, and if you tell it a goal it reads the
> MAF/O2, determines how much to adjust the signal, and lies to the stock
> ECM - i.e. if you set 15.7:1 AFR as a goal (economy) the unit reads the
> MAF gms/sec frequency and the O2 sensor and adjusts it's MAF output
> frequency to the ECM to fool it into leaning the mixture appropriately.
> 
> It will shortly read the MAP sensor and do the equivalent lying to the
> ECM - as the stock ECM cross checks sensor data to detect errors.
> 
> This is just the first little board in a distributed computing ECM
> design that can be used as a stand-alone (like a Megasquirt) or to make
> a stock ECM do what you want it to do.
> 
> Very fun to be able to enjoy my motorhead, electronics, engineering and
> programming skills/hobbies all at the same time.
-- 
"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
criminals."-- John Tandervold



From steve at donegan.org  Wed Sep  6 21:55:14 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 19:55:14 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] New guy on board - and my personal DIY project
In-Reply-To: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDIENCELAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>
References: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDIENCELAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>
Message-ID: <1157597714.25028.21.camel@perky.donegan.org>

Missed one note - all my little boards will have the microcontrollers
socketed - so a code change will be a simple swap chips thing for those
that have no interest in dealing with flashing microcontrollers. For
those that want to I'll make any .HEX updates available on my web site.



From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  6 23:44:58 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 21:44:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <44FF3218.7030008@f2s.com>
Message-ID: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- Ian Molton <spyro at f2s.com> wrote:

>> Dino oil's carbon is just out of the "active cycle"
>> for a while longer than that from biodiesel.

> Surely you arent going to suggest that one should
> liberate all the trapped carbon with carefree
abandon?

I don't think anyone suggested any such thing. 
Certainly not me.

Someone claimed that using biodiesel did not add
carbon to the environment, and that using fossil fuels
DID.  I was pointing out that that is not the case;
the amount of carbon on the planet remains almost
completely constant, albeit in various different forms
depending on compound.

| Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne)       Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)|
| "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it  |
|   didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to.   |
|  They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. |
|   The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun   |
|     had come up again."                    -Kurt Vonnegut     |
| M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com -  http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze |

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From WSCowell at aol.com  Thu Sep  7 00:26:41 2006
From: WSCowell at aol.com (WSCowell at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 01:26:41 EDT
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
Message-ID: <56e.4b70cfb.32310791@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 07/09/2006 05:45:51 GMT Standard Time,  
espresso_doppio at yahoo.com writes:

Someone  claimed that using biodiesel did not add
carbon to the environment, and  that using fossil fuels
DID.  I was pointing out that that is not the  case;
the amount of carbon on the planet remains almost
completely  constant, albeit in various different forms
depending on  compound.





That was probably me.  You are correct, in that the same amount of  carbon is 
there on the planet as a whole but this is disingenuous.   The key thing is 
your addition of the extra words "on the planet" to the  discussion.  We all 
know that the current concern is that carbon which was  safely locked up in the 
ground - fossil fuel - is being released back into the  atmosphere as CO2.  In 
that form, in that place, it is damaging.
 
There is a difference between (i) liberating back to atmosphere carbon  which 
was "reclaimed" by a plant earlier this year (biodiesel),  and  (ii) 
liberating back to atmosphere carbon locked up 300 million years and  more ago when 
fossil fuel beds were laid down (petro-diesel).
 
The latter is the damaging event, because the atmospheric CO2 level  will 
rise, and with it the mean temperature of the planet - or that is the  position 
apparently demonstrated by trend data.
 
So what you say is imho theoretically correct but practically  unhelpful, if 
not misleading!  Given the quality of your usual posts, and  your enormous 
experience, I am surprised that you would run this argument.  :-)
 
Will


From niche at iinet.net.au  Thu Sep  7 01:11:15 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:11:15 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <WorldClient-F200609061403.AA03080013@hawkgt.net>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F5B4@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
	<44FEF579.90405@f2s.com>
	<WorldClient-F200609061403.AA03080013@hawkgt.net>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060907135859.02801a80@iinet.net.au>>

At 02:03 AM 9/7/06, you wrote:
>> No surprise we arent seeing more fuel-cell powered cars out there - 
>> although I'd be really interested to see what becomes of the prototype 
>> diesel powered (not hydrogen) fuel cell I saw a few years back - I 
>> firmly believe hydrogen powered cars will never make it because
>> hydrogen 
>> is just too damn dangerous.
>
>Personally, *I* believe that hydrogen-powered vehicles will never make 
>it, NOT because of the danger (really not any more-so than gasoline) - 

Ooooo Disagree with you here and its likely most hazmat people will too.

Did you know H2 can ignite from its own generated static. Open the top
on a H2 bottle stand back and it will ignite from the static generated by
the gas leaving the bottle.

H2 is also quite sticky, it will form a layer on static surfaces for several
minutes and can penetrate cloths and other fabrics for over an hour.

H2 also causes embrittlement of most metals, especially steel. To use it
in a vehicle for any length of time means serious changes to the engine
or cranks will break etc...

The range of ignition of H2 is far wider than for petrol vapour, this and the
fact that H2 leaks out so easily of most fittings makes it far more dangerous
than petrol. ie. You dont need much H2 in a container (or near it) to have
an explosion, as little as 3% is enough by volume *and* if you consider its
static nature that can mean there is far more in other locations nearby
if the average is 3%. Also you dont need much air in H2 to ignite, I'm
not sure of the figure but it means you cant risk any pressurised containers
having *any* air or you have a sizable bang.

Oh and if you do have a hydrogen fire, you can see the flame front easily.

H2 is just such a bad fuel for storage and energy density. There is more
Hydrogen in a litre of petrol than there is in a litre of liquid hydrogen.

The infrastructure we have globally is already well suited to liquid fuels, it
would be a huge waste of resources to shift this to a gas that is so difficult
to liquify, harder to store and more dangerous to use.

>but because Hydrogen is just too damn hard to produce cheaply, and 
>contain and handle easily. (I won't even go into the "energy-in, energy-
>out argument)

Thats true, every method of producing hydrogen (so far) in any sort of volume
consumes far more petrol by almost a factor of 5 (best case) than is recovered
from the consumption of that hydrogen versus the petrol to generate it in the
first place or where the equilibrium is shifted in a refinery. Our own H2 bus
trial in perth is a *massive* waste of resources, the bust can only travel some
80Kms on a "fill' and BP "charge rather a lot". The buses are over a million
AUD$ each and have yet to have their fuel cells replatinised...

>You buy a tank of hydrogen, you think you're gonna have it for a good 
>long while? Not likely. It "finds ways" out of its containers. "I will 
>not be restrained!"  ;^D

Yes very true, the fittings are also subject to embrittlement and leaking out
doesnt always mean it goes up , its statically attracted to various surfaces...




>-Scott C.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi


Regards from


Mike
Perth, Western Australia
VL Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From niche at iinet.net.au  Thu Sep  7 01:26:43 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:26:43 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <56e.4b70cfb.32310791@aol.com>
References: <56e.4b70cfb.32310791@aol.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060907142345.028219f0@iinet.net.au>>

At 01:26 PM 9/7/06, you wrote: 
>So what you say is imho theoretically correct but practically  unhelpful, if 
>not misleading!  Given the quality of your usual posts, and  your enormous 
>experience, I am surprised that you would run this argument.  :-)

I sympathise with Adam, he slapped his head some time ago trying to
understand how the greenfire plug could possibly function (whether it
was any better or not than other methods), so his offering of obtuse
technically correct but completely useless observations (perhaps
designed to provoke - who knows ?)  might well be an artefact of such
self abuse... ;)




Regards from


Mike
Perth, Western Australia
VL Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From niche at iinet.net.au  Thu Sep  7 01:35:21 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:35:21 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20060907135859.02801a80@iinet.net.au>>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F5B4@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
	<44FEF579.90405@f2s.com>
	<WorldClient-F200609061403.AA03080013@hawkgt.net>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060907135859.02801a80@iinet.net.au>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060907142815.02810030@iinet.net.au>>

At 02:11 PM 9/7/06, you wrote:

>Oh and if you do have a hydrogen fire, you can see the flame front easily.

my slip, meant to say "... cant see the flame front..."     !my bad!

Firefighters used to use a long stick with a rag at the end, dont know what current practice is ?

And the guide for coming across a H2 fire was (from an old hazmat guide):-

"Life arm fully extended, raise thumb, if you can still see the building behind
your thumb, then you are too close"

There are a pair of H2 buses in Perth which look nice and have pretty little
steam exhausts at top - so you *know* they are working but I have a tinge
of concern when I drive past them, good thing is the tanks are at very top
and not covered so good chance for leakage to mostly go straight up but,

Anyone know the current practice for dealing with an H2 fire ?


ps: Welcome to Steven, you'll notice we have these sideways discussions
from time to time. I'm interested in the WideBand board you've done and
expect to get a sensor soon and prefer to construct my own driver/acquisition
to suit my other equipment,




Regards from


Mike Massen
Network Power Systems
Lab 08 9444 8961
Mb 0438 048961
Perth, Western Australia
* VL/VK Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt !
* New Skyline/NIssan/VL RB30 Milspec ignition driver in long term economy trials
* Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
* Industrial grade PolyVinyliDeneChloride (PVDC Copolymer) in bulk, the best
  oxygen and water protective barrier you can find for circuit boards.
Web site under construction   http://niche.iinet.net.au


From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  7 01:41:02 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 23:41:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <56e.4b70cfb.32310791@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20060907064102.91469.qmail@web32205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- WSCowell at aol.com wrote:

> ...is being released back into the atmosphere as
> CO2.  In that form, in that place, it is damaging.

As far as we know from the mass-media sources.  I'll
admit there are a few (very few!) studies that
indicate we need to look deeper at how things are
changing with our use of fossil fuels.  It remains a
fact, however, that humans are only responsible for
about 5% of the carbon released into the environment
on a yearly basis, and that the earth has seen much
higher levels of greehouse gases, especially CO2, in
times past from strictly natural sources.  I remain
unconvinced that there is an impending crisis, at
least byt the "evidence" commonly bandied about. 
Sure, the mean temps are increasing, but that's not
out of character with the normal cycles of our planet,
and I haven't seen anyone yet provide any conclusive
evidence that we are seeing something distinctly
abnormal, rather than a natural cycling of
temperatures and gases on our planet.

Therefore, I object to the automatic characterization
of the release of CO2 being "harmful" in any black and
white terms.  The jury is very much still out on OUR
rate of CO2 production, and it can be pretty easily
shown that CO2 is a necessary and important part of
the life cycles on our planet.

<http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm>

> There is a difference between (i) liberating back to
> atmosphere carbon which was "reclaimed" by a plant
> earlier this year (biodiesel),  and  (ii) liberating
> back to atmosphere carbon locked up 300 million
> years and  more ago when fossil fuel beds were laid
> down (petro-diesel).

In what sense?  And even if that were definitively the
case, shouldn't we be spending billions trying to seal
volcanos, which spew more CO2 and CO into the
atmosphere yearly than humans do?  Why isn't anyone
doing that?  If our releases of CO2 are bad, then
these releases must be much worse, and should receive
priority for funding and research, yes?  Yet I have
never even heard of a proposal along those lines, much
less any funding or research.  Why is that, I wonder?

>From the above research paper:

"Total human CO2 emissions primarily from use of coal,
oil, and natural gas and the production of cement are
currently about 5.5 GT C per year.

To put these figures in perspective, it is estimated
that the atmosphere contains 750 Gt C; the surface
ocean contains 1,000 Gt C; vegetation, soils, and
detritus contain 2,200 Gt C; and the intermediate and
deep oceans contain 38,000 Gt C. Each year, the
surface ocean and atmosphere exchange an estimated 90
Gt C; vegetation and the atmosphere, 60 Gt C; marine
biota and the surface ocean, 50 Gt C; and the surface
ocean and the intermediate and deep oceans, 100 Gt C."

Then have a look over here: 
<http://www.ees.nmt.edu/Geop/mevo/geochem/co2.html>

Halfway down is a chart on volcanos and their CO2 flux
per day.  Etna produces roughly 70 Kt C a DAY, or 25.5
Mt C per year.  That's nearly 1/5 the total output of
the entire human population on earth!  From ONE
volcano.  Kyoto is going after the wrong guy...

Another interesting article here, showing how
seriously vulcanism threatens ozone and solar
adsorbtion of radiation from sunlight. 
<http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1997/of97-262/of97-262.html>

> The latter is the damaging event, because the
> atmospheric CO2 level will rise, and with it the
> mean temperature of the planet - or that is the 
> position apparently demonstrated by trend data.

Unfortunately, current data gathered in the past few
hundred years is not extensive enough to show that we
are definitively deviating from natural cycles.  Check
the graphs from the first link I posted in this email;
they show it quite clearly.

> So what you say is imho theoretically correct but
> practically  unhelpful, if not misleading!

Aside from the lack of meaningful evidence to support
your belief, and its condemnation of the point YOU
assigned to what I posted (which it does not have and
was not given by myself), I suggest you look at what I
posted.  Someone made a factual statement that was
wrong, and I corrected it.  You chose to assign some
additional meaning to it, not me, nor my words. 
Please don't blame me for something you did on your
own.

> Given the quality of your usual posts, and  your
> enormous experience, I am surprised that you would
> run this argument.  :-)

Ad hominem, even "gently" disguised, is generally the
mark of someone without evidence to back his or her
point, when there is a strong desire not to back down
from a claim.  And I'll again remind you that I made
no "argument"; you fabricated that from whole cloth, yourself.

| Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne)       Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)|
| "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it  |
|   didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to.   |
|  They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. |
|   The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun   |
|     had come up again."                    -Kurt Vonnegut     |
| M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com -  http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze |

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From buckwill33 at hotmail.com  Thu Sep  7 01:43:37 2006
From: buckwill33 at hotmail.com (Buck Williams)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 00:43:37 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
Message-ID: <BAY103-W3F5DC4B8BDFBE8318BA68CE360@phx.gbl>

do you guys know thattt liquaiad hydrogennn cannot be contaianed in a liquid stateeee without ventingg to relase tje excess pressure, there is no known material that can containliq hydregen without venting,, that is why hydregen is not kept in buildings where ventalation is not natural and constant and why when u see films of liq hydrogen rocketss,  there is alwayss venting vapors presssant,,, buck

> Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 15:18:43 -0400> From: airhawk at hawkgt.net> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?> > > I dont know about the USA but over here hydrogen is transported in > > individual cylinders, in a _very_ solid steel frame, and the > > transporters arent even allowed to park in a warehouse, much less> > decant the stuff in them, for fear of the consequences.> > > > No, hydrogen isnt a viable fuel unless you're a spaceman.> > > > Just MHO.> > It's transported on trucks that resemble a "bundle of pipes". I always > assumed because of extreme high-pressure/extreme low-temperatures (in the > case of liquified gas). A single pressure-vessel storing it would have to > be so prohibitively thick-walled, that the GVWR would be above the max-> allowed on US highways (80,000lb for 18-wheeled tractor-trailers, I > *think* it's 65,000 for 3 or 4-axle trucks). Several small-diameter > vessels can have proportionally-thinner walls (but very thick, > nonetheless).> > I have no knowledge of any laws prohibiting parking in enclosed areas. > Not to say they're not in place, I just don't know anything about them.> > -Scott> > > _______________________________________________> Diy_efi mailing list> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

From niche at iinet.net.au  Thu Sep  7 01:55:01 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:55:01 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it? Hydrogen storage ?
In-Reply-To: <BAY103-W3F5DC4B8BDFBE8318BA68CE360@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY103-W3F5DC4B8BDFBE8318BA68CE360@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060907145048.02828780@iinet.net.au>>

Chaps,

There's a lot of work going into hydrogen storage methods and although
I see little value in using H2 as a fuel due to the overall economics etc
I'm curious what the state of the art is ?

I recall seeing a demonstration many years ago of Palladium and how the
metal has such a huge propensity for hydrogen that a solid cube of the
stuff will pincushion in its massive attempts to soak up H2 like a sponge,
its quite amazing how it looks like its going to explode...!

But I am not sure of the mass it can contain at close to STP or how long it takes ?



Regards from


Mike
Perth, Western Australia
VL Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From spyro at f2s.com  Thu Sep  7 05:15:56 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:15:56 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <44FFF15C.7090606@f2s.com>

Adam Wade wrote:
> --- Ian Molton <spyro at f2s.com> wrote:
> 
>
> Someone claimed that using biodiesel did not add
> carbon to the environment, and that using fossil fuels
> DID.  I was pointing out that that is not the case;
> the amount of carbon on the planet remains almost
> completely constant, albeit in various different forms
> depending on compound.

Well thats a somewhat specious argument - the 'environment' is the bit 
we live in. Thus the release of carbon from deep underground should 
really be viewed as an outside source of carbon being released into our 
living environment.

Most of us dont live underground in oily caverns.


From spyro at f2s.com  Thu Sep  7 05:21:51 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:21:51 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20060907142815.02810030@iinet.net.au>>
References: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F5B4@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>	<44FEF579.90405@f2s.com>	<WorldClient-F200609061403.AA03080013@hawkgt.net>	<7.0.0.16.0.20060907135859.02801a80@iinet.net.au>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060907142815.02810030@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <44FFF2BF.6030207@f2s.com>

Mike wrote:
> At 02:11 PM 9/7/06, you wrote:

> Anyone know the current practice for dealing with an H2 fire ?

AFAIK, run like hell :)


From spyro at f2s.com  Thu Sep  7 05:24:44 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:24:44 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] New guy on board - and my personal DIY project
In-Reply-To: <1157596912.25028.18.camel@perky.donegan.org>
References: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDIENCELAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>
	<1157596912.25028.18.camel@perky.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <44FFF36C.3030403@f2s.com>

Another ARM hacker eh? hello!


From niche at iinet.net.au  Thu Sep  7 05:28:35 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 18:28:35 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it? - Seams filling up again ?
In-Reply-To: <44FFF15C.7090606@f2s.com>
References: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<44FFF15C.7090606@f2s.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060907182137.02a9f640@iinet.net.au>>

At 06:15 PM 9/7/06, you wrote:
>Most of us dont live underground in oily caverns.

There seems to be more anecdotal evidence these (early) caverns are slowly
filling up with more oil, not just from the seams bleeding out due to
the removal of the primary oil by reduction in pressure but other factors.

There was an article in the local paper about 4 years ago by a US
scientist/enthusiast/professor that suggested the surrounding seams
held a huge amount of bacteria and organic feedstocks and the oil
we traditionally have drawn off releases the pressure and by virtue of
this allows the trapped bacteria in the surrounding seams to accelerate
their decomposition of the feedstocks to further spill oil into those
caverns. There are supposedly many fields which have been revisited
some 5 to 15 years after being tested as unviable in terms of flow
and "voila" finding rather more oil then expected ... !

Does any one know if studies have been done on crude to determine if
there are any remnants of bacterial activity present, not just from
200 or so million yearfs ago but as a result of more or less contemporary
activity ?






Regards from


Mike Massen
Network Power Systems
Lab 08 9444 8961
Mb 0438 048961
Perth, Western Australia
* VL/VK Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt ! Now buddy packs
* RB30 Skyline/Nissan/VL Milspec now in economy trials
* Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
* Industrial grade PolyVinyliDeneChloride (PVDC Copolymer) in bulk, the best
  oxygen and water protective barrier you can find for circuit boards.
Web site under construction   http://niche.iinet.net.au


From spyro at f2s.com  Thu Sep  7 05:31:04 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 11:31:04 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it? Hydrogen storage ?
In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20060907145048.02828780@iinet.net.au>>
References: <BAY103-W3F5DC4B8BDFBE8318BA68CE360@phx.gbl>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060907145048.02828780@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <44FFF4E8.4030300@f2s.com>

Mike wrote:
> Chaps,
> 
> There's a lot of work going into hydrogen storage methods and although
> I see little value in using H2 as a fuel due to the overall economics etc
> I'm curious what the state of the art is ?

Me too.

> I recall seeing a demonstration many years ago of Palladium and how the
> metal has such a huge propensity for hydrogen that a solid cube of the
> stuff will pincushion in its massive attempts to soak up H2 like a sponge,
> its quite amazing how it looks like its going to explode...!

Cool. I'd have liked to see that.


From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Thu Sep  7 09:14:06 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 09:14:06 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F84F@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org 
> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ian Molton
> Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 5:22 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
> 
> Mike wrote:
> > At 02:11 PM 9/7/06, you wrote:
> 
> > Anyone know the current practice for dealing with an H2 fire ?
> 
> AFAIK, run like hell :)

Seen on the back of a T-shirt:

"I am a bomb technician.  If you see me running, try to keep up"

--steve



-- The 2006 ARM Developers' Conference, October 3-5, Santa Clara, US 
Join ARM and its technology and tools Partners from around the world at the only industry event for developers of ARM Powered(R) solutions. 
http://www.arm.com/developersconference/


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 diy-efi at t-n-e.com  Thu Sep  7 12:22:21 2006
From: diy-efi at t-n-e.com (Phil Hunter)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 10:22:21 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] H2 embrittlement (was Re: Is E85 worth it?)
Message-ID: <1157649741.27537@bear.he.net>

"Regular" hydrogen does NOT cause embrittlement, it's IONIZED
H2 that does, like you can get when welding wet metal, chrome
plating, and in nuclear power plants. I've said this before,
I have a steel welding tank of H2, first inspection date I
can see is 1957, making the tank 50ish years old. If H2 caused
embrittlement, then why do they keep STAMPING the inspection
dates into the tank?!? There are tanks out there over 100
years old, still in regular service.

Same tank, I haven't used it for over a year, I could not
discern any loss in pressure. Yep, H2 leaks out of anything,
given enough time. I'm just SO worried about that, I'm shakin'
in my boots.

The pressure regulator is specific for H2, uses a metal diaphram.

-phil
(digest)


From pstelzig at tcq.net  Thu Sep  7 13:09:57 2006
From: pstelzig at tcq.net (paul)
Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 13:09:57 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <20060906040159.40262.qmail@web32208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20060906040159.40262.qmail@web32208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1157652598.10940.8.camel@localhost>


> 
> That doesn't seem to be the case compared to gasoline
> engines: 
> <http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/big_rig_cleanup/diesel-engines-and-public-health.html>
> 
> "Diesel engines emit large quantities of particulate
> matter (called PM) and nitrogen oxides (NOx), the
> latter a precursor to particulates and smog.
> Collectively, diesel-powered vehicles account for
> nearly half of all nitrogen oxides and more than
> two-thirds of all particulates from US
> transportation."

I don't have the statistics and I don't have time to look them up, but I
believe that a significantly larger amount of diesel fuel is burned than
gasoline in the US.  The largest transportation fuel user is semi
trucks.  So if I remember right and more diesel is burned and it's is
responsible for only half of the NOx than it must be cleaner.  Also most
of the diesel is burned in heavy trucks which have much lower emission
standards than passenger cars in the US. 



From klaus at Innovate-tech.com  Thu Sep  7 13:23:20 2006
From: klaus at Innovate-tech.com (Klaus Allmendinger)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 11:23:20 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C74341406117830128F84F@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>
Message-ID: <2C71874F3C26374DB7DBC538FCF82AB23906D2@ITFC1.innovate.com>

Hi,

I saw a documentary a while back about a test the US army did:
Fire on 3 cars with incendiary rounds. About 20 rounds/car in the trunk
area.

1st car with a regular gasoline tank in the trunk
2nd car with a propane tank in the trunk
3rd car with a hydrogen tank in the trunk

First and Second car immediately caught fire and burned out, the
gasoline car did so spectacularly.
Third car had some "patchable" holes, but the hydrogen vented through
the holes and burned above the car, not even damaging its paint. Filmed
using a infrared camera so the H2 flame was visible. Even setting the
venting hydrogen on fire proved to be difficult and was only possible by
firing the rounds through the venting hydrogen, not into the car.

Hydrogen can burn in extremely diluted mixtures with air, that's true.
But the explosion danger is almost non-existant at these extreme
dilutions because the flame-front speed becomes extremely slow (but is
much faster than gasoline when using near stoichiometric mixtures).
Also, because H2 is so light, it will dissipate almost immediately from
normal, not hermetically sealed places like a car interior.
IC engines running on hydrogen may have no throttle because of the
extreme dilution tolerance of hydrogen. They can be throttled, like a
diesel, purely by mixture control. Thermodynamic efficiency is very
high, higher than a diesel, but lower than a fuel-cell system.
At low loads the mixture is so weak, and therefore the flame-front so
slow, that spark ignition has to happen even before the intake valve
closes. This of course is difficult because of the danger of backfiring
into the intake.
On a per pound basis Hydrogen has the most energy of any IC fuel. Of
course by volume it's a different matter as H2 has such a low density.

As to hydrogen production:
There has been an article in the (I think) June SciAm about a new
discovery using Titanium Oxide nanotubes. If exposed to air and
sunlight, they break up Water into H2 and O2. Even though the process is
not yet very efficient, according to the article, the surface area of a
typical residential roof would yield the energy equivalent of 10 Liters
of gasoline in H2 per day. The efficiency is expected to double within
the next few years. Production cost of the nanotubes is expected to be a
tiny fraction of solar cells.

As promised, here also some studies about energy efficiency of corn
based ethanol:
http://www.ethanol.org/documents/NetEnergyBalanceofEthanol.pdf
http://www.ethanol-gec.org/corn_eth.htm
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer721/AER721.PDF

Regards,
Klaus






-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]
On Behalf Of Steve Ravet
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 7:14 AM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org 
> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ian Molton
> Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 5:22 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
> 
> Mike wrote:
> > At 02:11 PM 9/7/06, you wrote:
> 
> > Anyone know the current practice for dealing with an H2 fire ?
> 
> AFAIK, run like hell :)

Seen on the back of a T-shirt:

"I am a bomb technician.  If you see me running, try to keep up"

--steve



-- The 2006 ARM Developers' Conference, October 3-5, Santa Clara, US 
Join ARM and its technology and tools Partners from around the world at
the only industry event for developers of ARM Powered(R) solutions. 
http://www.arm.com/developersconference/


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.


_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi


From tigers at bserv.com  Wed Sep  6 22:17:12 2006
From: tigers at bserv.com (Bob Tom)
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2006 23:17:12 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] TPI Air Intake Temp Sensor Location
In-Reply-To: <001001c6cf09$ba5f4960$6501a8c0@davis>
References: <20060902233906.61212.qmail@web54614.mail.yahoo.com>
	<001001c6cf09$ba5f4960$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.0.20060906224945.02cac150@bserv.com>

At 11:33 PM 9/2/06, Clair wrote:
>... does the air temp sensor care where it's mounted?  ...

Back around '99 or '00, I put the MP 4bbl M1 intake on my '97 5.2L
Dakota.  It did not have a place for the air temp sensor.  MP
subsequently offered a 2-bbl version which I believe has
a spot for the sensor.

A lot of the Dakota drag racers replace their stock air cleaners
with aftermarket air cleaners which run an air duct to bring in
colder outside air.  They relocate the sensor to the air duct
of these aftermarket air cleaners.

I personally have a dual duct air cleaner with an air duct running
to each side of the rad.  I did not opt to relocate the sensor
to a duct but decided to just put it inside an insulated foam cylinder
and placed it the air stream from the fan for street driving.  At the track,
I remove the sensor and put in a resistor which fools the pcm into thinking
the air temp is a constant 60F.  I have not noticed any ill effects
during normal driving.  On the track, it helps to keep the a/f mixture
richer at wot and at high rpms (above 5000).  My scanner does not show
that the resistor has any affects on timing.

As a mopar fan from way way back ;-) , I look forward to reading about
your project.

Bob
97 318 Dak CC, 13.76 @ 99.65
70 383 Challenger, 47000 original miles 




From dowelljd at alltel.net  Thu Sep  7 18:14:22 2006
From: dowelljd at alltel.net (David Dowell)
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 00:14:22 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] H2 embrittlement (was Re: Is E85 worth it?)
In-Reply-To: <1157649741.27537@bear.he.net>
References: <1157649741.27537@bear.he.net>
Message-ID: <4500A7CE.6020803@alltel.net>

H2 embrittlement does not require IONIZED H2. It occurs at room
temperatures with HIGH strength steels. In fact, it is at it?s worst at
about room temperature and decreases as the temperature rises until
you get to about 175 degrees F, above which embrittlement no longer
occurs. Like I said, it occurs in HIGH strength steels. If you keep
the yield strength of the steel to 80,000 psi or less, embrittlement is not
a problem. So?. How do you build an H2 container that will stay
together and not break? You build it with steel of 80,000 psi yield
strength or less. H2 will not "work" it way through steel and "leak" but
because it is a VERY small atom, it will find it's way out of other forms of
containers that normally will hold air. Rubber, generally will not 
control H2.
You r kids fair balloons is an example.



Phil Hunter wrote:
> "Regular" hydrogen does NOT cause embrittlement, it's IONIZED
> H2 that does, like you can get when welding wet metal, chrome
> plating, and in nuclear power plants. I've said this before,
> I have a steel welding tank of H2, first inspection date I
> can see is 1957, making the tank 50ish years old. If H2 caused
> embrittlement, then why do they keep STAMPING the inspection
> dates into the tank?!? There are tanks out there over 100
> years old, still in regular service.
>
> Same tank, I haven't used it for over a year, I could not
> discern any loss in pressure. Yep, H2 leaks out of anything,
> given enough time. I'm just SO worried about that, I'm shakin'
> in my boots.
>
> The pressure regulator is specific for H2, uses a metal diaphram.
>
> -phil
> (digest)
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>   


From bill.washington at nec.com.au  Thu Sep  7 19:16:19 2006
From: bill.washington at nec.com.au (Bill Washington)
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 10:16:19 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Hydrogen
In-Reply-To: <20060907170006.C53F43B6C1@ns2.nec.com.au>
References: <20060907170006.C53F43B6C1@ns2.nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <4500B653.2000608@nec.com.au>

Gents,
    Some years ago I saw film of a demonstration comparing the safety of 
cylinders of liquified Hydrogen vs LPG.
the cylinders (of similar volume) were setout on a weapons range and an 
incendiary projectile was fired into each one to simulate a fracture 
resulting from a vehicle collision.

The result:
The Hydrogen vented in a rising jet of (invisible) flame - yes hot but 
not instantly catastrophic - anyone close by would have had a chance to 
escape.

The LPG cylinder exploded instantly in a very large explosion which 
would have obiterated anything/everything in a 20-30 yard radius and 
severly damaged anything over a considerably larger area.

The conclusion presented was that the hydrogen was much safer, however 
we have many LPG cars on the road and very few hydrogen .......

Yes 'manufacturing' and storage are an issue - the Huge pressures 
involved not the least of them .....

I don't know, however that demonstration keeps coming to mind in view of 
the comments and opinions that have been shared recently ....... I would 
like to hear from someone with expertise and experience in the gas industry.

Regards
Bill




From espresso_doppio at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  7 19:19:12 2006
From: espresso_doppio at yahoo.com (Adam Wade)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 17:19:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <1157652598.10940.8.camel@localhost>
Message-ID: <20060908001912.16129.qmail@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- paul <pstelzig at tcq.net> wrote:

Some new items for public consumption (from
dieselnet.com):

"2 June 2006: The transition to ultra low sulfur
diesel fuel has started in the United States. As of
yesterday, 80% of diesel fuel produced by refineries
or imported for use in on-road vehicles must contain
no more than 15 ppm sulfur. The retail level deadline
is October 15, 2006. The ultra low sulfur diesel will
enable advanced exhaust aftertreatment technologies in
future diesel engines, such as the catalytic
particulate filters which are being introduced on 2007
heavy-duty truck and bus engines. The EPA and the DTF
are both calling it a clean diesel milestone."

So we already have low-sulphur fuel in play.

Here are the US numbers for heavy road-going vehicles:

<http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.html>

And here are the passenger/light truck vehicle
numbers:

<http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/light.html>

World numbers are available through the menu at
http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/

<http://genomicsgtl.energy.gov/biofuels/transportation.shtml#consumption>
shows that for road use in the USA, the ratio of
gasoline to diesel consumption is about 7:2.

According to
<http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_04_05.html>,
the 2003 usage of diesel for transit, boat and railway
was 6.79 billion gallons.  Transit and other on-road
heavy vehicles only list combined gas and diesel
usage, but I think we can safely assume most of them
are diesels; 33.66 billion gallons consumed by them. 
Passenger/LT diesels only account for 0.1% of current
passenger/LT vehicles on the road, and the 2003
figures for combined diesel and gasoline usage for
passenger and light truck vehicles was 143.2 billion
gallons.  So even assuming all non-passenger vehicles
use nothing but diesel, and almost no passenger
vehicles do, gasoline is consumed over diesel in the
USA by a factor of more than 3:1.

As an aside, looks like our new diesel standards are
harder to achieve than anywhere else in the world. 
Have a look at this, which will be depressing for auto
manufacturers hoping to cash in on diesel passenger
car sales:  <http://blog.wired.com/cars/#1551774>

"The soon-to-be-released 2007 Mercedes-Benz E 320
Bluetec is billed as the cleanest diesel ever, but it
produces too many emissions to be sold in five states.

The sedan is the first of 10 models expected to use
the Bluetec common-rail direct injection engine, and
the vehicles include an aftertreatment process to
reduce nitrogen oxide emissions. However, that still
was not enough to meet the regulations of California,
New York, Maine, Massachusetts and Vermont, according
to Edmunds.

The V-6 engine is powerful (400 lbs. of torque and
0-60 in 6.6 seconds) and very fuel-efficient for its
class, getting an estimated 26/37 miles per gallon or
going an 700 miles (wowza) on a full tank. By
comparison, the Honda Accord hybrid is rated at 25/34
mpg.

The Bluetec engine was anticipated to usher in the new
era of clean diesels that offer hybrid-like economy
and cleanliness through the new ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfur
Diesel) fuel, but not being able to be sold nationwide
is a substantial setback for Mercedes and the
category. If all 10 models expected from
DaimlerChrysler that use the engines, including an SUV
and a Jeep Grand Cherokee, can't be sold in California
et al, it will take a long time for diesels to impact
the U.S. passenger vehicle market."


| Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne)       Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)|
| "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it  |
|   didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to.   |
|  They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. |
|   The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun   |
|     had come up again."                    -Kurt Vonnegut     |
| M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com -  http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze |

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From gpbeau at cox.net  Thu Sep  7 20:55:30 2006
From: gpbeau at cox.net (Garrett P. Beauregard)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 18:55:30 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Hydrogen
In-Reply-To: <4500B653.2000608@nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <NFBBKNMKMLDGMHGMDNEIAEGCCIAA.gpbeau@cox.net>

Some interesting conversation here about hydrogen. I'm not an expert, but
I've got quite a few years of experience in this area.

First, we designed built and operate the hydrogen station in Phoenix for
Arizona Public Service (APS).

http://www.aps.com/my_community/FutureFuels/FF_1.html

Hydrogen is generated via electrolysis (yes--expensive) and stored in ASTM
hydrogen cylinders. One great big unit for 150 psi storage and two smaller
tanks for 6000 psi storage. Each is made out of mild steel. They do have a
finite life, but it's a decade or more. We  also clean and store CNG from
the city mains and dispense that as "pure" CNG or blends of hydrogen. This
station is licensed by the city of Phoenix for selling fuel--one of only a
few hydrogen stations so licensed to sell fuel. It's been operating for 3-4
years now with no significant leaking or safety problems.

We have four hydrogen-fuele vehicles on-site and 8 more nearing completion.
The F150 in the picture on the above website is one of those four. See here
(http://www.etecevs.com/  --  find link on left side for Hydrogen Truck) for
the most recent design that we completed with Roush Industries. All these
vehicles are internal combustion for simplicity. See
http://avt.inl.gov/hydrogen.shtml for some reports on hydrogen and blended
fuel vehicles.

The state of the art these days in storage is Type 3 or Type 4 cylinders.
Type 3 have an aluminum lining with a carbon fiber overwrap. Dynetek is a
primary supplier of Type 3 (www.dynetek.com) Type 4 have a polyethylene
liner with a carbon fiber overwrap. Quantum Technologies (www.qtww.com) is a
supplier of Type 4 tanks. The standard these days is 5000 psi, but R&D is
taking place on 10,000 psi storage. Powertech Labs in BC, Canada is a leader
in Hydrogen/CNG test and development of gas systems (see
http://powertechlabs.com/cfm/index.cfm?It=900&Id=74 for some pictures of the
testing they do). Type 3 and Type 4  tanks have to undergo a series of tough
tests in order to be certified (CSA and TUV at this point). There is a
ballistics test in which a tank is punctured by a 30/30 round. In most
cases, there is a very brief flame, but the gas jet puts out the flame in
much the same way that oil rig fires are put out with explosives. Another
test is the "bonfire" test. Yup--build a fire and put the tank on the fire.
The thermally operated relief valve will open and vent the gas before the
tank cracks--a controlled leak rather than a high-pressure bursting. Then
there are crush tests and high pressure tests (4 times nominal rating).
There are no leaking issues with these tanks. I've stored H2 in them for
months on end with no loss of gas. There are currently specifications for
mounting similar CNG tanks which isn't a real engineering feat.
Specifications are under development for hydrogen systems, but there aren't
many deviations from the CNG rules.

Texaco Ovonics (or whatever they're called these days) is developing a solid
oxide storage system for hydrogen. I've not read up on this, but it is
supposed to delivery higher H2 density than liquid H2. It requires energy
input to get the hydrogen out and is quite heavy at this point.

Sierra Lobo is a company that develops and manufactures liquid gas storage
systems. They have been working on a system that can store liquid H2 with
very little evaporative loss.

As for fittings, the gold standard is Swagelok or Parker stainless steel
compression fittings:

http://www.swagelok.com/search/find_products_home.aspx?SEARCH=/search/Tube+F
ittings+and+Tube+Adapters/id-10000212/type-1

When installed correctly, these form a very tight seal. No appreciable
leakage over months of time. We also used orbital welding at the H2 plant,
but that was mostly as a test to determine the econmomics and efficacy of
welding vs. fittings. The tubing that is used is typically 316 stainless
steel with a wall thickness appropriate for the pressure. No embrittlement
with stainless, although we did get a batch of tubing that was corroded on
the inside as a result of an improper pickling treatment.

As for engines, we have seen no ill affects from the hydrogen gas. Of
course, one would use hardened valve faces to deal with the heat of
combustion. Lean mixtures are currently used to minimize NOx production and
keep temperatures reasonable. Quantum Technologies sells an injector for
port injection systems. There are a couple of companies working on direct
injection injectors, but nothing commercial yet (BMW does research in this
area). As there are no carbon molecules, CO and CO2 production is nearly
zero (some production from the combustion of the oil film). We recently
tested our HICE Silverado at Argonne National Labs and found that CO and CO2
emissions were below measurable levels and NOx was below that of the base
gasoline engine. Water production may be an issue for the sump oil, nothing
conclusive yet. Just today, we were awarded a contract with DOE to conduct
30 months of durability testing on these HICE trucks which will include 100
hours of dyno operation (alternating between max power and max torque)
followed by a teardown and materials analysis. We will also monitor the
durability performance of these engines in the field, inlcuding oil analysis
at regular intervals. Our experience so far with the existing vehicles
indicates that only the prototype components (injectors, coils) suffer
durability problems.

As for safety, I'm more comfortable around H2 than gasoline or propane. H2
dissipates (up) so quickly tha it's hard to maintain a concentraton at or
above LFL or LEL. Yes, hydrogen burns near invisibly, but you can hear the
gas escaping and readily feel the heat. (I've been told that the current
practice in industrial production plants is to hold a straw broom in front
of you if you suspect a fire). The flame is usually tightly constrained and
tends to go up. Gasoline is heavier than air so it will pool on the ground
in confined areas. The liquid stuff just runs and splashes everywhere,
creating more vapor to burn. Our city Fire Inspector tells us that they
respond to a gas station fire once per week on average. As I tell people who
are interested, we just have to get accustomed to working with Hydrogen.
We've all grown up toting around 20 gallons of liquit Napalm in our trunks
(boots) so we have very little concern (probably less than we should as
victims of the Crown Victoria gasoline fires will attest).

Now, don't ask me if Hydrogen is the fuel of the future because the jury is
not impaneled yet.


Garrett



-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
Behalf Of Bill Washington
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 5:16 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: [Diy_efi] Hydrogen


Gents,
    Some years ago I saw film of a demonstration comparing the safety of
cylinders of liquified Hydrogen vs LPG.
the cylinders (of similar volume) were setout on a weapons range and an
incendiary projectile was fired into each one to simulate a fracture
resulting from a vehicle collision.

The result:
The Hydrogen vented in a rising jet of (invisible) flame - yes hot but
not instantly catastrophic - anyone close by would have had a chance to
escape.

The LPG cylinder exploded instantly in a very large explosion which
would have obiterated anything/everything in a 20-30 yard radius and
severly damaged anything over a considerably larger area.

The conclusion presented was that the hydrogen was much safer, however
we have many LPG cars on the road and very few hydrogen .......

Yes 'manufacturing' and storage are an issue - the Huge pressures
involved not the least of them .....

I don't know, however that demonstration keeps coming to mind in view of
the comments and opinions that have been shared recently ....... I would
like to hear from someone with expertise and experience in the gas industry.

Regards
Bill


_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.1/440 - Release Date: 9/6/2006

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.1/440 - Release Date: 9/6/2006



From bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au  Thu Sep  7 21:03:06 2006
From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 10:03:06 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it? - Seams filling up again ?
In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20060907182137.02a9f640@iinet.net.au>
References: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<44FFF15C.7090606@f2s.com>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060907182137.02a9f640@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <200609081003.06600@death.2.spammers>

On Thursday 07 September 2006 18:28, Mike wrote:
> At 06:15 PM 9/7/06, you wrote:
> >Most of us dont live underground in oily caverns.

> There seems to be more anecdotal evidence these (early) caverns
> are slowly filling up with more oil, not just from the seams
> bleeding out due to the removal of the primary oil by reduction in
> pressure but other factors.

It'd produce more oil to use algae in sunlight to produce oils for
production of biodiesels. The unesterfied oil is equivalent to
vegetable oils as a fuel. If the engine is built to burn such oils,
then no further processing is required.

Esterfication produces a biodiesel, suitable for use in common
diesel engines.

One "feed stock" for the process is flue gas from coal-/oil-fired
power station, bubbled through ponds of selected algae. The
biodiesel yield from the aquaculture is about 7 times higher per
unit area than for agricultural stocks such as soya beans.  The CO2
sequestration cycle by algae is a matter of days; not even months.
Roughly 80% of the CO2 is typically captured by the algae.

The other feed stock is brack water from sewage treatment.

One complication is that the algae require sunlight to convert the
CO2; so flue gas emitted overnight needs to be stored until there is
enough light for the algae to start metabolising. Optimised control
of the process would require some sort of storage and reservoir of
CO2 anyway.

Some types of algae will "burst" and lose their lipids (oils) when
starved of CO2; which you don't want to happen until you're ready to
harvest. More resilient types of algae require more intensive
processing, mechanical or chemical, in order to harvest the lipids
within their cell wall.

Lots of research done in the past.
e.g.	http://www.fao.org/docrep/w7241e/w7241e0h.htm

-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | "Laws do not persuade just because
 X   against HTML mail     |  they threaten."
/ \  and postings          | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.




From bearbvd at mindspring.com  Thu Sep  7 22:50:18 2006
From: bearbvd at mindspring.com (bearbvd at mindspring.com)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 23:50:18 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Hydrogen
Message-ID: <380-2200695835018484@M2W013.mail2web.com>



Original Message:
-----------------
From: Garrett P. Beauregard gpbeau at cox.net
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 18:55:30 -0700
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Hydrogen


Hydrogen is generated via electrolysis (yes--expensive)

Perhaps this would be a credible way to do it with electricity generated
with nuclear power/MHD. Ya just gotta LOVE it when California (and other)
greenies want to export more pollution to the four corners area !!!

 and stored in ASTM
hydrogen cylinders.

This would be a BIT more credible as being safe if it were ASME who were
certifying the cylinders. Perhaps your saying ASTM was a typo ??? If a
pressure vessel doesn't carry the ASME cloverleaf stamp, don't pharkin'
trust it !!

As for fittings, the gold standard is Swagelok or Parker stainless steel
compression fittings:

http://www.swagelok.com/search/find_products_home.aspx?SEARCH=/search/Tube+F
ittings+and+Tube+Adapters/id-10000212/type-1

No embrittlement
with stainless, 

Huh ??? I'd like to see a few credible references on this statement !!!!

As for engines, we have seen no ill affects from the hydrogen gas.

What compression ratio are they running ??? Any credible research on the
equivalent of 'RON' for H2 as a fuel ??

 Of
course, one would use hardened valve faces to deal with the heat of
combustion.

Not so much the heat as the lack of lubricity--- same situation as a
methane (NG) fueled engine.

What is the adiabatic flame temp of H2 in air (and same number for gasoline
in air)??? I don't recall either offhand, but do recall it being 'not all
that high' because of the high heat of dissociation of H2. Do recall things
like C2H2 (acetylene) and MAPP gas being FAR higher---


Now, don't ask me if Hydrogen is the fuel of the future because the jury is
not impaneled yet.

This juror won't see much credibility in the arguements for it as any sort
of a useful fuel until folks (including the entire herd of grant
prostitutes who love to expound on the subject) start admitting that water
vapor is a FAR more powerful greenhouse gas--particularly at low
stratospheric elevations--than CO2 is !!!!

Not to mention until some of what could be done for home heating, cooling,
and dhw (with economics that are entirely reasonable TODAY) with small
(house size) sub-critical reactors fueled with 'depleted' U (slugs of
U-238) such as are used as sabots in anti tank projectiles--- gets DONE !!!
We have HUNDREDS (perhaps thousands) of TONS of 'depleted' U, it's criminal
that we are not USING it when practical tech to do so EXISTS TODAY !!!

For information sake, one must understand that 'depleted' U is the very
nearly pure U-238 which is the by-product of  an 'enrichment' process which
removes the naturally occurring (small) portion of the U which is the U-235
isotope--to produce 'enriched' U--namely U which contains a higher
percentage of U-235 than what occurs in nature for fuel (in CRITICAL
reactors) or weapons purposes.

Greg 

Greg


Garrett

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .




From liberty1 at gmail.com  Thu Sep  7 23:02:29 2006
From: liberty1 at gmail.com (Bobby Yates Emory)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 00:02:29 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it?
In-Reply-To: <20060908001912.16129.qmail@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <1157652598.10940.8.camel@localhost>
	<20060908001912.16129.qmail@web32215.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <54b6188b0609072102k53c77173y305f79474ccb721f@mail.gmail.com>

Adam,

The situation is confusing.  What you said is correct - "So we already have
low-sulphur fuel in play."  But you should have added the following:

and we have for several years.  And about now we are getting ultra low.

Bobby

On 9/7/06, Adam Wade <espresso_doppio at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- paul <pstelzig at tcq.net> wrote:
>
> Some new items for public consumption (from
> dieselnet.com):
>
> "2 June 2006: The transition to ultra low sulfur
> diesel fuel has started in the United States. As of
> yesterday, 80% of diesel fuel produced by refineries
> or imported for use in on-road vehicles must contain
> no more than 15 ppm sulfur. The retail level deadline
> is October 15, 2006. The ultra low sulfur diesel will
> enable advanced exhaust aftertreatment technologies in
> future diesel engines, such as the catalytic
> particulate filters which are being introduced on 2007
> heavy-duty truck and bus engines. The EPA and the DTF
> are both calling it a clean diesel milestone."
>
> So we already have low-sulphur fuel in play.
>
> Here are the US numbers for heavy road-going vehicles:
>
> <http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/hd.html>
>
> And here are the passenger/light truck vehicle
> numbers:
>
> <http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/light.html>
>
> World numbers are available through the menu at
> http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/
>
> <http://genomicsgtl.energy.gov/biofuels/transportation.shtml#consumption>
> shows that for road use in the USA, the ratio of
> gasoline to diesel consumption is about 7:2.
>
> According to
> <
> http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_04_05.html
> >,
> the 2003 usage of diesel for transit, boat and railway
> was 6.79 billion gallons.  Transit and other on-road
> heavy vehicles only list combined gas and diesel
> usage, but I think we can safely assume most of them
> are diesels; 33.66 billion gallons consumed by them.
> Passenger/LT diesels only account for 0.1% of current
> passenger/LT vehicles on the road, and the 2003
> figures for combined diesel and gasoline usage for
> passenger and light truck vehicles was 143.2 billion
> gallons.  So even assuming all non-passenger vehicles
> use nothing but diesel, and almost no passenger
> vehicles do, gasoline is consumed over diesel in the
> USA by a factor of more than 3:1.
>
> As an aside, looks like our new diesel standards are
> harder to achieve than anywhere else in the world.
> Have a look at this, which will be depressing for auto
> manufacturers hoping to cash in on diesel passenger
> car sales:  <http://blog.wired.com/cars/#1551774>
>
> "The soon-to-be-released 2007 Mercedes-Benz E 320
> Bluetec is billed as the cleanest diesel ever, but it
> produces too many emissions to be sold in five states.
>
> The sedan is the first of 10 models expected to use
> the Bluetec common-rail direct injection engine, and
> the vehicles include an aftertreatment process to
> reduce nitrogen oxide emissions. However, that still
> was not enough to meet the regulations of California,
> New York, Maine, Massachusetts and Vermont, according
> to Edmunds.
>
> The V-6 engine is powerful (400 lbs. of torque and
> 0-60 in 6.6 seconds) and very fuel-efficient for its
> class, getting an estimated 26/37 miles per gallon or
> going an 700 miles (wowza) on a full tank. By
> comparison, the Honda Accord hybrid is rated at 25/34
> mpg.
>
> The Bluetec engine was anticipated to usher in the new
> era of clean diesels that offer hybrid-like economy
> and cleanliness through the new ULSD (Ultra Low Sulfur
> Diesel) fuel, but not being able to be sold nationwide
> is a substantial setback for Mercedes and the
> category. If all 10 models expected from
> DaimlerChrysler that use the engines, including an SUV
> and a Jeep Grand Cherokee, can't be sold in California
> et al, it will take a long time for diesels to impact
> the U.S. passenger vehicle market."
>
>
> | Kawasaki Zephyr 615 (Daphne)       Kawasaki Zephyr 550 (Velma)|
> | "It was like an emergency ward after a great catastrophe; it  |
> |   didn't matter what race or class the victims belonged to.   |
> |  They were all given the same miracle drug, which was coffee. |
> |   The catastrophe in this case, of course, was that the sun   |
> |     had come up again."                    -Kurt Vonnegut     |
> | M/C Fuel Inj. Hndbk. @ Amazon.com -  http://tinyurl.com/6o3ze |
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Toward freedom,

Bobby Yates Emory


From liberty1 at gmail.com  Fri Sep  8 00:27:15 2006
From: liberty1 at gmail.com (Bobby Yates Emory)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 01:27:15 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it? - Seams filling up again ?
In-Reply-To: <200609081003.06600@death.2.spammers>
References: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<44FFF15C.7090606@f2s.com>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060907182137.02a9f640@iinet.net.au>
	<200609081003.06600@death.2.spammers>
Message-ID: <54b6188b0609072227t3c3afe96ycf799327852dcad0@mail.gmail.com>

Berend,

Comments with +++++++++++++

On 9/7/06, Bernd Felsche <bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> On Thursday 07 September 2006 18:28, Mike wrote:
> > At 06:15 PM 9/7/06, you wrote:
> > >Most of us dont live underground in oily caverns.
>
> > There seems to be more anecdotal evidence these (early) caverns
> > are slowly filling up with more oil, not just from the seams
> > bleeding out due to the removal of the primary oil by reduction in
> > pressure but other factors.
>
> It'd produce more oil to use algae in sunlight to produce oils for
> production of biodiesels. The unesterfied oil is equivalent to
> vegetable oils as a fuel. If the engine is built to burn such oils,
> then no further processing is required.
>
> Esterfication produces a biodiesel, suitable for use in common
> diesel engines.
>
> One "feed stock" for the process is flue gas from coal-/oil-fired
> power station, bubbled through ponds of selected algae.


++++++++++++++++++++
Many people have suggested using flue gas, but it is not necessary.  (It
will increase growth, but is not required.)

The
> biodiesel yield from the aquaculture is about 7 times higher per
> unit area than for agricultural stocks such as soya beans.


++++++++++++++++++++
The projections based on lab results are many times higher - even better
yields.

 The CO2
> sequestration cycle by algae is a matter of days; not even months.
> Roughly 80% of the CO2 is typically captured by the algae.
>
> The other feed stock is brack water from sewage treatment.


++++++++++++++++++++++++
I'm confused - I thought brackish meant between seawater and freshwater.
Partially treated sewage would be vile, but not salty.  Or, did I miss
something?   Some people have suggested doing a methane digestion on the
sewage (animal or human) in order to kill pathogens.



One complication is that the algae require sunlight to convert the
> CO2; so flue gas emitted overnight needs to be stored until there is
> enough light for the algae to start metabolising.


+++++++++++++++++++
Greenfuels reported some mitigation even in darkness, so it might not be
necessary to store overnight.

Optimised control
> of the process would require some sort of storage and reservoir of
> CO2 anyway.
>
> Some types of algae will "burst" and lose their lipids (oils) when
> starved of CO2; which you don't want to happen until you're ready to
> harvest.


+++++++++++++++++
Are any of these species heavy producers of oil?


More resilient types of algae require more intensive
> processing, mechanical or chemical, in order to harvest the lipids
> within their cell wall.


+++++++++++++
We assume we will have to do something to break the cell wall.

+++++++++++++++
A group of us are trying to understand all the steps in this process and
develop an open-source process for growing oil from algae.  You are invited
to join us:

"http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/oil_from_algae/join

or:

*http://tinyurl.com/lk9pg

*Bobby


Lots of research done in the past.
> e.g.    http://www.fao.org/docrep/w7241e/w7241e0h.htm
>
> --
> /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
> \ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | "Laws do not persuade just because
> X   against HTML mail     |  they threaten."
> / \  and postings          | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Toward freedom,

Bobby Yates Emory


From liberty1 at gmail.com  Fri Sep  8 00:32:14 2006
From: liberty1 at gmail.com (Bobby Yates Emory)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 01:32:14 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it? - Seams filling up again ?
In-Reply-To: <54b6188b0609072227t3c3afe96ycf799327852dcad0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<44FFF15C.7090606@f2s.com>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060907182137.02a9f640@iinet.net.au>
	<200609081003.06600@death.2.spammers>
	<54b6188b0609072227t3c3afe96ycf799327852dcad0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54b6188b0609072232w30d283ddvb948803b7c750e74@mail.gmail.com>

Berend,

Oops - forgot to mention - a researcher in Perth has written his doctoral
dissertation on this:

The front matter for his thesis is at:

http://wwwlib.murdoch.edu.au/adt/pubfiles/adt-MU20050901.140745/01Front.pdf

or:

*http://tinyurl.com/kssqb*

The  rest of it is at:

http://wwwlib.murdoch.edu.au/adt/pubfiles/adt-MU20050901.140745/02Whole.pdf

or:

*http://tinyurl.com/gzkp2


He gave me this URL:

http://wwwlib.murdoch.edu.au/adt/browse/view/adt-MU20050901.140745

or:

**http://tinyurl.com/p2cd7*)

Bobby


On 9/8/06, Bobby Yates Emory <liberty1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Berend,
>
> Comments with +++++++++++++
>
> On 9/7/06, Bernd Felsche < bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Thursday 07 September 2006 18:28, Mike wrote:
> > > At 06:15 PM 9/7/06, you wrote:
> > > >Most of us dont live underground in oily caverns.
> >
> > > There seems to be more anecdotal evidence these (early) caverns
> > > are slowly filling up with more oil, not just from the seams
> > > bleeding out due to the removal of the primary oil by reduction in
> > > pressure but other factors.
> >
> > It'd produce more oil to use algae in sunlight to produce oils for
> > production of biodiesels. The unesterfied oil is equivalent to
> > vegetable oils as a fuel. If the engine is built to burn such oils,
> > then no further processing is required.
> >
> > Esterfication produces a biodiesel, suitable for use in common
> > diesel engines.
> >
> > One "feed stock" for the process is flue gas from coal-/oil-fired
> > power station, bubbled through ponds of selected algae.
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++
> Many people have suggested using flue gas, but it is not necessary.  (It
> will increase growth, but is not required.)
>
> The
> > biodiesel yield from the aquaculture is about 7 times higher per
> > unit area than for agricultural stocks such as soya beans.
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++
> The projections based on lab results are many times higher - even better
> yields.
>
>  The CO2
> > sequestration cycle by algae is a matter of days; not even months.
> > Roughly 80% of the CO2 is typically captured by the algae.
> >
> > The other feed stock is brack water from sewage treatment.
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++
> I'm confused - I thought brackish meant between seawater and freshwater.
> Partially treated sewage would be vile, but not salty.  Or, did I miss
> something?   Some people have suggested doing a methane digestion on the
> sewage (animal or human) in order to kill pathogens.
>
>
>
> One complication is that the algae require sunlight to convert the
> > CO2; so flue gas emitted overnight needs to be stored until there is
> > enough light for the algae to start metabolising.
>
>
> +++++++++++++++++++
> Greenfuels reported some mitigation even in darkness, so it might not be
> necessary to store overnight.
>
> Optimised control
> > of the process would require some sort of storage and reservoir of
> > CO2 anyway.
> >
> > Some types of algae will "burst" and lose their lipids (oils) when
> > starved of CO2; which you don't want to happen until you're ready to
> > harvest.
>
>
> +++++++++++++++++
> Are any of these species heavy producers of oil?
>
>
> More resilient types of algae require more intensive
> > processing, mechanical or chemical, in order to harvest the lipids
> > within their cell wall.
>
>
> +++++++++++++
> We assume we will have to do something to break the cell wall.
>
> +++++++++++++++
> A group of us are trying to understand all the steps in this process and
> develop an open-source process for growing oil from algae.  You are invited
> to join us:
>
> "http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/oil_from_algae/join
>
> or:
>
> *http://tinyurl.com/lk9pg
>
> *Bobby
>
>
> Lots of research done in the past.
> > e.g.     http://www.fao.org/docrep/w7241e/w7241e0h.htm
> >
> > --
> > /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
> > \ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | "Laws do not persuade just because
> > X   against HTML mail     |  they threaten."
> > / \  and postings          | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > Main WWW page:   http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Toward freedom,
>
> Bobby Yates Emory
>



-- 
Toward freedom,

Bobby Yates Emory


From bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au  Fri Sep  8 04:53:32 2006
From: bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au (Bernd Felsche)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 17:53:32 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it? - Seams filling up again ?
In-Reply-To: <54b6188b0609072227t3c3afe96ycf799327852dcad0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<200609081003.06600@death.2.spammers>
	<54b6188b0609072227t3c3afe96ycf799327852dcad0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <200609081753.32843@death.2.spammers>

On Friday 08 September 2006 13:27, Bobby Yates Emory wrote:
> Berend,

Who? :-)

> On 9/7/06, Bernd Felsche <bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:
> > On Thursday 07 September 2006 18:28, Mike wrote:
> > > At 06:15 PM 9/7/06, you wrote:
> > > >Most of us dont live underground in oily caverns.

> > > There seems to be more anecdotal evidence these (early) caverns
> > > are slowly filling up with more oil, not just from the seams
> > > bleeding out due to the removal of the primary oil by reduction in
> > > pressure but other factors.

> > It'd produce more oil to use algae in sunlight to produce oils for
> > production of biodiesels. The unesterfied oil is equivalent to
> > vegetable oils as a fuel. If the engine is built to burn such oils,
> > then no further processing is required.

> > Esterfication produces a biodiesel, suitable for use in common
> > diesel engines.

> > One "feed stock" for the process is flue gas from coal-/oil-fired
> > power station, bubbled through ponds of selected algae.

> Many people have suggested using flue gas, but it is not
> necessary.  (It will increase growth, but is not required.)

The general reason for setting up such a facility is to process the
CO2 from a power station. aka Carbon (bio)sequestration.

If you operate a diesel-fired power station, you should be able to
produce 25% or more of your own fuel after adapting the generator to
run on a blend of raw lipids and diesel. Makes a big difference for
isolated settlements where fuel costs are higher.

Integration with waste-water treatment provides an overall
improvement in both cycles.

> > The biodiesel yield from the aquaculture is about 7 times higher
> > per unit area than for agricultural stocks such as soya beans.

> The projections based on lab results are many times higher - even
> better yields.

The practical results indicate what can/could be done in practice.
If one claims attainable results instead of ideal ones, then it's
more likely that the technology will spread.

Don't promise anything you can't guarrantee to deliver in a
practical situation and the operators won't be disappointed.

> > The CO2 sequestration cycle by algae is a matter of days; not
> > even months.  Roughly 80% of the CO2 is typically captured by
> > the algae.

> > The other feed stock is brack water from sewage treatment.

> I'm confused - I thought brackish meant between seawater and
> freshwater.  Partially treated sewage would be vile, but not
> salty.  Or, did I miss something?   Some people have suggested
> doing a methane digestion on the sewage (animal or human) in order
> to kill pathogens.

"Brack water" is in this case used generically (aka "carelessly" :-)).

The water doesn't need to be purified and certainly in the case of
some algae, MUST contain organic material to feed the culture.

Salt water is easier to get than "fresh" water.

> > One complication is that the algae require sunlight to convert
> > the CO2; so flue gas emitted overnight needs to be stored until
> > there is enough light for the algae to start metabolising.

> Greenfuels reported some mitigation even in darkness, so it might
> not be necessary to store overnight.

Conversion rates reduce with most algae when there is no sunlight.
Getting the algae to sunlight is the reason for agitation.

> > Optimised control of the process would require some sort of
> > storage and reservoir of CO2 anyway.

> > Some types of algae will "burst" and lose their lipids (oils)
> > when starved of CO2; which you don't want to happen until you're
> > ready to harvest.

> Are any of these species heavy producers of oil?

See the FAO report (URL below) lists a number of algae with superior
lipid content.

If open ponds are to be used, which is the lowest-cost option, then
one would choose algae that are local to the region to minimise the
problem of contamination.

It makes sense to survey a site for endemic algae and to analyse
them for lipid content and suitability for aquaculture.

> > More resilient types of algae require more intensive processing,
> > mechanical or chemical, in order to harvest the lipids within
> > their cell wall.

> We assume we will have to do something to break the cell wall.

Starving some types of algae causes the cells to automatically
burst. This is in NASA reports, IIRC.

> A group of us are trying to understand all the steps in this
> process and develop an open-source process for growing oil from
> algae.  You are invited to join us:

> "http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/oil_from_algae/join

Arggggggggggggggggggggggg.... too many groups.

> > Lots of research done in the past.
> > e.g.    http://www.fao.org/docrep/w7241e/w7241e0h.htm

-- 
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ /  ASCII ribbon campaign | "Laws do not persuade just because
 X   against HTML mail     |  they threaten."
/ \  and postings          | Lucius Annaeus Seneca, c. 4BC - 65AD.




From liberty1 at gmail.com  Fri Sep  8 07:03:48 2006
From: liberty1 at gmail.com (Bobby Yates Emory)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 08:03:48 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it? - Seams filling up again ?
In-Reply-To: <200609081753.32843@death.2.spammers>
References: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<200609081003.06600@death.2.spammers>
	<54b6188b0609072227t3c3afe96ycf799327852dcad0@mail.gmail.com>
	<200609081753.32843@death.2.spammers>
Message-ID: <54b6188b0609080503we88bb2ajabf3f877fae287d9@mail.gmail.com>

Bernd,

Sorry about the misspelling.

Bobby

On 9/8/06, Bernd Felsche <bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>
> On Friday 08 September 2006 13:27, Bobby Yates Emory wrote:
> > Berend,
>
> Who? :-)



(SNIP)


From niche at iinet.net.au  Fri Sep  8 07:18:47 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 20:18:47 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Is E85 worth it? - Seams filling up again ?
In-Reply-To: <54b6188b0609080503we88bb2ajabf3f877fae287d9@mail.gmail.com
 >
References: <20060907044458.28928.qmail@web32207.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<200609081003.06600@death.2.spammers>
	<54b6188b0609072227t3c3afe96ycf799327852dcad0@mail.gmail.com>
	<200609081753.32843@death.2.spammers>
	<54b6188b0609080503we88bb2ajabf3f877fae287d9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060908201742.02703a90@iinet.net.au>>

At 08:03 PM 9/8/06, you wrote:
>Bernd,
>
>Sorry about the misspelling.
>
>Bobby

I wouldnt worry, we can all get pedantic as we get older, otherwise
the important things become way too important and the little things
we can control become more timely than the bigger things we cant,
or something like that ;-)

mike




>On 9/8/06, Bernd Felsche <bernie at innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:
>>
>>On Friday 08 September 2006 13:27, Bobby Yates Emory wrote:
>>> Berend,
>>
>>Who? :-)
>
>
>
>(SNIP)
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi


From goslojo at yahoo.com.au  Fri Sep  8 09:14:13 2006
From: goslojo at yahoo.com.au (joe de abreu)
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 00:14:13 +1000 (EST)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Converting a commodore blue 6 cylinder to efi
Message-ID: <20060908141413.93948.qmail@web53210.mail.yahoo.com>

I'm almost ready to convert my commodore blue 6 cylinder motor to efi, however not sure on a few things and need your help to get me started.
   
  Yeah I know, it's been done a thousand times before.  But no one has really explained (texts & forums) to me on how I go about telling the ecm that it's now a 6 cylinder, not a 4.
   
  My conversion hardware consists of a VK efi manifold, fuel rail, fuel pump, exhaust headers with O2 bung, VN throttle body with IAC, JE camira 808 ecm with wiring harness complete with all the sensors and ignition module.   And for simplicity I will be using the standard electronic dizzy with the weights locked.
   
  With the above, I hoping this will be enough to get my car going so that I can fine tune the ecm later by editing the camira's bin file with Tunerpro (bin editing) and WinALDL (slow 160 data logging on the fly) software.
   
  However, I'm not sure as to what needs doing with the ignition side of things.  Is this going to be a hardware or software issue?  
  I'm guesing the dizzy will dictate the firing order, thus not a function required by the ecm.  But, how do I tell the ecm that its a 6 cylinder so that it can perform ignition functions accordingly?  Or does the 6 cylinder dizzy reluctor in conjunction with the camira's ignition module perform this function on behalf of the ecm?
   
  Do I need to align the dizzy with any marks (eg timing) when installing the dizzy?
   
  Will the standard ecm injector drivers be sufficient enough to drive two additional injectors?
   
  And what needs doing in regards with VSS (if its required with the camira's ecm....can't remember)?
   
  If you can anticipate any other problems that I may encounter, please let me know.
   
  I'm aware there are costly software programs and kits out there that could make life easier, however, my project objective is to carry out the conversion on a shoestring budget for the sake of achievement.
   
  I will greatly appreciate any advice on the above subject matter, as I'm sure others will too.
   
  Kindest Regards,
   
  Joe  "goslojo"

 		
---------------------------------
On Yahoo!7 
  360&#176;: Give your page a sassy look with a cool new theme

From niche at iinet.net.au  Fri Sep  8 10:10:32 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Fri, 08 Sep 2006 23:10:32 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Converting a commodore blue 6 cylinder to efi
In-Reply-To: <20060908141413.93948.qmail@web53210.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20060908141413.93948.qmail@web53210.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060908230300.02805960@iinet.net.au>>

At 10:14 PM 9/8/06, you wrote:
>I'm almost ready to convert my commodore blue 6 cylinder motor to efi, however not sure on a few things and need your help to get me started.

<snip> All very good questions and I'm sure there are some on this
list that can help you directly, I've heard of people doing this for the
venerable VK or even VB and a few people have skipped what you intend and gone 
the whole hog instead (as it were), taken the old motor out and installed an
RB30 instead, the motors are cheap and the electronics are also now pretty
cheap for what you get and you get rather more power with easier option to upgrade to turbo model...

Even for the HZ I have heard of people pulling the old motor and putting an RB30 in with
little problem even allowing for the tank mods to take a pump inside tank etc... My ex gf had
an HZ and there is just so much room around the motor to add all sorts of nice things,
the VL engine bay is a bit tight for the RB30 in the VL body but an RB30 in a VK body seems
to have heaps of room...



Regards from


Mike
Perth, Western Australia
VK/VL Commodore Fuse Rail panel that wont warp, twist or melt, guaranteed  !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From gpbeau at cox.net  Fri Sep  8 15:02:50 2006
From: gpbeau at cox.net (gpbeau at cox.net)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 13:02:50 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Hydrogen
Message-ID: <16952967.1157745770211.JavaMail.root@fed1wml04.mgt.cox.net>

Good points, Greg.

We also have a grant (I guess we're one of those grant prostitutes you mentioned) to study the economics of electrolyzing water from nuclear-produced energy. Having Palo Verde in our back yard helps with that.

Yes--ASME, not ASTM. One of the hazards of trying to type with a 4-year-old buzzing around your chair.

316L (austenitic) stainless does not suffer from embrittlement. The 400-series stainless (martensitic) and some 304 stainless will suffer embrittlement. Talk to the chaps at Swagelok for details.

We have run engines with as high as 13:1 CR with 15 psi of boost. You need good cranks, rods and pistons to survive this and very good calibration to keep from having detonation. Our current Chevy maintainst the stock CR (10:1 or so) with 15 psi of boost and is a very happy camper.

I have not seen RON comparisons for Hydrogen.

Stoichiometric flame temperatures are rather high, compared with gasoline. Lean flame temperatures are lower compared to gasoline which is what allows an engine to burn H2 without significant NOx production. We were seeing EGTs in the 800 (F) range. 

Yes, lack of lubricity is a problem for valve faces and injectors. 

-Garrett- 



---- "bearbvd at mindspring.com" <bearbvd at mindspring.com> wrote: 
> 
> 
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From: Garrett P. Beauregard gpbeau at cox.net
> Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 18:55:30 -0700
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Hydrogen
> 
> 
> Hydrogen is generated via electrolysis (yes--expensive)
> 
> Perhaps this would be a credible way to do it with electricity generated
> with nuclear power/MHD. Ya just gotta LOVE it when California (and other)
> greenies want to export more pollution to the four corners area !!!
> 
>  and stored in ASTM
> hydrogen cylinders.
> 
> This would be a BIT more credible as being safe if it were ASME who were
> certifying the cylinders. Perhaps your saying ASTM was a typo ??? If a
> pressure vessel doesn't carry the ASME cloverleaf stamp, don't pharkin'
> trust it !!
> 
> As for fittings, the gold standard is Swagelok or Parker stainless steel
> compression fittings:
> 
> http://www.swagelok.com/search/find_products_home.aspx?SEARCH=/search/Tube+F
> ittings+and+Tube+Adapters/id-10000212/type-1
> 
> No embrittlement
> with stainless, 
> 
> Huh ??? I'd like to see a few credible references on this statement !!!!
> 
> As for engines, we have seen no ill affects from the hydrogen gas.
> 
> What compression ratio are they running ??? Any credible research on the
> equivalent of 'RON' for H2 as a fuel ??
> 
>  Of
> course, one would use hardened valve faces to deal with the heat of
> combustion.
> 
> Not so much the heat as the lack of lubricity--- same situation as a
> methane (NG) fueled engine.
> 
> What is the adiabatic flame temp of H2 in air (and same number for gasoline
> in air)??? I don't recall either offhand, but do recall it being 'not all
> that high' because of the high heat of dissociation of H2. Do recall things
> like C2H2 (acetylene) and MAPP gas being FAR higher---
> 
> 
> Now, don't ask me if Hydrogen is the fuel of the future because the jury is
> not impaneled yet.
> 
> This juror won't see much credibility in the arguements for it as any sort
> of a useful fuel until folks (including the entire herd of grant
> prostitutes who love to expound on the subject) start admitting that water
> vapor is a FAR more powerful greenhouse gas--particularly at low
> stratospheric elevations--than CO2 is !!!!
> 
> Not to mention until some of what could be done for home heating, cooling,
> and dhw (with economics that are entirely reasonable TODAY) with small
> (house size) sub-critical reactors fueled with 'depleted' U (slugs of
> U-238) such as are used as sabots in anti tank projectiles--- gets DONE !!!
> We have HUNDREDS (perhaps thousands) of TONS of 'depleted' U, it's criminal
> that we are not USING it when practical tech to do so EXISTS TODAY !!!
> 
> For information sake, one must understand that 'depleted' U is the very
> nearly pure U-238 which is the by-product of  an 'enrichment' process which
> removes the naturally occurring (small) portion of the U which is the U-235
> isotope--to produce 'enriched' U--namely U which contains a higher
> percentage of U-235 than what occurs in nature for fuel (in CRITICAL
> reactors) or weapons purposes.
> 
> Greg 
> 
> Greg
> 
> 
> Garrett
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From miloszk at gmail.com  Fri Sep  8 17:30:27 2006
From: miloszk at gmail.com (Milosz Kardasinski)
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 18:30:27 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Hydrogen
References: <16952967.1157745770211.JavaMail.root@fed1wml04.mgt.cox.net>
Message-ID: <002201c6d396$633bdae0$6601a8c0@goat>

I have a number in my collection of numbers that cites "130+"...but I don't
have the book anymore to confirm.

Source:
C.Borusbay and T. Nejat Veziroglu, "Hydrogen as a Fuel for Spark Ignition
Engines," Alternative Energy Sources VIII, Volume 2, Research and
Development (New York: Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, 1989), pp.
559-560.

----- Original Message -----

>
> I have not seen RON comparisons for Hydrogen.



From geoff_h at smartchat.net.au  Fri Sep  8 18:26:56 2006
From: geoff_h at smartchat.net.au (Geoff Harrison)
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 09:26:56 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Converting a commodore blue 6 cylinder to efi
References: <20060908141413.93948.qmail@web53210.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000301c6d39e$475f01a0$6500a8c0@fred>

Why not grab a 808 from a VN or VP and harness. It's the same as 
the Camira, but the mapping
would be closer to your requirements.

I have seen the DFI system from the 3800 adapted to straight 6s. 
It looks like you have gone
too far with the blue 6 conversion - the 3800 is a much stronger 
engine. Look for a EV6 block.
A friend has planted one in a HT premier. Better fuel economy 
(not hard to beat the old 186 - 2 speed hydro on that) power and 
drivabilty.

If using an ECM from an auto on a manual transmission, be sure 
to ground the neutral
input to the ECM to keep the idle at 700 RPM. There are (or 
were) drawings on the GMECM site
that will help connecting the dis to the ECM.

I have VN manuals if you need drawings.

Geoff.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "joe de abreu" <goslojo at yahoo.com.au>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2006 12:14 AM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Converting a commodore blue 6 cylinder to efi


I'm almost ready to convert my commodore blue 6 cylinder motor 
to efi, however not sure on a few things and need your help to 
get me started.

  Yeah I know, it's been done a thousand times before.  But no 
one has really explained (texts & forums) to me on how I go 
about telling the ecm that it's now a 6 cylinder, not a 4.

  My conversion hardware consists of a VK efi manifold, fuel 
rail, fuel pump, exhaust headers with O2 bung, VN throttle body 
with IAC, JE camira 808 ecm with wiring harness complete with 
all the sensors and ignition module.   And for simplicity I will 
be using the standard electronic dizzy with the weights locked.

  With the above, I hoping this will be enough to get my car 
going so that I can fine tune the ecm later by editing the 
camira's bin file with Tunerpro (bin editing) and WinALDL (slow 
160 data logging on the fly) software.

  However, I'm not sure as to what needs doing with the ignition 
side of things.  Is this going to be a hardware or software 
issue?
  I'm guesing the dizzy will dictate the firing order, thus not 
a function required by the ecm.  But, how do I tell the ecm that 
its a 6 cylinder so that it can perform ignition functions 
accordingly?  Or does the 6 cylinder dizzy reluctor in 
conjunction with the camira's ignition module perform this 
function on behalf of the ecm?

  Do I need to align the dizzy with any marks (eg timing) when 
installing the dizzy?

  Will the standard ecm injector drivers be sufficient enough to 
drive two additional injectors?

  And what needs doing in regards with VSS (if its required with 
the camira's ecm....can't remember)?

  If you can anticipate any other problems that I may encounter, 
please let me know.

  I'm aware there are costly software programs and kits out 
there that could make life easier, however, my project objective 
is to carry out the conversion on a shoestring budget for the 
sake of achievement.

  I will greatly appreciate any advice on the above subject 
matter, as I'm sure others will too.

  Kindest Regards,

  Joe  "goslojo"



From mdacmail at optusnet.com.au  Fri Sep  8 21:28:58 2006
From: mdacmail at optusnet.com.au (mdacmail at optusnet.com.au)
Date: Sat, 09 Sep 2006 12:28:58 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Delco on a 202 blue
Message-ID: <200609090228.k892SwWv017329@mail30.syd.optusnet.com.au>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Url: http://lists.diy-efi.org/pipermail/diy_efi/attachments/20060909/e8d542e7/attachment.pl 

From dingebre at 3dphysics.net  Sun Sep 10 22:59:10 2006
From: dingebre at 3dphysics.net (David M. Ingebretsen)
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 21:59:10 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
In-Reply-To: <002201c6d396$633bdae0$6601a8c0@goat>
Message-ID: <E1GMcwz-0004Ht-61@mgr1.xmission.com>


I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. But, I'm
thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed for that
engine.

My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that the
GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the Mopar
unit.

Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
lockup? 

I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic uses; temp,
speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a cable
throttle position sensor which might work.

What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel anymore and
the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?

Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the other
processing in the GM ECU?

I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".
_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net




From frankmccracken at shaw.ca  Mon Sep 11 00:51:00 2006
From: frankmccracken at shaw.ca (Frank McCracken)
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 22:51:00 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
References: <E1GMcwz-0004Ht-61@mgr1.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <01cc01c6d566$43109ae0$6401a8c0@flamingo>

Several years ago I had 700 with a lock-up. I just a power lead to the green
wire on the trans plug. I did have switched power for a while until I
discovered that somehow the thing unlocked by itself when nessesary.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David M. Ingebretsen" <dingebre at 3dphysics.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 8:59 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only


>
> I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. But, I'm
> thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed for that
> engine.
>
> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that the
> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the
Mopar
> unit.
>
> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
> lockup?
>
> I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic uses; temp,
> speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a cable
> throttle position sensor which might work.
>
> What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel anymore and
> the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?
>
> Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the
other
> processing in the GM ECU?
>
> I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".
> _______________________________________
>
> David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
> Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
> 2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
> Salt Lake City, UT 84121
>
> 801 733-5458
> dingebre at 3dphysics.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.2/442 - Release Date: 9/8/2006
>
>



From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net  Mon Sep 11 01:29:18 2006
From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod)
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 23:29:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
In-Reply-To: <E1GMcwz-0004Ht-61@mgr1.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <20060911062918.48643.qmail@web80503.mail.yahoo.com>

It actually is rather painless, (punn) Painless makes a kit:
 
snip<
700R/4 TRANSMISSION TORQUE CONVERTER LOCK-UP KIT
#60109 - Now you can control the lockup converter on your overdrive transmission with your carbureted engine and not have to buy an expensive computer! With our easy to install Lock-Up Kit you don?t need the computer or speed sensor. A vacuum controlled 4th gear pressure switch/lock up solenoid combination controls the lockup. Comes with everything to complete the job including a pan gasket. Fits any 700R4 GM transmission. 
>end-snip
 
or you can fab your own, search the archives for diagrams, I've seen them before



----- Original Message ----
From: David M. Ingebretsen <dingebre at 3dphysics.net>
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 10:59:10 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only


I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. But, I'm
thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed for that
engine.

My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that the
GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the Mopar
unit.

Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
lockup? 

I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic uses; temp,
speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a cable
throttle position sensor which might work.

What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel anymore and
the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?

Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the other
processing in the GM ECU?

I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".
_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net


_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

From donsauman at cythera.net  Mon Sep 11 01:43:49 2006
From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 14:43:49 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
In-Reply-To: <20060911062918.48643.qmail@web80503.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20060911062918.48643.qmail@web80503.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <450505A5.2070904@cythera.net>

The guy who does my transmissions believes that TC lockup causes more 
problems than it is worth. He reckons that at certain loads/speed you 
can get a drivetrain chatter that will quickly destroy splines/bearings 
etc. He suggests that when I put the 4L80E in my Jeep that I disable the 
lockup.

Thoughts anyone.

Don


Rick McLeod wrote:

>It actually is rather painless, (punn) Painless makes a kit:
> 
>snip<
>700R/4 TRANSMISSION TORQUE CONVERTER LOCK-UP KIT
>#60109 - Now you can control the lockup converter on your overdrive transmission with your carbureted engine and not have to buy an expensive computer! With our easy to install Lock-Up Kit you don?t need the computer or speed sensor. A vacuum controlled 4th gear pressure switch/lock up solenoid combination controls the lockup. Comes with everything to complete the job including a pan gasket. Fits any 700R4 GM transmission. 
>  
>
>>end-snip
>>    
>>
> 
>or you can fab your own, search the archives for diagrams, I've seen them before
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: David M. Ingebretsen <dingebre at 3dphysics.net>
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2006 10:59:10 PM
>Subject: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
>
>
>I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. But, I'm
>thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed for that
>engine.
>
>My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that the
>GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the Mopar
>unit.
>
>Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
>lockup? 
>
>I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic uses; temp,
>speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a cable
>throttle position sensor which might work.
>
>What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel anymore and
>the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?
>
>Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the other
>processing in the GM ECU?
>
>I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".
>_______________________________________
>
>David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
>Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
>2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
>Salt Lake City, UT 84121
>
>801 733-5458
>dingebre at 3dphysics.net
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>  
>

-- 
Don Sauman
Cythera Communication
35 Asteroid Way
Carlisle 6101
Western Australia

P: 08 9361 0337
F: 08 9361 0581
M: 0427 389 547





From airhawk at hawkgt.net  Mon Sep 11 07:21:37 2006
From: airhawk at hawkgt.net (The AirHawk)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 07:21:37 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
References: <20060911062918.48643.qmail@web80503.mail.yahoo.com>
	<450505A5.2070904@cythera.net>
Message-ID: <000901c6d59c$dee06460$0202a8c0@MajorDisaster>

You'll likely have problems with the trans overheating, without some modifications. I'd get it in 
writing, with a guarantee.

-Scott


> The guy who does my transmissions believes that TC lockup causes more problems than it is worth. 
> He reckons that at certain loads/speed you can get a drivetrain chatter that will quickly destroy 
> splines/bearings etc. He suggests that when I put the 4L80E in my Jeep that I disable the lockup.
>
> Thoughts anyone.
>
> Don




From tsimpson at claremore.k12.ok.us  Mon Sep 11 07:53:27 2006
From: tsimpson at claremore.k12.ok.us (Terry Simpson)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 07:53:27 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
In-Reply-To: <000901c6d59c$dee06460$0202a8c0@MajorDisaster>
References: <20060911062918.48643.qmail@web80503.mail.yahoo.com>	<450505A5.2070904@cythera.net>
	<000901c6d59c$dee06460$0202a8c0@MajorDisaster>
Message-ID: <45055C47.5060102@claremore.k12.ok.us>

I have use a kit made by TCI for 8 years in my 55 Chevy with out any 
problems. Kit is a little expensive. I modified the 700r in my 77 GMC 
Sprint by changing the 4th gear solenoid to a normal open and wire it to 
key on power for 5 years with no problems.

The AirHawk wrote:
> You'll likely have problems with the trans overheating, without some 
> modifications. I'd get it in writing, with a guarantee.
>
> -Scott
>
>
>> The guy who does my transmissions believes that TC lockup causes more 
>> problems than it is worth. He reckons that at certain loads/speed you 
>> can get a drivetrain chatter that will quickly destroy 
>> splines/bearings etc. He suggests that when I put the 4L80E in my 
>> Jeep that I disable the lockup.
>>
>> Thoughts anyone.
>>
>> Don
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>



From james.d.ulmer at usps.gov  Mon Sep 11 08:43:04 2006
From: james.d.ulmer at usps.gov (Ulmer, James D - Denver, CO)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 08:43:04 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
In-Reply-To: <450505A5.2070904@cythera.net>
Message-ID: <11C99472FAC536408B55E5E30924AB2D0492A5F8@EAGNMNSXM18>

Well, GM has built a few million transmissions with the function so I'd
be reluctant to say it has an inherent problem. If I were to use lockup
in a conversion application, I'd want to make sure my lockup circuit had
a time delay function so that there could be no possibility of rapid
repeated engage/disengage cycles.

Big Jim

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]
On Behalf Of Don Sauman
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 12:44 AM
To: Rick McLeod; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only

The guy who does my transmissions believes that TC lockup causes more 
problems than it is worth. He reckons that at certain loads/speed you 
can get a drivetrain chatter that will quickly destroy splines/bearings 
etc. He suggests that when I put the 4L80E in my Jeep that I disable the

lockup.

Thoughts anyone.

Don





From miloszk at gmail.com  Mon Sep 11 17:16:43 2006
From: miloszk at gmail.com (Milosz Kardasinski)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 18:16:43 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
References: <E1GMcwz-0004Ht-61@mgr1.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <003001c6d5ef$f76cf1d0$6601a8c0@goat>

What I have seen in some applications is the use of a vacuum sensor
connected to ported vacuum. You'd have
to set the switch point to whatever you feel is the appropriate vacuum
threshold...but all the sensor does is ground
out, which engages the TCC below a certain vacuum setting. Some also connect
a switch in series to turn off TCC
whenever the brake pedal is depressed.

----- Original Message -----

>
> I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. But, I'm
> thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed for that
> engine.
>
> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that the
> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the
Mopar
> unit.
>
> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
> lockup?
>
> I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic uses; temp,
> speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a cable
> throttle position sensor which might work.
>
> What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel anymore and
> the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?
>
> Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the
other
> processing in the GM ECU?
>
> I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".



From epilipanko at mn.rr.com  Mon Sep 11 19:20:16 2006
From: epilipanko at mn.rr.com (Eugene Pilipanko)
Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:20:16 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
References: <E1GMcwz-0004Ht-61@mgr1.xmission.com>
	<003001c6d5ef$f76cf1d0$6601a8c0@goat>
Message-ID: <000601c6d601$398b0000$6400a8c0@retiredj6zyn4t>

www.bulkpart.com    part # 74416ak.   Summit racing part # TCI 376600 or 
Jegs part 3 890-37660 should help you out.

---- Original Message ----- 
From: "Milosz Kardasinski" <miloszk at gmail.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only


> What I have seen in some applications is the use of a vacuum sensor
> connected to ported vacuum. You'd have
> to set the switch point to whatever you feel is the appropriate vacuum
> threshold...but all the sensor does is ground
> out, which engages the TCC below a certain vacuum setting. Some also 
> connect
> a switch in series to turn off TCC
> whenever the brake pedal is depressed.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>>
>> I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. But, I'm
>> thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed for that
>> engine.
>>
>> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that 
>> the
>> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the
> Mopar
>> unit.
>>
>> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
>> lockup?
>>
>> I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic uses; 
>> temp,
>> speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a cable
>> throttle position sensor which might work.
>>
>> What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel anymore and
>> the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?
>>
>> Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the
> other
>> processing in the GM ECU?
>>
>> I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 




From dingebre at 3dphysics.net  Tue Sep 12 01:05:34 2006
From: dingebre at 3dphysics.net (David M. Ingebretsen)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 00:05:34 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only -- THANKS!
In-Reply-To: <000601c6d601$398b0000$6400a8c0@retiredj6zyn4t>
Message-ID: <E1GN1Ot-0002Rt-66@mgr1.xmission.com>

Many, Many, thanks to all who helped. 

When I had the transmission built, I had the guy put in a "kit" so that I
have a self grounding solenoid in it already. It is also wired so I can have
it engage in 2nd through overdrive or only in overdrive. I had to do some
fancy wiring to get it to work with the 747 ECU. 

I think the ideas that use a vacuum switch get me most of the way there. I
found that B&M makes a speed dependent lockup, and I think a combination of
that with a vacuum switch might be close enough to the ECU logic to work.
Maybe just the vacuum switch. I'll think on it.

It is important to have the transmission locked more often that because it
builds heat way fast when the torque converter is slipping. The 700R4 design
and cooling depends on that torque converter being locked. 

I think the basic ECU logic is to engage when possible and disengage at a
high rate of change of throttle position, at closed throttle, and at WOT.
There is also some speed dependency I haven't looked at closely. I think the
idea to disengage at WOT and high rate of change of throttle position is to
make use of the torque multiplication you get with the torque converter
slipping under load and also to disengage when you are coming to a stop
(although, the circuit always disengages when the brake is applied).

Anyway, thanks for the ideas everyone.

_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net

__

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of Eugene Pilipanko
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 6:20 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only

www.bulkpart.com    part # 74416ak.   Summit racing part # TCI 376600 or 
Jegs part 3 890-37660 should help you out.

---- Original Message ----- 
From: "Milosz Kardasinski" <miloszk at gmail.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only


> What I have seen in some applications is the use of a vacuum sensor
> connected to ported vacuum. You'd have
> to set the switch point to whatever you feel is the appropriate vacuum
> threshold...but all the sensor does is ground
> out, which engages the TCC below a certain vacuum setting. Some also 
> connect
> a switch in series to turn off TCC
> whenever the brake pedal is depressed.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>>
>> I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. But, I'm
>> thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed for that
>> engine.
>>
>> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that 
>> the
>> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the
> Mopar
>> unit.
>>
>> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
>> lockup?
>>
>> I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic uses; 
>> temp,
>> speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a cable
>> throttle position sensor which might work.
>>
>> What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel anymore and
>> the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?
>>
>> Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the
> other
>> processing in the GM ECU?
>>
>> I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 


_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From lschneg1 at rochester.rr.com  Tue Sep 12 06:09:31 2006
From: lschneg1 at rochester.rr.com (Leo Schneggenburger)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 07:09:31 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only -- THANKS!
In-Reply-To: <E1GN1Ot-0002Rt-66@mgr1.xmission.com>
References: <E1GN1Ot-0002Rt-66@mgr1.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <4506956B.1000101@rochester.rr.com>

Hi David,
 I just happen to be a transmission specialist and yes, you need lock up 
unless you have really low (high numerically) rear gearing. I would 
recommend the vacuum setup as with proper adjustment it will 
automatically unlock under higher load conditions as it should. Hope 
this helps.
Leo

David M. Ingebretsen wrote:
> Many, Many, thanks to all who helped. 
>
> When I had the transmission built, I had the guy put in a "kit" so that I
> have a self grounding solenoid in it already. It is also wired so I can have
> it engage in 2nd through overdrive or only in overdrive. I had to do some
> fancy wiring to get it to work with the 747 ECU. 
>
> I think the ideas that use a vacuum switch get me most of the way there. I
> found that B&M makes a speed dependent lockup, and I think a combination of
> that with a vacuum switch might be close enough to the ECU logic to work.
> Maybe just the vacuum switch. I'll think on it.
>
> It is important to have the transmission locked more often that because it
> builds heat way fast when the torque converter is slipping. The 700R4 design
> and cooling depends on that torque converter being locked. 
>
> I think the basic ECU logic is to engage when possible and disengage at a
> high rate of change of throttle position, at closed throttle, and at WOT.
> There is also some speed dependency I haven't looked at closely. I think the
> idea to disengage at WOT and high rate of change of throttle position is to
> make use of the torque multiplication you get with the torque converter
> slipping under load and also to disengage when you are coming to a stop
> (although, the circuit always disengages when the brake is applied).
>
> Anyway, thanks for the ideas everyone.
>
> _______________________________________
>
> David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
> Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
> 2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
> Salt Lake City, UT 84121
>
> 801 733-5458
> dingebre at 3dphysics.net
>
> __
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> Behalf Of Eugene Pilipanko
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 6:20 PM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
>
> www.bulkpart.com    part # 74416ak.   Summit racing part # TCI 376600 or 
> Jegs part 3 890-37660 should help you out.
>
> ---- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Milosz Kardasinski" <miloszk at gmail.com>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 5:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
>
>
>   
>> What I have seen in some applications is the use of a vacuum sensor
>> connected to ported vacuum. You'd have
>> to set the switch point to whatever you feel is the appropriate vacuum
>> threshold...but all the sensor does is ground
>> out, which engages the TCC below a certain vacuum setting. Some also 
>> connect
>> a switch in series to turn off TCC
>> whenever the brake pedal is depressed.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>>     
>>> I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. But, I'm
>>> thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed for that
>>> engine.
>>>
>>> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that 
>>> the
>>> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the
>>>       
>> Mopar
>>     
>>> unit.
>>>
>>> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
>>> lockup?
>>>
>>> I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic uses; 
>>> temp,
>>> speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a cable
>>> throttle position sensor which might work.
>>>
>>> What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel anymore and
>>> the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?
>>>
>>> Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the
>>>       
>> other
>>     
>>> processing in the GM ECU?
>>>
>>> I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> Diy_efi mailing list
>> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>>     
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>
>   


From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net  Tue Sep 12 08:26:35 2006
From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 06:26:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only -- THANKS!
In-Reply-To: <4506956B.1000101@rochester.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20060912132635.18508.qmail@web80503.mail.yahoo.com>

If I understand the code correctly, the computer controlled lock-up attempts to control based on load, not just gear/rpm so it is really a electronic emulation of the old fashioned method.


Hi David,
I just happen to be a transmission specialist and yes, you need lock up 
unless you have really low (high numerically) rear gearing. I would 
recommend the vacuum setup as with proper adjustment it will 
automatically unlock under higher load conditions as it should. Hope 
this helps.
Leo

sniped the rest

From monsters54 at yahoo.com  Tue Sep 12 15:11:04 2006
From: monsters54 at yahoo.com (Don Schlicker)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 13:11:04 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] 2f TBI Binaries
Message-ID: <005701c6d6a7$94898200$0400a8c0@irongate.zna.com>

Hey all,

Im at the end of my TBI conversion and have just burned the 2f_tbi.bin that
I believe originates from Chet Wagner onto an EPROM that I am hoping makes
my 40 driveable.

One of my goals is to tweak this for performance as I go, and I was curious
if anyone on the list has a binary that not only works well on a 2f, but is
possibly more performance oriented than the "standard" binary.

(total shot in the dark, but gotta ask - looking for an initial shortcut
before tweaking myself)

Thanks,

Don
Bellingham, WA



From aoturneriii at tds.net  Tue Sep 12 15:36:16 2006
From: aoturneriii at tds.net (Arby)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 16:36:16 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] 2732 direct EEPROM / Flash replacement
References: <005e01c6cfac$95f16e70$16ce5245@yancey.com>
Message-ID: <022901c6d6ab$1f95f1f0$0300a8c0@NATALIE>

David,

      Sorry, There is nothing available that I have seen.  And I did some 
searching for the same thing when I got started.  All of the ECM's that I 
have converted I have used adapters from Moates.net.  There not expensive 
($30) and its fairly easy to install.  Plus it will allow you to do live 
tuning with an emulator if you decide to go that route.  Something for you 
to consider.

Good luck,
Arby


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David Allen" <davida1 at hiwaay.net>
To: "GM-ECM" <gmecm at diy-efi.org>; <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 03, 2006 6:59 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] 2732 direct EEPROM / Flash replacement


  Hey, does anyone know what chip (if any) is a pin-compatible EEPROM or 
Flash chip to replace a 2732 EPROM used in a 7747 ECM?  I have searched the 
archive (thanks for getting this feature woking!!) and only found more 
confusion and conflicting information.
  I'm looking to replace it with something that will not need to be UV 
erased, and will not require any funky adapter to fit into my ECM.
  Thanks,
David

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi 



From geoff_h at smartchat.net.au  Mon Sep 11 20:29:07 2006
From: geoff_h at smartchat.net.au (Geoff Harrison)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 11:29:07 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
References: <E1GMcwz-0004Ht-61@mgr1.xmission.com><003001c6d5ef$f76cf1d0$6601a8c0@goat>
	<000601c6d601$398b0000$6400a8c0@retiredj6zyn4t>
Message-ID: <000301c6d60a$d7df7200$6500a8c0@fred>

The 700R4 has 2 internal switches, connected in series, such 
that when
the fluid temp is up to normal, and the transmission is in 4th 
gear, ground
is sent back to the GM ECU.

Take that lead, feed it to a delay of say 5 seconds, (to stop 
the clutch engaging
as it shifts into 4th) override that with a signal from the 
brake light switch (to drop
the clutch out so as not to pull RPM below idle speed at low 
road speeds)
and control the TCC solenoid. The only advantage of using 
manifold vacuum
would be to allow the TCC to disengage prior to the transmission 
shifting from
4th down to 3 gear.

Just my 2c worth

Geoff

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eugene Pilipanko" <epilipanko at mn.rr.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 10:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only


> www.bulkpart.com    part # 74416ak.   Summit racing part # TCI 
> 376600 or Jegs part 3 890-37660 should help you out.
> ---- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Milosz Kardasinski" <miloszk at gmail.com>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 5:16 PM
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup 
> only
>
>
>> What I have seen in some applications is the use of a vacuum 
>> sensor
>> connected to ported vacuum. You'd have
>> to set the switch point to whatever you feel is the 
>> appropriate vacuum
>> threshold...but all the sensor does is ground
>> out, which engages the TCC below a certain vacuum setting. 
>> Some also connect
>> a switch in series to turn off TCC
>> whenever the brake pedal is depressed.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>>>
>>> I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works 
>>> well. But, I'm
>>> thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was 
>>> designed for that
>>> engine.
>>>
>>> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and 
>>> like that the
>>> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that 
>>> feature in the
>> Mopar
>>> unit.
>>>
>>> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just 
>>> control the TCC
>>> lockup?
>>>
>>> I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC 
>>> logic uses; temp,
>>> speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I 
>>> saw a cable
>>> throttle position sensor which might work.
>>>
>>> What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the 
>>> fuel anymore and
>>> the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling 
>>> the system?
>>>
>>> Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and 
>>> disable the
>> other
>>> processing in the GM ECU?
>>>
>>> I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so 
>>> "unelegant".
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Diy_efi mailing list
>> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi 


From llingle at seidata.com  Tue Sep 12 18:09:05 2006
From: llingle at seidata.com (Logan Lingle)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:09:05 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
In-Reply-To: <E1GMcwz-0004Ht-61@mgr1.xmission.com>
References: <E1GMcwz-0004Ht-61@mgr1.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <45073E11.4070504@seidata.com>

David M. Ingebretsen wrote:
> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that the
> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the Mopar
> unit.
>
> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
> lockup? 
>   
Hi David..   I own a transmission shop and deal with the 700R4/4L60 
lockup issue constantly.

You can do this cheap and do it yourself.. No problem.

It's easy..   Ditch the GM ECM completely and convert over to whatever 
you want.

First, you'll need a cruise control type brake light switch. 

Now with a normal brake switch, it's normally open and the contacts 
close when you hit the brake, turning on your brake lights. The Cruise 
style (and it can come from anything, I recently used a Lexus switch in 
a 57 Chevy, just because it fit well) has a normally closed side as 
well..   It works in the opposite manner. When you hit the brakes, this 
normally closed side opens and breaks the circuit. The reason for this 
is that in 4th gear (Can also be 3rd in some units) and locked up, if 
you hit the brake you need to release the TCC Clutch or you will cause a 
bind up. This clutch isn't designed to be abused and you don't want to 
bind it. I know some people/after market kits omit this step, but it's 
wrong and a professional install will include this feature.

Second, run fused power (Solenoid is 100% duty, should draw about half 
an amp) through the brake switch and a suitable conductor into the plug 
on the trans and (Typically - Internal wiring differs, but you can 
modify the circuit to suit your needs..  It's real simple) into the + 
(It's diode protected) side of the solenoid. From there, come out of the 
- side and to the 4th gear pressure switch.

And that's it.

Now when your 4th gear PSI switch sees pressure, it will close and, 
provided you aren't depressing the brake pedal, the circuit closes, 
backs up pressure in the imput shaft and turns on the TCC Clutch.

As you slow down from speed, governor pressure will drop, shifting you 
from 4th to 3rd..   which will take pressure off the switch, and turn 
off the TCC.

Likewise, when you hit the brake, you will turn off the TCC.

You can do more, depending. on the particular valve body you're using. 
Some of them have a thermal switch wired inline which will inhibit TCC 
operation below about 130 degrees..   Some of them have a PSI switch for 
third also..   Some of them will have a pass switch, which gives a 
little cleaner 4-3 kickdown. Some people install a manifold vacum switch 
also, to help with clean kick downs..

But, regardless..  That's the right way to get lockup in 4th with no ECM 
control. It works and it's the correct way to do this.

If you have trouble locating the PSI switch, lemme know and I'll try to 
find a diagram for you.

PS: Trans Fluid is non-conductive, so you don't have to go to allot of 
effort wiring the thing.

Regards & good luck.


From llingle at seidata.com  Tue Sep 12 18:36:21 2006
From: llingle at seidata.com (Logan Lingle)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:36:21 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
In-Reply-To: <450505A5.2070904@cythera.net>
References: <20060911062918.48643.qmail@web80503.mail.yahoo.com>
	<450505A5.2070904@cythera.net>
Message-ID: <45074475.8070106@seidata.com>

Don Sauman wrote:
> The guy who does my transmissions believes that TC lockup causes more 
> problems than it is worth. He reckons that at certain loads/speed you 
> can get a drivetrain chatter that will quickly destroy 
> splines/bearings etc. He suggests that when I put the 4L80E in my Jeep 
> that I disable the lockup.
>
> Thoughts anyone.

He's totally, completely incorrect..

First, the 4L60/700R4 has a superior 1st gear ratio. If you can use it, 
you should.

Second, lockup helps the transmission to run cooler and it uses less fuel.

And there's no "chatter" in a 4L60/TH700 TCC clutch unless you've got 
internal pressure control problems.

It's an simple, on/off clutch and 100% duty solenoid.

If it's slipping or chattering, then you don't have enough pressure to 
hold it on properly. Something is leaking.

The last car that came in to my shop wanting a 4speed unit with lockup 
was a 57 Chevy with an LT1 Corvette engine and a TH400/3L80. (The three 
speed cousin of the 4L80)

The customer hated it because it ran hot, used allot of fuel and had a 
lazy launch.

With a performance 4L60/TH 700R4 behind it, he's thrilled.

It's more responsive, the transmission runs cooler, the engine turns 
1600 RPM on the highway, it gets 21 MPG and it will still rip the tires 
through third gear.

IMO? Find a new transmission shop.


From five10man at commspeed.net  Tue Sep 12 21:59:03 2006
From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 19:59:03 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only -- THANKS!
In-Reply-To: <4506956B.1000101@rochester.rr.com>
References: <E1GN1Ot-0002Rt-66@mgr1.xmission.com>
	<4506956B.1000101@rochester.rr.com>
Message-ID: <450773F7.9020701@commspeed.net>

You could talk to a parts guy (an older one) and have him find an "EGR 
delay valve" or "distributor advance check valve."  It works like a 
straight-through tube in one direction, and an orifice in the other.  
Used in the late 70s-early 80s on many American cars and trucks as well 
as Toyotas.  If you install it in your lockup vacuum switch (or 
distributor, or EGR valve) it only passes vacuum through slowly - so the 
thing receiving the vacuum receives it slowly.  Then, if you romp on the 
gas (or roll onto it too fast,) the trick valve releases the vacuum 
quickly, so your [tranny doesn't stay locked up, dizzy doesn't stay 
advanced, EGR doesn't stay open] when getting on the gas. 
HTH,
TomV

Leo Schneggenburger wrote:

> Hi David,
> I just happen to be a transmission specialist and yes, you need lock 
> up unless you have really low (high numerically) rear gearing. I would 
> recommend the vacuum setup as with proper adjustment it will 
> automatically unlock under higher load conditions as it should. Hope 
> this helps.
> Leo
>
> David M. Ingebretsen wrote:
>
>> Many, Many, thanks to all who helped.
>> When I had the transmission built, I had the guy put in a "kit" so 
>> that I
>> have a self grounding solenoid in it already. It is also wired so I 
>> can have
>> it engage in 2nd through overdrive or only in overdrive. I had to do 
>> some
>> fancy wiring to get it to work with the 747 ECU.
>> I think the ideas that use a vacuum switch get me most of the way 
>> there. I
>> found that B&M makes a speed dependent lockup, and I think a 
>> combination of
>> that with a vacuum switch might be close enough to the ECU logic to 
>> work.
>> Maybe just the vacuum switch. I'll think on it.
>>
>> It is important to have the transmission locked more often that 
>> because it
>> builds heat way fast when the torque converter is slipping. The 700R4 
>> design
>> and cooling depends on that torque converter being locked.
>> I think the basic ECU logic is to engage when possible and disengage 
>> at a
>> high rate of change of throttle position, at closed throttle, and at 
>> WOT.
>> There is also some speed dependency I haven't looked at closely. I 
>> think the
>> idea to disengage at WOT and high rate of change of throttle position 
>> is to
>> make use of the torque multiplication you get with the torque converter
>> slipping under load and also to disengage when you are coming to a stop
>> (although, the circuit always disengages when the brake is applied).
>>
>> Anyway, thanks for the ideas everyone.
>>
>> _______________________________________
>>
>> David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
>> Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
>> 2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
>> Salt Lake City, UT 84121
>>
>> 801 733-5458
>> dingebre at 3dphysics.net
>>
>> __
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org 
>> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
>> Behalf Of Eugene Pilipanko
>> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 6:20 PM
>> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
>>
>> www.bulkpart.com    part # 74416ak.   Summit racing part # TCI 376600 
>> or Jegs part 3 890-37660 should help you out.
>>
>> ---- Original Message ----- From: "Milosz Kardasinski" 
>> <miloszk at gmail.com>
>> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 5:16 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>> What I have seen in some applications is the use of a vacuum sensor
>>> connected to ported vacuum. You'd have
>>> to set the switch point to whatever you feel is the appropriate vacuum
>>> threshold...but all the sensor does is ground
>>> out, which engages the TCC below a certain vacuum setting. Some also 
>>> connect
>>> a switch in series to turn off TCC
>>> whenever the brake pedal is depressed.
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>
>>>    
>>>
>>>> I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. 
>>>> But, I'm
>>>> thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed 
>>>> for that
>>>> engine.
>>>>
>>>> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like 
>>>> that the
>>>> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the
>>>>       
>>>
>>> Mopar
>>>    
>>>
>>>> unit.
>>>>
>>>> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control 
>>>> the TCC
>>>> lockup?
>>>>
>>>> I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic 
>>>> uses; temp,
>>>> speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a 
>>>> cable
>>>> throttle position sensor which might work.
>>>>
>>>> What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel 
>>>> anymore and
>>>> the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?
>>>>
>>>> Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the
>>>>       
>>>
>>> other
>>>    
>>>
>>>> processing in the GM ECU?
>>>>
>>>> I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".
>>>>       
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Diy_efi mailing list
>>> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>>
>>>     
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Diy_efi mailing list
>> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Diy_efi mailing list
>> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>>
>>   
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>


From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Tue Sep 12 22:03:57 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 22:03:57 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C7434140611783012F0042@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org 
> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Logan Lingle
> Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 6:09 PM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
> 
> David M. Ingebretsen wrote:
> > My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing 
> and like that 
> > the GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that 
> feature in 
> > the Mopar unit.
> >
> > Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just 
> control the 
> > TCC lockup?
> >   
> Hi David..   I own a transmission shop and deal with the 700R4/4L60 
> lockup issue constantly.

[description of using 4th gear switch to control TCC deleted]

Everyone has their preferences for how they want things to work...  My
transmission shop hooked up TCC this way (bypassing the computer
control!) and it was terrible.  Maybe if you have them change the shift
points also it would be better.  While driving through the neighborhood
I would find myself in 4th gear at 900-1000 rpm, around 20 mph or so.
Talk about shuddering and shaking.  The TCC should be unlocked in these
conditions allowing more engine torque but wiring the switch directly
removed the computer from control.  I took it back the next day and had
them put it back to stock.

--steve



-- The 2006 ARM Developers' Conference, October 3-5, Santa Clara, US 
Join ARM and its technology and tools Partners from around the world at the only industry event for developers of ARM Powered(R) solutions. 
http://www.arm.com/developersconference/


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 dingebre at 3dphysics.net  Thu Sep 14 16:19:33 2006
From: dingebre at 3dphysics.net (David M. Ingebretsen)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 15:19:33 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using  GM '747 to control TCC lockup only
In-Reply-To: <45073E11.4070504@seidata.com>
Message-ID: <E1GNycU-0002ES-4y@mgr1.xmission.com>

Thanks!

_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net

__

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of Logan Lingle
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 5:09 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only

David M. Ingebretsen wrote:
> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that the
> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the
Mopar
> unit.
>
> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
> lockup? 
>   
Hi David..   I own a transmission shop and deal with the 700R4/4L60 
lockup issue constantly.

You can do this cheap and do it yourself.. No problem.

It's easy..   Ditch the GM ECM completely and convert over to whatever 
you want.

First, you'll need a cruise control type brake light switch. 

Now with a normal brake switch, it's normally open and the contacts 
close when you hit the brake, turning on your brake lights. The Cruise 
style (and it can come from anything, I recently used a Lexus switch in 
a 57 Chevy, just because it fit well) has a normally closed side as 
well..   It works in the opposite manner. When you hit the brakes, this 
normally closed side opens and breaks the circuit. The reason for this 
is that in 4th gear (Can also be 3rd in some units) and locked up, if 
you hit the brake you need to release the TCC Clutch or you will cause a 
bind up. This clutch isn't designed to be abused and you don't want to 
bind it. I know some people/after market kits omit this step, but it's 
wrong and a professional install will include this feature.

Second, run fused power (Solenoid is 100% duty, should draw about half 
an amp) through the brake switch and a suitable conductor into the plug 
on the trans and (Typically - Internal wiring differs, but you can 
modify the circuit to suit your needs..  It's real simple) into the + 
(It's diode protected) side of the solenoid. From there, come out of the 
- side and to the 4th gear pressure switch.

And that's it.

Now when your 4th gear PSI switch sees pressure, it will close and, 
provided you aren't depressing the brake pedal, the circuit closes, 
backs up pressure in the imput shaft and turns on the TCC Clutch.

As you slow down from speed, governor pressure will drop, shifting you 
from 4th to 3rd..   which will take pressure off the switch, and turn 
off the TCC.

Likewise, when you hit the brake, you will turn off the TCC.

You can do more, depending. on the particular valve body you're using. 
Some of them have a thermal switch wired inline which will inhibit TCC 
operation below about 130 degrees..   Some of them have a PSI switch for 
third also..   Some of them will have a pass switch, which gives a 
little cleaner 4-3 kickdown. Some people install a manifold vacum switch 
also, to help with clean kick downs..

But, regardless..  That's the right way to get lockup in 4th with no ECM 
control. It works and it's the correct way to do this.

If you have trouble locating the PSI switch, lemme know and I'll try to 
find a diagram for you.

PS: Trans Fluid is non-conductive, so you don't have to go to allot of 
effort wiring the thing.

Regards & good luck.
_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From dingebre at 3dphysics.net  Thu Sep 14 16:23:27 2006
From: dingebre at 3dphysics.net (David M. Ingebretsen)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 15:23:27 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only - Again MANY
	MANY THANKS
In-Reply-To: <003001c6d5ef$f76cf1d0$6601a8c0@goat>
Message-ID: <E1GNygG-0002fL-4s@mgr1.xmission.com>

	Thanks again. This is a great list and I appreciate all who chipped
in advice and suggestions.

_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net

__

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of Milosz Kardasinski
Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 4:17 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Using GM '747 to control TCC lockup only

What I have seen in some applications is the use of a vacuum sensor
connected to ported vacuum. You'd have
to set the switch point to whatever you feel is the appropriate vacuum
threshold...but all the sensor does is ground
out, which engages the TCC below a certain vacuum setting. Some also connect
a switch in series to turn off TCC
whenever the brake pedal is depressed.

----- Original Message -----

>
> I converted a Jeep 4.2 liter to a GM throttle body, works well. But, I'm
> thinking of purchasing a MOPAR MPI conversion which was designed for that
> engine.
>
> My dilemma is that I have a 700R4 automatic in the thing and like that the
> GM ECU ('747) controls the TCC lockup. I will lose that feature in the
Mopar
> unit.
>
> Any ideas about the feasibility of using the '747 to just control the TCC
> lockup?
>
> I think I can piggy back off most of the sensors the TCC logic uses; temp,
> speed, MAP, but I'm not sure about the throttle position. I saw a cable
> throttle position sensor which might work.
>
> What happens when the ECU isn't actually controlling the fuel anymore and
> the closed loop logic gets feedback, but isn't controlling the system?
>
> Is there a better way to automatically control the TCC and disable the
other
> processing in the GM ECU?
>
> I just hate going to a switch on the dash. It's so "unelegant".

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From dingebre at 3dphysics.net  Thu Sep 14 16:27:43 2006
From: dingebre at 3dphysics.net (David M. Ingebretsen)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 15:27:43 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
In-Reply-To: <45074475.8070106@seidata.com>
Message-ID: <E1GNykL-00033G-4L@mgr1.xmission.com>

Another question. Does anyone have any resources or suggestions for custom
tuning a MOPAR PCM? I am converting my Jeep 4.2 liter to a Mopar MPI with a
Mopar kit. However, I understand if I add a header or other performance
modifications, the supplied PCM can't fully compensate. I've had little luck
finding resources for tuning a Mopar system and would love any suggestions.

Thanks
David

_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net




From jlg-sep at comcast.net  Thu Sep 14 18:01:29 2006
From: jlg-sep at comcast.net (Scott Peitzsch)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 19:01:29 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
References: <E1GNykL-00033G-4L@mgr1.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <000801c6d851$b6b343b0$6601a8c0@HPDESKTOP>

> Another question. Does anyone have any resources or suggestions for custom
> tuning a MOPAR PCM? I am converting my Jeep 4.2 liter to a Mopar MPI with 
> a
> Mopar kit. However, I understand if I add a header or other performance
> modifications, the supplied PCM can't fully compensate. I've had little 
> luck
> finding resources for tuning a Mopar system and would love any 
> suggestions.

Just out of curiosity, why are you even using the Mopar PCM?  Why not simply
upgrade the '747 you have to a '730 ECM, retain ECM control over the TCC
lockup and have the ability to easily tune at will?  You already have all of 
the
compatible GM sensors - simply move them over to the new intake.  It may
require some effort to adapt the TPS and IAC, but that effort would be well
worth it in the long term.

Seems the more flexible solution to me - was kinda wondering why nobody
suggested it?

-Scott



From robert.fleming at sbcglobal.net  Thu Sep 14 18:19:47 2006
From: robert.fleming at sbcglobal.net (Robert Fleming)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 18:19:47 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
References: <E1GNykL-00033G-4L@mgr1.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <001f01c6d854$458cb6a0$6b00a8c0@hotshit>

as far as I know... I've done the most jeep 4.2 tuning I can find anywhere. 
And all that has included so far is socketing the pcm's and reading the bins

I think the main reason tuning isn't huge on these is the pcm is encased in 
this rubber glue that makes it a real PITA to socket.

Theres a few dodge boards out there that deal with tuning, but none of there 
ram addresses matched up with the jeep bins.

Best thing to do would be replace it with an aftermarket efi system

-Robert


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David M. Ingebretsen" <dingebre at 3dphysics.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:27 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?


> Another question. Does anyone have any resources or suggestions for custom
> tuning a MOPAR PCM? I am converting my Jeep 4.2 liter to a Mopar MPI with 
> a
> Mopar kit. However, I understand if I add a header or other performance
> modifications, the supplied PCM can't fully compensate. I've had little 
> luck
> finding resources for tuning a Mopar system and would love any 
> suggestions.
>
> Thanks
> David
>
> _______________________________________
>
> David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
> Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
> 2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
> Salt Lake City, UT 84121
>
> 801 733-5458
> dingebre at 3dphysics.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi 



From dingebre at 3dphysics.net  Thu Sep 14 20:49:14 2006
From: dingebre at 3dphysics.net (David M. Ingebretsen)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 19:49:14 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
In-Reply-To: <000801c6d851$b6b343b0$6601a8c0@HPDESKTOP>
Message-ID: <E1GO2p2-0001T0-5g@mgr1.xmission.com>

Great idea. I've thought about it a lot. Custom EFIS has a MPI conversion
kit based on GM parts for about the same price, too.

I think the real reason is because I'm tired of trying to kludge the
components together. I like the idea of putting the Mopar unit on with the
Mopar PCM because it was designed to work together. I'd jut like to retain
the fun of tweaking the calibration :)

_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net

__

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of Scott Peitzsch
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:01 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?

> Another question. Does anyone have any resources or suggestions for custom
> tuning a MOPAR PCM? I am converting my Jeep 4.2 liter to a Mopar MPI with 
> a
> Mopar kit. However, I understand if I add a header or other performance
> modifications, the supplied PCM can't fully compensate. I've had little 
> luck
> finding resources for tuning a Mopar system and would love any 
> suggestions.

Just out of curiosity, why are you even using the Mopar PCM?  Why not simply
upgrade the '747 you have to a '730 ECM, retain ECM control over the TCC
lockup and have the ability to easily tune at will?  You already have all of

the
compatible GM sensors - simply move them over to the new intake.  It may
require some effort to adapt the TPS and IAC, but that effort would be well
worth it in the long term.

Seems the more flexible solution to me - was kinda wondering why nobody
suggested it?

-Scott

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From dingebre at 3dphysics.net  Thu Sep 14 20:49:57 2006
From: dingebre at 3dphysics.net (David M. Ingebretsen)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 19:49:57 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
In-Reply-To: <001f01c6d854$458cb6a0$6b00a8c0@hotshit>
Message-ID: <E1GO2pk-0001VH-68@mgr1.xmission.com>

Interesting. Thanks


_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net

__

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of Robert Fleming
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 5:20 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?

as far as I know... I've done the most jeep 4.2 tuning I can find anywhere. 
And all that has included so far is socketing the pcm's and reading the bins

I think the main reason tuning isn't huge on these is the pcm is encased in 
this rubber glue that makes it a real PITA to socket.

Theres a few dodge boards out there that deal with tuning, but none of there

ram addresses matched up with the jeep bins.

Best thing to do would be replace it with an aftermarket efi system

-Robert


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David M. Ingebretsen" <dingebre at 3dphysics.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:27 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?


> Another question. Does anyone have any resources or suggestions for custom
> tuning a MOPAR PCM? I am converting my Jeep 4.2 liter to a Mopar MPI with 
> a
> Mopar kit. However, I understand if I add a header or other performance
> modifications, the supplied PCM can't fully compensate. I've had little 
> luck
> finding resources for tuning a Mopar system and would love any 
> suggestions.
>
> Thanks
> David
>
> _______________________________________
>
> David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
> Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
> 2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
> Salt Lake City, UT 84121
>
> 801 733-5458
> dingebre at 3dphysics.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi 

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From clair.davis at charter.net  Thu Sep 14 21:00:28 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 21:00:28 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
References: <E1GNykL-00033G-4L@mgr1.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <006c01c6d86a$bba00fc0$6501a8c0@davis>

I would bet that the Mopar PCM would handle an exhaust upgrade OK, probably
some sort of cold air intake setup as well, but add a cam to that mix, and
it would start to have problems.  As for tuning, there's very little
available to folks using OEM Mopar parts.  There's also no desire on the
part of Mopar to develop, or help develop, anything like that.

Mopar Action Magazine http://www.moparaction.com/ is working with some DCX
engineers to develop some "kit" EFI/PCM/harness arrangements to help adapt
the last generation (now discontinued) Magnum V8 engines to alternative
vehicles.  I.E., hotrods.  No tuning here, you get to choose from three
levels of tune: stone-cold stock; basic bolt-ons and MAYBE a mild cam; and
380hp crate engine specs.  That's it.  Nice on one hand that you can plug in
a known combo and it will run as well as any OEM-engineered system, because
it is.  Not so nice because that's only three points on a wide curve.

An example of one of the kits is being installed on their Savvy Savoy
project:
http://www.moparaction.com/Tech/archive/Savoy.html

The inability to tinker with things (and my inability to leave ANYTHING
alone) has kept me from looking very closely at any OEM Mopar system.  My
340 will be running (soon, I hope...) with a hodge-podge of Chevy and Mopar
parts.  If you need a hand with sorting out which sensors will swap around,
feel free to ask, I've done a lot of parts swapping and comparisons to see
what will replace what to fit my system.

Clair


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "David M. Ingebretsen" <dingebre at 3dphysics.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 4:27 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?


> Another question. Does anyone have any resources or suggestions for custom
> tuning a MOPAR PCM? I am converting my Jeep 4.2 liter to a Mopar MPI with
a
> Mopar kit. However, I understand if I add a header or other performance
> modifications, the supplied PCM can't fully compensate. I've had little
luck
> finding resources for tuning a Mopar system and would love any
suggestions.
>
> Thanks
> David
>
> _______________________________________
>
> David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
> Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
> 2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
> Salt Lake City, UT 84121
>
> 801 733-5458
> dingebre at 3dphysics.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



From jlg-sep at comcast.net  Thu Sep 14 21:30:26 2006
From: jlg-sep at comcast.net (Scott Peitzsch)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:30:26 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
References: <E1GO2p2-0001T0-5g@mgr1.xmission.com>
Message-ID: <001201c6d86e$e9a0ceb0$6701a8c0@Monkey>

> Great idea. I've thought about it a lot. Custom EFIS has a MPI conversion
> kit based on GM parts for about the same price, too.
>
> I think the real reason is because I'm tired of trying to kludge the
> components together. I like the idea of putting the Mopar unit on with the
> Mopar PCM because it was designed to work together. I'd jut like to retain
> the fun of tweaking the calibration :)

Kludge what together?  You already have everything you need with
the '747 setup on the engine now.  You don't need anything from
Custom EFIS at all - just the sensors and controls that are already on
your engine.

The IAT and CTS sensors are the same.  The TPS from your TB can be
moved over if you like, or you can use the one for the Mopar TB, as long
as you use the existing 5V reference.  The IAC is the ONLY issue, and
its a trivial one at that.  You may have to use one of the external IAC
mounting kits, like those offered by Street and Performance.

If you can buy just the intake, throttle body and fuel rails from Mopar,
and source the rest from the local junkyard, you're going to be dollars
ahead AND end up with a better system in the end.  The bonus is that
you don't even have to replace the engine harness - just repin the ECM
connectors (same pins, 2 of the three connectors are the same '747 to
'730) and rewire at the intake/TB.

-Scott



From airhawk at hawkgt.net  Thu Sep 14 22:07:51 2006
From: airhawk at hawkgt.net (The AirHawk)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:07:51 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
References: <E1GO2p2-0001T0-5g@mgr1.xmission.com>
	<001201c6d86e$e9a0ceb0$6701a8c0@Monkey>
Message-ID: <000c01c6d874$26153d90$0202a8c0@MajorDisaster>

> Kludge what together?  You already have everything you need with
> the '747 setup on the engine now.  You don't need anything from
> Custom EFIS at all - just the sensors and controls that are already on
> your engine.

Even though I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Mopar man, I have to agree with Scott here, - you've got 
well-hac'd ECM, with documentation available all over the web. Most of the sensors needed are very 
nearly the same as the Mopar stuff (or can be interchanged with little swearing). There's something 
like 10 million-billion-gazillion GM computers in salvage yards out there - and a lot of them are 
"cross-platform, cross-engine family"; so you don't have to come up with say a Corvette ECM if you 
have a breakdown (especially if you're doing a little hac'n to fit your application better).

In fact, I was seriously considering a GM-ECM for my pet project - 'til MegaSquirt came along. The 
idea of "building everything myself from the ground UP" just spoke to my inner gearhead too loudly, 
or I'd have followed-through.

There is absolutely no advantage to backsliding to the Mopar PCM. And a damn-sight lot of 
DIS-advantages.

-Scott Creech 




From dingebre at 3dphysics.net  Fri Sep 15 00:40:54 2006
From: dingebre at 3dphysics.net (David M. Ingebretsen)
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 23:40:54 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
In-Reply-To: <001201c6d86e$e9a0ceb0$6701a8c0@Monkey>
Message-ID: <E1GO6Qg-0002fP-3S@mgr1.xmission.com>

I'll think about it. Thanks Scott.

_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net

__

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of Scott Peitzsch
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 8:30 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?

> Great idea. I've thought about it a lot. Custom EFIS has a MPI conversion
> kit based on GM parts for about the same price, too.
>
> I think the real reason is because I'm tired of trying to kludge the
> components together. I like the idea of putting the Mopar unit on with the
> Mopar PCM because it was designed to work together. I'd jut like to retain
> the fun of tweaking the calibration :)

Kludge what together?  You already have everything you need with
the '747 setup on the engine now.  You don't need anything from
Custom EFIS at all - just the sensors and controls that are already on
your engine.

The IAT and CTS sensors are the same.  The TPS from your TB can be
moved over if you like, or you can use the one for the Mopar TB, as long
as you use the existing 5V reference.  The IAC is the ONLY issue, and
its a trivial one at that.  You may have to use one of the external IAC
mounting kits, like those offered by Street and Performance.

If you can buy just the intake, throttle body and fuel rails from Mopar,
and source the rest from the local junkyard, you're going to be dollars
ahead AND end up with a better system in the end.  The bonus is that
you don't even have to replace the engine harness - just repin the ECM
connectors (same pins, 2 of the three connectors are the same '747 to
'730) and rewire at the intake/TB.

-Scott

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From clair.davis at charter.net  Fri Sep 15 20:48:28 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 20:48:28 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
References: <E1GO2p2-0001T0-5g@mgr1.xmission.com>
	<001201c6d86e$e9a0ceb0$6701a8c0@Monkey>
Message-ID: <000c01c6d932$35b22f60$6501a8c0@davis>

The main issues I had (and which may not apply to your project) were the
following:

IAC wiring - had to sort out hi/lo coils and the Mopar wiring diagrams
don't list them that way.  +/- for each coil is easy enough, but I
rolled the dice on which was hi/lo.  Shouldn't be an issue, but it's a
matter of swapping 4 wires around to fix it if I need to.  This ASSumes
a stepper motor IAC, not the Ford-type thing.  Since you're talking
Jeep, which was and still sort of continues to be its own thing,
ANYTHING could have been used.  Lots of AMC heritage clinging to that
division, and all the EFI control units for the trucks were developed by
the AMC/Jeep engineers.  Vastly different architecture than the pass car
controllers.

TPS function & wiring - My original GM TPS wouldn't bolt up to the
aftermarket Mopar throttle body (go fig), and the TPS I needed was
"handed" opposite from the OEM Magnum TPS.  That is, the throttle shaft
twisted CW rather than CCW, for example.  Found an earlier pre-Magnum TBI
TPS that
did the job, and even shared the GM connector.  Had to swap a couple
wires, though, and many of the Mopar TPS's aren't adjustable.  I'm
thinking the Mopar PCM reads the initial resistance and sets that as the
baseline.  I hope that's not a problem with my 7730.

MAP wiring - just a matter of making sure the wires in the connector are
correct for the sensor, and that the plug fits.  Another non-problem.

Clair


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Peitzsch" <jlg-sep at comcast.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 9:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?


> > Great idea. I've thought about it a lot. Custom EFIS has a MPI
conversion
> > kit based on GM parts for about the same price, too.
> >
> > I think the real reason is because I'm tired of trying to kludge the
> > components together. I like the idea of putting the Mopar unit on with
the
> > Mopar PCM because it was designed to work together. I'd jut like to
retain
> > the fun of tweaking the calibration :)
>
> Kludge what together?  You already have everything you need with
> the '747 setup on the engine now.  You don't need anything from
> Custom EFIS at all - just the sensors and controls that are already on
> your engine.
>
> The IAT and CTS sensors are the same.  The TPS from your TB can be
> moved over if you like, or you can use the one for the Mopar TB, as long
> as you use the existing 5V reference.  The IAC is the ONLY issue, and
> its a trivial one at that.  You may have to use one of the external IAC
> mounting kits, like those offered by Street and Performance.
>
> If you can buy just the intake, throttle body and fuel rails from Mopar,
> and source the rest from the local junkyard, you're going to be dollars
> ahead AND end up with a better system in the end.  The bonus is that
> you don't even have to replace the engine harness - just repin the ECM
> connectors (same pins, 2 of the three connectors are the same '747 to
> '730) and rewire at the intake/TB.
>
> -Scott
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



From dingebre at 3dphysics.net  Fri Sep 15 22:48:44 2006
From: dingebre at 3dphysics.net (David M. Ingebretsen)
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2006 21:48:44 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
In-Reply-To: <000c01c6d932$35b22f60$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <E1GOR8e-0002TI-3m@mgr1.xmission.com>

Thanks Clair.

_______________________________________

David M. Ingebretsen, M.S., M.E.
Collision Forensics & Engineering, Inc.
2469 East Fort Union Boulevard, Ste 114
Salt Lake City, UT 84121

801 733-5458
dingebre at 3dphysics.net

__

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of Clair Davis
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 7:48 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?

The main issues I had (and which may not apply to your project) were the
following:

IAC wiring - had to sort out hi/lo coils and the Mopar wiring diagrams
don't list them that way.  +/- for each coil is easy enough, but I
rolled the dice on which was hi/lo.  Shouldn't be an issue, but it's a
matter of swapping 4 wires around to fix it if I need to.  This ASSumes
a stepper motor IAC, not the Ford-type thing.  Since you're talking
Jeep, which was and still sort of continues to be its own thing,
ANYTHING could have been used.  Lots of AMC heritage clinging to that
division, and all the EFI control units for the trucks were developed by
the AMC/Jeep engineers.  Vastly different architecture than the pass car
controllers.

TPS function & wiring - My original GM TPS wouldn't bolt up to the
aftermarket Mopar throttle body (go fig), and the TPS I needed was
"handed" opposite from the OEM Magnum TPS.  That is, the throttle shaft
twisted CW rather than CCW, for example.  Found an earlier pre-Magnum TBI
TPS that
did the job, and even shared the GM connector.  Had to swap a couple
wires, though, and many of the Mopar TPS's aren't adjustable.  I'm
thinking the Mopar PCM reads the initial resistance and sets that as the
baseline.  I hope that's not a problem with my 7730.

MAP wiring - just a matter of making sure the wires in the connector are
correct for the sensor, and that the plug fits.  Another non-problem.

Clair


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Scott Peitzsch" <jlg-sep at comcast.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 9:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?


> > Great idea. I've thought about it a lot. Custom EFIS has a MPI
conversion
> > kit based on GM parts for about the same price, too.
> >
> > I think the real reason is because I'm tired of trying to kludge the
> > components together. I like the idea of putting the Mopar unit on with
the
> > Mopar PCM because it was designed to work together. I'd jut like to
retain
> > the fun of tweaking the calibration :)
>
> Kludge what together?  You already have everything you need with
> the '747 setup on the engine now.  You don't need anything from
> Custom EFIS at all - just the sensors and controls that are already on
> your engine.
>
> The IAT and CTS sensors are the same.  The TPS from your TB can be
> moved over if you like, or you can use the one for the Mopar TB, as long
> as you use the existing 5V reference.  The IAC is the ONLY issue, and
> its a trivial one at that.  You may have to use one of the external IAC
> mounting kits, like those offered by Street and Performance.
>
> If you can buy just the intake, throttle body and fuel rails from Mopar,
> and source the rest from the local junkyard, you're going to be dollars
> ahead AND end up with a better system in the end.  The bonus is that
> you don't even have to replace the engine harness - just repin the ECM
> connectors (same pins, 2 of the three connectors are the same '747 to
> '730) and rewire at the intake/TB.
>
> -Scott
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From yakir.green at intel.com  Sun Sep 17 08:00:05 2006
From: yakir.green at intel.com (Green, Yakir)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:00:05 +0300
Subject: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??
Message-ID: <875C321F70C64D43957EE7FB4C73CB8301A1A7CD@hasmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com>

Where can I fing info about the PC project??

 

Does anyone have the files?

 

Yakir Green

 



From steve at donegan.org  Sun Sep 17 15:21:36 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 13:21:36 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Circuit boards from China fab have arrived - very nice
	quality
Message-ID: <1158524496.12072.10.camel@perky.donegan.org>

The boards arrived after 2 days - FedEx does darn good on international
orders.

I have populated the first board with the same components as my pure
breadboard setup contained. I expect by tomorrow PM I'll have seen if it
does the MAF interceptor/translator job correctly. In addition the board
(1.25 inches X 3 inches) has support for 5 analog inputs such as IAT,
TPS, CT, O2 sensors etc. Output can drive an LCD panel and an RS-232
port. Not bad for a board with 8 active components on it :-) All
'unused' I/O pins are present on headers - so as the software grows the
hardware will be ready. My only ooops on the board was placing the
crystal pins at .3 inches instead of .2 inches - schematic has been
modified for the next run.

At some point I will offer these for sale if there are any interested
parties out there.
-- 
"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
criminals."-- John Tandervold



From niche at iinet.net.au  Mon Sep 18 01:25:54 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 14:25:54 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Circuit boards from China fab have arrived -
	very nice quality
In-Reply-To: <1158524496.12072.10.camel@perky.donegan.org>
References: <1158524496.12072.10.camel@perky.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060918142512.026e8340@iinet.net.au>>

Sorry I must have missed the thread - is this for an EFI controller ?

Curious how much the Fed Ex was from CHina to US ?

Rgds

Mike


At 04:21 AM 9/18/06, you wrote:
>The boards arrived after 2 days - FedEx does darn good on international
>orders.
>
>I have populated the first board with the same components as my pure
>breadboard setup contained. I expect by tomorrow PM I'll have seen if it
>does the MAF interceptor/translator job correctly. In addition the board
>(1.25 inches X 3 inches) has support for 5 analog inputs such as IAT,
>TPS, CT, O2 sensors etc. Output can drive an LCD panel and an RS-232
>port. Not bad for a board with 8 active components on it :-) All
>'unused' I/O pins are present on headers - so as the software grows the
>hardware will be ready. My only ooops on the board was placing the
>crystal pins at .3 inches instead of .2 inches - schematic has been
>modified for the next run.
>
>At some point I will offer these for sale if there are any interested
>parties out there.
>-- 
>"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
>criminals."-- John Tandervold
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



Regards from


Mike Massen
Network Power Systems
Lab 08 9444 8961
Mb 0438 048961
Perth, Western Australia
* VL/VK Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt !
* RB30 Skyline/Nissan/VL Milspec now in economy trials
* Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
* Industrial grade PolyVinyliDeneChloride (PVDC Copolymer) in bulk, the best
  oxygen and water protective barrier you can find for circuit boards.
Web site under construction   http://niche.iinet.net.au


From benof1987 at hotmail.com  Mon Sep 18 02:39:35 2006
From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 17:39:35 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
Message-ID: <BAY106-F29626E17F1E82986F8004A82D0@phx.gbl>

Now i know its not DIY, but it still has something to do with cheap fuel 
injection.

The problem is that I have a Haltech E5, and it does datalogging. And I 
can't view the data logs in anything but the haltech program, unless I print 
out all 140 pages of data, and type it up into Excel. As you can see, that 
is not an option.

And because the haltech program is in MSDOS, taking a screenshot doesnt get 
me anywhere. (it comes out with the data in word form, not a picture, but it 
comes in unorganised streams, which makes it less useful).

Can anyone think of a fix for this?

thanks
Ben

_________________________________________________________________
Find your old friends and discover what they're doing now. 
http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=389&referral=HM_tagline_SEP06&URL=http://ninemsn.schoolfriends.com.au



From ivaan at jagertech.co.za  Mon Sep 18 03:10:46 2006
From: ivaan at jagertech.co.za (ivaan at jagertech.co.za)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 09:10:46 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 19, Issue 22
Message-ID: <7406c5cc1ad64515a8b74dc3bffdcefd.ivaan@jagertech.co.za>

Where can I find files or a URL aboat a analog EFI system for a simple two stroke engine?

Ivan de Jager





------- Original Message -------
>From    : diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org[mailto:diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org]
Sent    : 9/17/2006 6:01:08 PM
To      : diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Cc      : 
Subject : RE: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 19, Issue 22

 Send Diy_efi mailing list submissions to
	diy_efi at diy-efi.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	 http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi 
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	diy_efi-owner at diy-efi.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Diy_efi digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Where can I fing info about the PC project?? (Green, Yakir)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:00:05 +0300
From: "Green, Yakir" <yakir.green at intel.com>
Subject: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Message-ID:
	<875C321F70C64D43957EE7FB4C73CB8301A1A7CD at hasmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com>
	
Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"

Where can I fing info about the PC project??

 

Does anyone have the files?

 

Yakir Green

 



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
 http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi 


End of Diy_efi Digest, Vol 19, Issue 22
***************************************




From llemoine at gmail.com  Mon Sep 18 06:16:46 2006
From: llemoine at gmail.com (Lee M. Lemoine)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:16:46 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
In-Reply-To: <BAY106-F29626E17F1E82986F8004A82D0@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY106-F29626E17F1E82986F8004A82D0@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <bedc2dea0609180416o1bbd565esc2650c83238acdb3@mail.gmail.com>

Hmm, i never really tried exporting stuff from my haltech.  I know that you
can save the documents and review them in the software.  when you say it
prints things out in word form, do you mean plaintext or a simulated font
(Postscript)  ?    If its just doing a text dump in a standard dot matrix
(80 columns wide)  i'm pretty sure you can find dos programs that run "TSR"
(Terminate Stay Resident)  which will basically capture all the data sent to
a specific com port and put it into a file --   but if it uses post script
i'm not sure how useful that'd be...    It's worth a shot, it'd be on a dos
freeware site.

You'd simply just run that program, then it'll exit back to the dos prompt
--  then you run your haltech software.

if you can't find anything let me know later on, i'll look for you -- gotta
head to work here unfortunately though.

-- Lee
(haltech E6GM)

On 9/18/06, Ben P <benof1987 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Now i know its not DIY, but it still has something to do with cheap fuel
> injection.
>
> The problem is that I have a Haltech E5, and it does datalogging. And I
> can't view the data logs in anything but the haltech program, unless I
> print
> out all 140 pages of data, and type it up into Excel. As you can see, that
> is not an option.
>
> And because the haltech program is in MSDOS, taking a screenshot doesnt
> get
> me anywhere. (it comes out with the data in word form, not a picture, but
> it
> comes in unorganised streams, which makes it less useful).
>
> Can anyone think of a fix for this?
>
> thanks
> Ben
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Find your old friends and discover what they're doing now.
>
> http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=389&referral=HM_tagline_SEP06&URL=http://ninemsn.schoolfriends.com.au
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Sincerely,
Lee M. Lemoine
KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)


From llemoine at gmail.com  Mon Sep 18 06:21:39 2006
From: llemoine at gmail.com (Lee M. Lemoine)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:21:39 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
In-Reply-To: <bedc2dea0609180416o1bbd565esc2650c83238acdb3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BAY106-F29626E17F1E82986F8004A82D0@phx.gbl>
	<bedc2dea0609180416o1bbd565esc2650c83238acdb3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bedc2dea0609180421l5cfb809ekcf2c517da4823bf7@mail.gmail.com>

quick correction on myself -- it'd capture from a specific LPT port.

On 9/18/06, Lee M. Lemoine <llemoine at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hmm, i never really tried exporting stuff from my haltech.  I know that
> you can save the documents and review them in the software.  when you say it
> prints things out in word form, do you mean plaintext or a simulated font
> (Postscript)  ?    If its just doing a text dump in a standard dot matrix
> (80 columns wide)  i'm pretty sure you can find dos programs that run "TSR"
> (Terminate Stay Resident)  which will basically capture all the data sent to
> a specific com port and put it into a file --   but if it uses post script
> i'm not sure how useful that'd be...    It's worth a shot, it'd be on a dos
> freeware site.
>
> You'd simply just run that program, then it'll exit back to the dos prompt
> --  then you run your haltech software.
>
> if you can't find anything let me know later on, i'll look for you --
> gotta head to work here unfortunately though.
>
> -- Lee
> (haltech E6GM)
>
>
> On 9/18/06, Ben P <benof1987 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Now i know its not DIY, but it still has something to do with cheap fuel
> > injection.
> >
> > The problem is that I have a Haltech E5, and it does datalogging. And I
> > can't view the data logs in anything but the haltech program, unless I
> > print
> > out all 140 pages of data, and type it up into Excel. As you can see,
> > that
> > is not an option.
> >
> > And because the haltech program is in MSDOS, taking a screenshot doesnt
> > get
> > me anywhere. (it comes out with the data in word form, not a picture,
> > but it
> > comes in unorganised streams, which makes it less useful).
> >
> > Can anyone think of a fix for this?
> >
> > thanks
> > Ben
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Find your old friends and discover what they're doing now.
> > http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=389&referral=HM_tagline_SEP06&URL=http://ninemsn.schoolfriends.com.au
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sincerely,
> Lee M. Lemoine
> KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
> http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
> '06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
> '93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)
>



-- 
Sincerely,
Lee M. Lemoine
KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)


From steve at donegan.org  Mon Sep 18 07:34:44 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 05:34:44 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Circuit boards from China fab have arrived - very
	nice quality
In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20060918142512.026e8340@iinet.net.au>>
References: <1158524496.12072.10.camel@perky.donegan.org>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060918142512.026e8340@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <1158582884.12072.20.camel@perky.donegan.org>

Yes, it is an EFI/ECM project - the board is the eyes/fingers of the
system. The core 'brain' will be an LPC2106 (Phillips ARM CPU).

On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 14:25 +0800, Mike wrote:
> Sorry I must have missed the thread - is this for an EFI controller ?
> 
> Curious how much the Fed Ex was from CHina to US ?
> 
> Rgds
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> At 04:21 AM 9/18/06, you wrote:
> >The boards arrived after 2 days - FedEx does darn good on international
> >orders.
> >
> >I have populated the first board with the same components as my pure
> >breadboard setup contained. I expect by tomorrow PM I'll have seen if it
> >does the MAF interceptor/translator job correctly. In addition the board
> >(1.25 inches X 3 inches) has support for 5 analog inputs such as IAT,
> >TPS, CT, O2 sensors etc. Output can drive an LCD panel and an RS-232
> >port. Not bad for a board with 8 active components on it :-) All
> >'unused' I/O pins are present on headers - so as the software grows the
> >hardware will be ready. My only ooops on the board was placing the
> >crystal pins at .3 inches instead of .2 inches - schematic has been
> >modified for the next run.
> >
> >At some point I will offer these for sale if there are any interested
> >parties out there.
> >-- 
> >"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
> >criminals."-- John Tandervold
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Diy_efi mailing list
> >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 
> 
> 
> Regards from
> 
> 
> Mike Massen
> Network Power Systems
> Lab 08 9444 8961
> Mb 0438 048961
> Perth, Western Australia
> * VL/VK Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt !
> * RB30 Skyline/Nissan/VL Milspec now in economy trials
> * Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
> * Industrial grade PolyVinyliDeneChloride (PVDC Copolymer) in bulk, the best
>   oxygen and water protective barrier you can find for circuit boards.
> Web site under construction   http://niche.iinet.net.au
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
-- 
"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
criminals."-- John Tandervold



From steve at donegan.org  Mon Sep 18 07:35:34 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 05:35:34 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Circuit boards from China fab have arrived - very
	nice quality
In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20060918142512.026e8340@iinet.net.au>>
References: <1158524496.12072.10.camel@perky.donegan.org>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060918142512.026e8340@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <1158582934.12072.22.camel@perky.donegan.org>

Sorry, FedEx cost was ~20$ I believe.

On Mon, 2006-09-18 at 14:25 +0800, Mike wrote:
> Sorry I must have missed the thread - is this for an EFI controller ?
> 
> Curious how much the Fed Ex was from CHina to US ?
> 
> Rgds
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> At 04:21 AM 9/18/06, you wrote:
> >The boards arrived after 2 days - FedEx does darn good on international
> >orders.
> >
> >I have populated the first board with the same components as my pure
> >breadboard setup contained. I expect by tomorrow PM I'll have seen if it
> >does the MAF interceptor/translator job correctly. In addition the board
> >(1.25 inches X 3 inches) has support for 5 analog inputs such as IAT,
> >TPS, CT, O2 sensors etc. Output can drive an LCD panel and an RS-232
> >port. Not bad for a board with 8 active components on it :-) All
> >'unused' I/O pins are present on headers - so as the software grows the
> >hardware will be ready. My only ooops on the board was placing the
> >crystal pins at .3 inches instead of .2 inches - schematic has been
> >modified for the next run.
> >
> >At some point I will offer these for sale if there are any interested
> >parties out there.
> >-- 
> >"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
> >criminals."-- John Tandervold
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Diy_efi mailing list
> >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 
> 
> 
> Regards from
> 
> 
> Mike Massen
> Network Power Systems
> Lab 08 9444 8961
> Mb 0438 048961
> Perth, Western Australia
> * VL/VK Commodore Fuse Rail that wont warp or melt !
> * RB30 Skyline/Nissan/VL Milspec now in economy trials
> * Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
> * Industrial grade PolyVinyliDeneChloride (PVDC Copolymer) in bulk, the best
>   oxygen and water protective barrier you can find for circuit boards.
> Web site under construction   http://niche.iinet.net.au
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
-- 
"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
criminals."-- John Tandervold



From niche at iinet.net.au  Mon Sep 18 09:55:39 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 22:55:39 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Circuit boards from China fab have arrived -
	very nice quality
In-Reply-To: <1158582884.12072.20.camel@perky.donegan.org>
References: <1158524496.12072.10.camel@perky.donegan.org>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060918142512.026e8340@iinet.net.au>
	<1158582884.12072.20.camel@perky.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060918225256.026b1cb0@iinet.net.au>>

At 08:34 PM 9/18/06, you wrote:
>Yes, it is an EFI/ECM project - the board is the eyes/fingers of the
>system. The core 'brain' will be an LPC2106 (Phillips ARM CPU).

Thanks Steven,
Is this your own project or part of a batch as I recall you mentioned
selling some, ie. Are there other participants on this user group ?

The Fed Ex seems on the low side from previous experience, has Fed Ex
lifted their game or is it par for the course...

I had less than a Kg of parts come from Singapore (To Perth, Western
Australia - where there is at least on direct flight per day)) and it
went via Sydney and cost AUD $192 and took 6 days, I was not impressed :(




Regards from


Mike
Perth, Western Australia
VK/VL Commodore Fuse Rail panel that wont warp, twist or melt, guaranteed  !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From steve at donegan.org  Mon Sep 18 13:25:38 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 11:25:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Circuit boards from China fab have arrived - very 
	nice quality
In-Reply-To: <7.0.0.16.0.20060918225256.026b1cb0@iinet.net.au>>
References: <1158524496.12072.10.camel@perky.donegan.org>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060918142512.026e8340@iinet.net.au>
	<1158582884.12072.20.camel@perky.donegan.org>
	<7.0.0.16.0.20060918225256.026b1cb0@iinet.net.au>>
Message-ID: <25377.70.168.146.244.1158603938.squirrel@www.donegan.org>

Well, I received a note from the PCB comapany and the parts arrived ~2
days later. The entire order only cost 90$ or so including shipping.

This is my own project the boards are the eyes/fingers so to speak of a
distributed system - although they can be used just dandy stand-alone.

Right now this is a hobby for myself and a friend - however I will
probably make the boards available as a kit - with pre-programmed PIC. As
soon as I determine what my total cost is I'll know what makes sense to
charge for them - in any case I expect it will be 50$ or less. The board
has 5 available A/D converters, 2 capture/hold channels (input from MAF,
spoofed MAF output to ECM) and a bunch of digital I/O which I will
initially use to drive an LCD panel. It also has RS-232 I/O although I did
that at 5V, not the usual higher voltage - so you would need to use a
MAX232 or equivalent.

> At 08:34 PM 9/18/06, you wrote:
>>Yes, it is an EFI/ECM project - the board is the eyes/fingers of the
>>system. The core 'brain' will be an LPC2106 (Phillips ARM CPU).
>
> Thanks Steven,
> Is this your own project or part of a batch as I recall you mentioned
> selling some, ie. Are there other participants on this user group ?
>
> The Fed Ex seems on the low side from previous experience, has Fed Ex
> lifted their game or is it par for the course...
>
> I had less than a Kg of parts come from Singapore (To Perth, Western
> Australia - where there is at least on direct flight per day)) and it
> went via Sydney and cost AUD $192 and took 6 days, I was not impressed :(
>
>
>
>
> Regards from
>
>
> Mike
> Perth, Western Australia
> VK/VL Commodore Fuse Rail panel that wont warp, twist or melt, guaranteed
> !
> Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
> http://niche.iinet.net.au
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



From benof1987 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 19 08:10:51 2006
From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:10:51 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
In-Reply-To: <bedc2dea0609180416o1bbd565esc2650c83238acdb3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY106-F176AC021DE1EE6D7EC2F8EA8220@phx.gbl>

well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP results 
in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS borders coming 
out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that highlighting all of the 
'picture' in microsoft word, converting it into a monospace text (courier 
new), and changing the size to 8 point (i think thats it anyway) results in 
an ASCII picture, with all relevant data in the appropriate columns. However 
taking a shot of anything with real graphics (like the bar graph tuning 
screen on haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same characters 
as opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).

Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal screenshot (i 
believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator in windows, rather 
than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This really sucks because 98 
can't use memory sticks, and the computer hooked up to the dyno doesnt have 
a cd burner. So i have to put it on floppy, which is a long forgotten (for 
good reason) art...

however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than the 
haltech program.

Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file instead of 
the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the relevant data and 
put it into a word document for ease of viewing.

Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to open the 
datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come up with something.

any ideas/clues?

thanks
Ben


>From: "Lee M. Lemoine" <llemoine at gmail.com>
>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:16:46 -0400
>
>Hmm, i never really tried exporting stuff from my haltech.  I know that you
>can save the documents and review them in the software.  when you say it
>prints things out in word form, do you mean plaintext or a simulated font
>(Postscript)  ?    If its just doing a text dump in a standard dot matrix
>(80 columns wide)  i'm pretty sure you can find dos programs that run "TSR"
>(Terminate Stay Resident)  which will basically capture all the data sent 
>to
>a specific com port and put it into a file --   but if it uses post script
>i'm not sure how useful that'd be...    It's worth a shot, it'd be on a dos
>freeware site.
>
>You'd simply just run that program, then it'll exit back to the dos prompt
>--  then you run your haltech software.
>
>if you can't find anything let me know later on, i'll look for you -- gotta
>head to work here unfortunately though.
>
>-- Lee
>(haltech E6GM)
>
>On 9/18/06, Ben P <benof1987 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Now i know its not DIY, but it still has something to do with cheap fuel
>>injection.
>>
>>The problem is that I have a Haltech E5, and it does datalogging. And I
>>can't view the data logs in anything but the haltech program, unless I
>>print
>>out all 140 pages of data, and type it up into Excel. As you can see, that
>>is not an option.
>>
>>And because the haltech program is in MSDOS, taking a screenshot doesnt
>>get
>>me anywhere. (it comes out with the data in word form, not a picture, but
>>it
>>comes in unorganised streams, which makes it less useful).
>>
>>Can anyone think of a fix for this?
>>
>>thanks
>>Ben
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Find your old friends and discover what they're doing now.
>>
>>http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=389&referral=HM_tagline_SEP06&URL=http://ninemsn.schoolfriends.com.au
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>
>
>
>--
>Sincerely,
>Lee M. Lemoine
>KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
>http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
>'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
>'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

_________________________________________________________________
Search for local singles online @ Lavalife 
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Flavalife9%2Eninemsn%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fclickthru%2Fclickthru%2Eact%3Fid%3Dninemsn%26context%3Dan99%26locale%3Den%5FAU%26a%3D23198&_t=751140432&_r=emailtaglines_search_aug06&_m=EXT



From b.shaw at comcast.net  Tue Sep 19 08:21:00 2006
From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 09:21:00 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
In-Reply-To: <BAY106-F176AC021DE1EE6D7EC2F8EA8220@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY106-F176AC021DE1EE6D7EC2F8EA8220@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <450FEEBC.4030804@comcast.net>

Can you pipe the output to a text file?

If your program's name is haltech.exe and you want the data to end up in 
a file called test1.txt,  try a command line like this....

haltech > test1.txt

hth,

Bill

Ben P wrote:
> well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP 
> results in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS 
> borders coming out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that 
> highlighting all of the 'picture' in microsoft word, converting it 
> into a monospace text (courier new), and changing the size to 8 point 
> (i think thats it anyway) results in an ASCII picture, with all 
> relevant data in the appropriate columns. However taking a shot of 
> anything with real graphics (like the bar graph tuning screen on 
> haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same characters as 
> opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).
>
> Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal 
> screenshot (i believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator 
> in windows, rather than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This 
> really sucks because 98 can't use memory sticks, and the computer 
> hooked up to the dyno doesnt have a cd burner. So i have to put it on 
> floppy, which is a long forgotten (for good reason) art...
>
> however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than the 
> haltech program.
>
> Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file instead 
> of the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the relevant 
> data and put it into a word document for ease of viewing.
>
> Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to open 
> the datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come up with 
> something.
>
> any ideas/clues?
>
> thanks
> Ben
>
>
>> From: "Lee M. Lemoine" <llemoine at gmail.com>
>> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
>> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:16:46 -0400
>>
>> Hmm, i never really tried exporting stuff from my haltech.  I know 
>> that you
>> can save the documents and review them in the software.  when you say it
>> prints things out in word form, do you mean plaintext or a simulated 
>> font
>> (Postscript)  ?    If its just doing a text dump in a standard dot 
>> matrix
>> (80 columns wide)  i'm pretty sure you can find dos programs that run 
>> "TSR"
>> (Terminate Stay Resident)  which will basically capture all the data 
>> sent to
>> a specific com port and put it into a file --   but if it uses post 
>> script
>> i'm not sure how useful that'd be...    It's worth a shot, it'd be on 
>> a dos
>> freeware site.
>>
>> You'd simply just run that program, then it'll exit back to the dos 
>> prompt
>> --  then you run your haltech software.
>>
>> if you can't find anything let me know later on, i'll look for you -- 
>> gotta
>> head to work here unfortunately though.
>>
>> -- Lee
>> (haltech E6GM)
>>
>> On 9/18/06, Ben P <benof1987 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Now i know its not DIY, but it still has something to do with cheap 
>>> fuel
>>> injection.
>>>
>>> The problem is that I have a Haltech E5, and it does datalogging. And I
>>> can't view the data logs in anything but the haltech program, unless I
>>> print
>>> out all 140 pages of data, and type it up into Excel. As you can 
>>> see, that
>>> is not an option.
>>>
>>> And because the haltech program is in MSDOS, taking a screenshot doesnt
>>> get
>>> me anywhere. (it comes out with the data in word form, not a 
>>> picture, but
>>> it
>>> comes in unorganised streams, which makes it less useful).
>>>
>>> Can anyone think of a fix for this?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> Ben
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Find your old friends and discover what they're doing now.
>>>
>>> http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=389&referral=HM_tagline_SEP06&URL=http://ninemsn.schoolfriends.com.au 
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Sincerely,
>> Lee M. Lemoine
>> KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
>> http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
>> '06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
>> '93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)



From benof1987 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 19 08:41:06 2006
From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:41:06 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
In-Reply-To: <450FEEBC.4030804@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <BAY106-F21D417243A63991122EBDCA8220@phx.gbl>


so what does that print to the text file? The data that it saves, displays, 
or everything that the program 'sees'?

>From: Bill - Comcast <b.shaw at comcast.net>
>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
>Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 09:21:00 -0400
>
>Can you pipe the output to a text file?
>
>If your program's name is haltech.exe and you want the data to end up in a 
>file called test1.txt,  try a command line like this....
>
>haltech > test1.txt
>
>hth,
>
>Bill
>
>Ben P wrote:
>>well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP results 
>>in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS borders coming 
>>out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that highlighting all of the 
>>'picture' in microsoft word, converting it into a monospace text (courier 
>>new), and changing the size to 8 point (i think thats it anyway) results 
>>in an ASCII picture, with all relevant data in the appropriate columns. 
>>However taking a shot of anything with real graphics (like the bar graph 
>>tuning screen on haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same 
>>characters as opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).
>>
>>Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal screenshot 
>>(i believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator in windows, 
>>rather than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This really sucks 
>>because 98 can't use memory sticks, and the computer hooked up to the dyno 
>>doesnt have a cd burner. So i have to put it on floppy, which is a long 
>>forgotten (for good reason) art...
>>
>>however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than the 
>>haltech program.
>>
>>Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file instead of 
>>the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the relevant data and 
>>put it into a word document for ease of viewing.
>>
>>Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to open the 
>>datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come up with 
>>something.
>>
>>any ideas/clues?
>>
>>thanks
>>Ben

_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Spaces: share up to 500 photos per month, free 
http://spaces.live.com/



From niche at iinet.net.au  Tue Sep 19 09:04:25 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 22:04:25 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
In-Reply-To: <BAY106-F176AC021DE1EE6D7EC2F8EA8220@phx.gbl>
References: <bedc2dea0609180416o1bbd565esc2650c83238acdb3@mail.gmail.com>
	<BAY106-F176AC021DE1EE6D7EC2F8EA8220@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060919215654.02b8de90@iinet.net.au>>

I have an MSC-FD2M which is a floppy disk to Memory stick adaptor
and it works fine on Win98se, I think the device is now obsolete but can
be found in some Sony shops, on ebay or the odd tech s/h shop.


ie. Plug in memory stick (in my case 16, 64 or 128megs) into adaptor,
place adaptor into floppy drive,
Access the floppy drive from the Windows Explorer menu and it correctly
handles the memory stick capacity but as a flash drive.

It does however, require that one load a driver for the adaptor first but
seems most reliable. The install s/w says it works down to Win 95.

Another option, especially if your screen is an LCD or good CRT is to
use a digital camera on a small tripod taking a pot shot of the screen,
though you might want to select longer exposure for CRT to avoid frames.
I have regularly used this with a Sony 4Meg pixel camera and a 18"
LCD and the result is almost as good as a screen dump. With a jpeg
cut and paste/editor etc you can extract graphs, tables and even use an
OCR front end from a scanner - though I havent used that part much.

I have even taken screen dumps this way from an HP1631A/D logic analyser
of 1985 vintage with its green CRT and the result is very usable :)

Rgds

Mike



At 09:10 PM 9/19/06, you wrote:
>well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP results in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS borders coming out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that highlighting all of the 'picture' in microsoft word, converting it into a monospace text (courier new), and changing the size to 8 point (i think thats it anyway) results in an ASCII picture, with all relevant data in the appropriate columns. However taking a shot of anything with real graphics (like the bar graph tuning screen on haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same characters as opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).
>
>Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal screenshot (i believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator in windows, rather than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This really sucks because 98 can't use memory sticks, and the computer hooked up to the dyno doesnt have a cd burner. So i have to put it on floppy, which is a long forgotten (for good reason) art...
>
>however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than the haltech program.
>
>Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file instead of the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the relevant data and put it into a word document for ease of viewing.
>
>Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to open the datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come up with something.
>
>any ideas/clues?
>
>thanks
>Ben
>
>
>>From: "Lee M. Lemoine" <llemoine at gmail.com>
>>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
>>Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2006 07:16:46 -0400
>>
>>Hmm, i never really tried exporting stuff from my haltech.  I know that you
>>can save the documents and review them in the software.  when you say it
>>prints things out in word form, do you mean plaintext or a simulated font
>>(Postscript)  ?    If its just doing a text dump in a standard dot matrix
>>(80 columns wide)  i'm pretty sure you can find dos programs that run "TSR"
>>(Terminate Stay Resident)  which will basically capture all the data sent to
>>a specific com port and put it into a file --   but if it uses post script
>>i'm not sure how useful that'd be...    It's worth a shot, it'd be on a dos
>>freeware site.
>>
>>You'd simply just run that program, then it'll exit back to the dos prompt
>>--  then you run your haltech software.
>>
>>if you can't find anything let me know later on, i'll look for you -- gotta
>>head to work here unfortunately though.
>>
>>-- Lee
>>(haltech E6GM)
>>
>>On 9/18/06, Ben P <benof1987 at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Now i know its not DIY, but it still has something to do with cheap fuel
>>>injection.
>>>
>>>The problem is that I have a Haltech E5, and it does datalogging. And I
>>>can't view the data logs in anything but the haltech program, unless I
>>>print
>>>out all 140 pages of data, and type it up into Excel. As you can see, that
>>>is not an option.
>>>
>>>And because the haltech program is in MSDOS, taking a screenshot doesnt
>>>get
>>>me anywhere. (it comes out with the data in word form, not a picture, but
>>>it
>>>comes in unorganised streams, which makes it less useful).
>>>
>>>Can anyone think of a fix for this?
>>>
>>>thanks
>>>Ben
>>>
>>>_________________________________________________________________
>>>Find your old friends and discover what they're doing now.
>>>
>>>http://ninemsn.com.au/share/redir/adTrack.asp?mode=click&clientID=389&referral=HM_tagline_SEP06&URL=http://ninemsn.schoolfriends.com.au
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Sincerely,
>>Lee M. Lemoine
>>KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
>>http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
>>'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
>>'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)
>>_______________________________________________
>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Search for local singles online @ Lavalife http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Flavalife9%2Eninemsn%2Ecom%2Eau%2Fclickthru%2Fclickthru%2Eact%3Fid%3Dninemsn%26context%3Dan99%26locale%3Den%5FAU%26a%3D23198&_t=751140432&_r=emailtaglines_search_aug06&_m=EXT
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



Regards from


Mike
Perth, Western Australia
VK/VL Commodore Fuse Rail panel that wont warp, twist or melt, guaranteed  !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From b.shaw at comcast.net  Tue Sep 19 09:08:21 2006
From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill - Comcast)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 10:08:21 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
In-Reply-To: <BAY106-F21D417243A63991122EBDCA8220@phx.gbl>
References: <BAY106-F21D417243A63991122EBDCA8220@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <450FF9D5.9060603@comcast.net>

Data that is printed to the screen.

Bill

Ben P wrote:
>
> so what does that print to the text file? The data that it saves, 
> displays, or everything that the program 'sees'?
>
>> From: Bill - Comcast <b.shaw at comcast.net>
>> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
>> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 09:21:00 -0400
>>
>> Can you pipe the output to a text file?
>>
>> If your program's name is haltech.exe and you want the data to end up 
>> in a file called test1.txt,  try a command line like this....
>>
>> haltech > test1.txt
>>
>> hth,
>>
>> Bill
>>
>> Ben P wrote:
>>> well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP 
>>> results in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS 
>>> borders coming out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that 
>>> highlighting all of the 'picture' in microsoft word, converting it 
>>> into a monospace text (courier new), and changing the size to 8 
>>> point (i think thats it anyway) results in an ASCII picture, with 
>>> all relevant data in the appropriate columns. However taking a shot 
>>> of anything with real graphics (like the bar graph tuning screen on 
>>> haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same characters 
>>> as opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).
>>>
>>> Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal 
>>> screenshot (i believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator 
>>> in windows, rather than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This 
>>> really sucks because 98 can't use memory sticks, and the computer 
>>> hooked up to the dyno doesnt have a cd burner. So i have to put it 
>>> on floppy, which is a long forgotten (for good reason) art...
>>>
>>> however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than 
>>> the haltech program.
>>>
>>> Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file 
>>> instead of the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the 
>>> relevant data and put it into a word document for ease of viewing.
>>>
>>> Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to 
>>> open the datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come 
>>> up with something.
>>>
>>> any ideas/clues?
>>>
>>> thanks
>>> Ben



From andy_powell29 at hotmail.com  Tue Sep 19 16:12:42 2006
From: andy_powell29 at hotmail.com (Andy)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 22:12:42 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??
References: <875C321F70C64D43957EE7FB4C73CB8301A1A7CD@hasmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com>
Message-ID: <BAY101-DAV6DB0D6EE283F2CA377EF984220@phx.gbl>

what pc project ?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Green, Yakir" <yakir.green at intel.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 2:00 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??


Where can I fing info about the PC project??

 

Does anyone have the files?

 

Yakir Green

 

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From Steve.Ravet at arm.com  Tue Sep 19 21:29:36 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 21:29:36 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 19, Issue 22
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301354EEE@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

Ivan, try searching the archives for 555 efi, then expand your search to
google.

--steve 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org 
> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] 
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 3:11 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 19, Issue 22
> 
> Where can I find files or a URL aboat a analog EFI system for 
> a simple two stroke engine?
> 
> Ivan de Jager
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------- Original Message -------
> >From    : 
> diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org[mailto:diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org]
> Sent    : 9/17/2006 6:01:08 PM
> To      : diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Cc      : 
> Subject : RE: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 19, Issue 22
> 
>  Send Diy_efi mailing list submissions to
> 	diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	 http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	diy_efi-owner at diy-efi.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more 
> specific than "Re: Contents of Diy_efi digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>    1. Where can I fing info about the PC project?? (Green, Yakir)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 16:00:05 +0300
> From: "Green, Yakir" <yakir.green at intel.com>
> Subject: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	
> <875C321F70C64D43957EE7FB4C73CB8301A1A7CD at hasmsx413.ger.corp.i
> ntel.com>
> 	
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Where can I fing info about the PC project??
> 
>  
> 
> Does anyone have the files?
> 
>  
> 
> Yakir Green
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>  http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi 
> 
> 
> End of Diy_efi Digest, Vol 19, Issue 22
> ***************************************
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 


-- The 2006 ARM Developers' Conference, October 3-5, Santa Clara, US 
Join ARM and its technology and tools Partners from around the world at the only industry event for developers of ARM Powered(R) solutions. 
http://www.arm.com/developersconference/


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  Tue Sep 19 21:39:02 2006
From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 21:39:02 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
Message-ID: <DBB2E4C4173F1749B6C743414061178301354EF0@NASDAQ.usa.Arm.com>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org 
> [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Ben P
> Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 8:41 AM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
> 
> 
> so what does that print to the text file? The data that it 
> saves, displays, or everything that the program 'sees'?

All text that the program sends to the screen in the "normal way" (ie
via DOS calls) will instead be sent to a text file.  It sounds like your
program uses the line drawing characters, moves the cursor all over the
screen to put text in specific places, and maybe even draws graphics.
The file probably won't get much of that correct, certainly not the
graphics, but you can try it.  It's mostly for programs that scroll a
lot of text up the screen, for example you could do:

c:\>dir > dirlist.txt

to capture a directory listing to a file.

--steve



-- The 2006 ARM Developers' Conference, October 3-5, Santa Clara, US 
Join ARM and its technology and tools Partners from around the world at the only industry event for developers of ARM Powered(R) solutions. 
http://www.arm.com/developersconference/


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 llemoine at gmail.com  Tue Sep 19 21:44:55 2006
From: llemoine at gmail.com (Lee M. Lemoine)
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 22:44:55 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
In-Reply-To: <450FF9D5.9060603@comcast.net>
References: <BAY106-F21D417243A63991122EBDCA8220@phx.gbl>
	<450FF9D5.9060603@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <bedc2dea0609191944yc90f1e3x9c668245595236bf@mail.gmail.com>

The haltech > dos.txt would work fine if you didn't have to pass
parameters.  its not a strict data logging program, and there are no
command-line switches to configure like your mentioning.   If you've got
WinXP the only thing that comes to mind is to install a printer driver that
writes to disk.  this way the dos emulator will pipe the output to a windows
printer, which simply writes the data to disk.  i've done this before, i
think win98 has a "file writer" or "print to disk" function as a "generic"
or "Microsoft" brand printer in the 'add printers' section.

Let me know what you come up with, again, short notice not much time to
research.

-- LL

On 9/19/06, Bill - Comcast <b.shaw at comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Data that is printed to the screen.
>
> Bill
>
> Ben P wrote:
> >
> > so what does that print to the text file? The data that it saves,
> > displays, or everything that the program 'sees'?
> >
> >> From: Bill - Comcast <b.shaw at comcast.net>
> >> Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
> >> Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 09:21:00 -0400
> >>
> >> Can you pipe the output to a text file?
> >>
> >> If your program's name is haltech.exe and you want the data to end up
> >> in a file called test1.txt,  try a command line like this....
> >>
> >> haltech > test1.txt
> >>
> >> hth,
> >>
> >> Bill
> >>
> >> Ben P wrote:
> >>> well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP
> >>> results in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS
> >>> borders coming out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that
> >>> highlighting all of the 'picture' in microsoft word, converting it
> >>> into a monospace text (courier new), and changing the size to 8
> >>> point (i think thats it anyway) results in an ASCII picture, with
> >>> all relevant data in the appropriate columns. However taking a shot
> >>> of anything with real graphics (like the bar graph tuning screen on
> >>> haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same characters
> >>> as opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).
> >>>
> >>> Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal
> >>> screenshot (i believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator
> >>> in windows, rather than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This
> >>> really sucks because 98 can't use memory sticks, and the computer
> >>> hooked up to the dyno doesnt have a cd burner. So i have to put it
> >>> on floppy, which is a long forgotten (for good reason) art...
> >>>
> >>> however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than
> >>> the haltech program.
> >>>
> >>> Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file
> >>> instead of the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the
> >>> relevant data and put it into a word document for ease of viewing.
> >>>
> >>> Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to
> >>> open the datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come
> >>> up with something.
> >>>
> >>> any ideas/clues?
> >>>
> >>> thanks
> >>> Ben
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Sincerely,
Lee M. Lemoine
KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)


From bill.washington at nec.com.au  Tue Sep 19 22:56:43 2006
From: bill.washington at nec.com.au (Bill Washington)
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 13:56:43 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Memory Sticks and WIN98SE
In-Reply-To: <20060919142758.2EF1637749@ns1.nec.com.au>
References: <20060919142758.2EF1637749@ns1.nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <4510BBFB.1060607@nec.com.au>

Gents,
    You can install an aftermarket USB card if your hardware does not 
have a physical USB port, and download a (USB) driver from your memory 
stick manufacturer for WIN98SE.
Done it, works fine.
Bill

>>
>>    
>>
>
>
>  
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject:
> Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
> From:
> "Ben P" <benof1987 at hotmail.com>
> Date:
> Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:10:51 +1000
> To:
> diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> To:
> diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
>
> well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP 
> results in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS 
> borders coming out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that 
> highlighting all of the 'picture' in microsoft word, converting it 
> into a monospace text (courier new), and changing the size to 8 point 
> (i think thats it anyway) results in an ASCII picture, with all 
> relevant data in the appropriate columns. However taking a shot of 
> anything with real graphics (like the bar graph tuning screen on 
> haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same characters as 
> opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).
>
> Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal 
> screenshot (i believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator 
> in windows, rather than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This 
> really sucks because 98 can't use memory sticks, and the computer 
> hooked up to the dyno doesnt have a cd burner. So i have to put it on 
> floppy, which is a long forgotten (for good reason) art...
>
> however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than the 
> haltech program.
>
> Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file instead 
> of the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the relevant 
> data and put it into a word document for ease of viewing.
>
> Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to open 
> the datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come up with 
> something.
>
> any ideas/clues?
>
> thanks
> Ben
>
>
>lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>  
>


From benof1987 at hotmail.com  Wed Sep 20 02:30:43 2006
From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P)
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 17:30:43 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Memory Sticks and WIN98SE
In-Reply-To: <4510BBFB.1060607@nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <BAY106-F2864156333D38514FC196FA8230@phx.gbl>

well the computer already has a USB port, but windows wont recognise the usb 
disk as a drive. what can i do for that?

thanks
Ben


>From: Bill Washington <bill.washington at nec.com.au>
>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: [Diy_efi] Memory Sticks and WIN98SE
>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 13:56:43 +1000
>
>Gents,
>    You can install an aftermarket USB card if your hardware does not have 
>a physical USB port, and download a (USB) driver from your memory stick 
>manufacturer for WIN98SE.
>Done it, works fine.
>Bill
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Subject:
>>Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
>>From:
>>"Ben P" <benof1987 at hotmail.com>
>>Date:
>>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:10:51 +1000
>>To:
>>diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>
>>To:
>>diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>
>>
>>well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP results 
>>in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS borders coming 
>>out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that highlighting all of the 
>>'picture' in microsoft word, converting it into a monospace text (courier 
>>new), and changing the size to 8 point (i think thats it anyway) results 
>>in an ASCII picture, with all relevant data in the appropriate columns. 
>>However taking a shot of anything with real graphics (like the bar graph 
>>tuning screen on haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same 
>>characters as opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).
>>
>>Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal screenshot 
>>(i believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator in windows, 
>>rather than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This really sucks 
>>because 98 can't use memory sticks, and the computer hooked up to the dyno 
>>doesnt have a cd burner. So i have to put it on floppy, which is a long 
>>forgotten (for good reason) art...
>>
>>however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than the 
>>haltech program.
>>
>>Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file instead of 
>>the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the relevant data and 
>>put it into a word document for ease of viewing.
>>
>>Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to open the 
>>datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come up with 
>>something.
>>
>>any ideas/clues?
>>
>>thanks
>>Ben
>>
>>
>>lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>
>>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

_________________________________________________________________
Research and compare new cars side by side at carpoint.com.au 
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fsecure%2Dau%2Eimrworldwide%2Ecom%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Fa%2Fci%5F450304%2Fet%5F2%2Fcg%5F801459%2Fpi%5F1004813%2Fai%5F833884&_t=54321&_r=hotmail_endtext&_m=EXT



From niche at iinet.net.au  Wed Sep 20 02:52:31 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 15:52:31 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Memory Sticks and WIN98SE
In-Reply-To: <BAY106-F2864156333D38514FC196FA8230@phx.gbl>
References: <4510BBFB.1060607@nec.com.au>
	<BAY106-F2864156333D38514FC196FA8230@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060920155113.026f4eb0@iinet.net.au>>

At 03:30 PM 9/20/06, you wrote:
>well the computer already has a USB port, but windows wont recognise the usb disk as a drive. what can i do for that?

driver - hopefully the one that came with the usb disk, if not then
search for it on the net, should be one with it, often on a small cd

Do you have a digital camera with USB, that should also have a driver
disk for the usb so the files in the camera can be written as well as read...

rgds

mike





>thanks
>Ben
>
>
>>From: Bill Washington <bill.washington at nec.com.au>
>>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subject: [Diy_efi] Memory Sticks and WIN98SE
>>Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 13:56:43 +1000
>>
>>Gents,
>>   You can install an aftermarket USB card if your hardware does not have a physical USB port, and download a (USB) driver from your memory stick manufacturer for WIN98SE.
>>Done it, works fine.
>>Bill
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>Subject:
>>>Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
>>>From:
>>>"Ben P" <benof1987 at hotmail.com>
>>>Date:
>>>Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:10:51 +1000
>>>To:
>>>diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>>
>>>To:
>>>diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>>
>>>
>>>well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP results in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS borders coming out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that highlighting all of the 'picture' in microsoft word, converting it into a monospace text (courier new), and changing the size to 8 point (i think thats it anyway) results in an ASCII picture, with all relevant data in the appropriate columns. However taking a shot of anything with real graphics (like the bar graph tuning screen on haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same characters as opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).
>>>
>>>Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal screenshot (i believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator in windows, rather than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This really sucks because 98 can't use memory sticks, and the computer hooked up to the dyno doesnt have a cd burner. So i have to put it on floppy, which is a long forgotten (for good reason) art...
>>>
>>>however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than the haltech program.
>>>
>>>Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file instead of the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the relevant data and put it into a word document for ease of viewing.
>>>
>>>Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to open the datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come up with something.
>>>
>>>any ideas/clues?
>>>
>>>thanks
>>>Ben
>>>
>>>
>>>lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Research and compare new cars side by side at carpoint.com.au http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fsecure%2Dau%2Eimrworldwide%2Ecom%2Fcgi%2Dbin%2Fa%2Fci%5F450304%2Fet%5F2%2Fcg%5F801459%2Fpi%5F1004813%2Fai%5F833884&_t=54321&_r=hotmail_endtext&_m=EXT
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



Regards from


Mike
Perth, Western Australia
VK/VL Commodore Fuse Rail panel that wont warp, twist or melt, guaranteed  !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From davida1 at hiwaay.net  Wed Sep 20 05:45:55 2006
From: davida1 at hiwaay.net (David Allen)
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 05:45:55 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Memory Sticks and WIN98SE
References: <20060919142758.2EF1637749@ns1.nec.com.au>
	<4510BBFB.1060607@nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <028f01c6dca2$0fdfdda0$994da6a6@yancey.com>

  If the card is a "generic USB mass-storage device" there are free universal Win98SE drivers out there.  They allow it to recognize any storage device that XP will recognize.
  E-mail me off-list and I can send you the install file.
David

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Washington" <bill.washington at nec.com.au>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 10:56 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Memory Sticks and WIN98SE


> Gents,
>    You can install an aftermarket USB card if your hardware does not 
> have a physical USB port, and download a (USB) driver from your memory 
> stick manufacturer for WIN98SE.
> Done it, works fine.
> Bill
> 
>>>
>>>    
>>>
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Subject:
>> Re: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
>> From:
>> "Ben P" <benof1987 at hotmail.com>
>> Date:
>> Tue, 19 Sep 2006 23:10:51 +1000
>> To:
>> diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>
>> To:
>> diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>
>>
>> well taking a screenshot of the data logging process in windows XP 
>> results in all of the data coming out in words (with the simple DOS 
>> borders coming out like ASCII art). I have since discovered that 
>> highlighting all of the 'picture' in microsoft word, converting it 
>> into a monospace text (courier new), and changing the size to 8 point 
>> (i think thats it anyway) results in an ASCII picture, with all 
>> relevant data in the appropriate columns. However taking a shot of 
>> anything with real graphics (like the bar graph tuning screen on 
>> haltech units) results in meaningless mumbo jumbo (same characters as 
>> opening the datalog files in text, maybe a link here?).
>>
>> Taking a screenshot in Windows 98 however results in a normal 
>> screenshot (i believe this is because windows XP runs a dos emulator 
>> in windows, rather than a visual version of dos, as 98 does). This 
>> really sucks because 98 can't use memory sticks, and the computer 
>> hooked up to the dyno doesnt have a cd burner. So i have to put it on 
>> floppy, which is a long forgotten (for good reason) art...
>>
>> however I still can't get the data to view in anything other than the 
>> haltech program.
>>
>> Is it possible to tell a dos program to 'print' to a .txt file instead 
>> of the actual printer? as this would allow me to select the relevant 
>> data and put it into a word document for ease of viewing.
>>
>> Tomorow I will have a shot at hotwiring DOS on the 98 machine to open 
>> the datalog file in its own text viewer, maybe that will come up with 
>> something.
>>
>> any ideas/clues?
>>
>> thanks
>> Ben
>>
>>
>>lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>  
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>


From support at cad500parts.com  Wed Sep 20 14:33:31 2006
From: support at cad500parts.com (Cad Company Support)
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 13:33:31 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] Haltech Data Logging
Message-ID: <004501c6dceb$aed35ab0$0600a8c0@CC2>

The generic drivers at download.com, etc seem to work on mine. PNY didn't
offer win98 drivers anymore last time I looked (the day MS said no more
support, many companies yanked the driver downloads). The ones I downloaded
previously caused ugly conflicts, but the generic ones are smaller, lighter,
and seem to work. Note that on some 98 machines (probably certain add in USB
boards as well as non-SE versions) you will have to have the drive plugged
in when you boot, as 95 and pre-SE 98 are not fully hot swap compatible,
along with some cheaper/ older add in cards.

2 other thoughts:
Install something like cutePDF. On an XP machine, you select it as the
default printer, and select the settings to save the file without prompt,
and it will intercept print output from DOS and give you a PDF file that
looks exactly like the printed page does (usually). Some DOS programs
require more fiddling with settings than others, but basically, you are
printing to a graphical image file in PDF format. 

Contact HALTEC and find out what their DB format is (chances are it is
something standard, as writing proprietary DB code is expensive, and in this
case would be of no advantage). Actually, chances are good that the XP
version of Excel can figure it out and import it automatically.
Unfortunately, that feature is usually only installed if you do the custom
installation, dig through levels of menus, and check the check box during
the installation. There are freeware programs that are even more versatile
and output comma delimited files from almost any DB format you input. Point
being, I got the impression you wanted to do more than have a digital copy
of the printout - graphics files, screen output files, or electronic copies
of the printout are not analyzable data, where a file you can open in Excel
can be sorted and analyzed. 

Chris





From support at cad500parts.com  Wed Sep 20 15:21:13 2006
From: support at cad500parts.com (Cad Company Support)
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 14:21:13 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Mopar tuning
Message-ID: <004601c6dcf2$5807f270$0600a8c0@CC2>

BMW TPS units are not adjustable, either, but when necessary, I drove the
brass bushing out of the hole, and used washers behind the screw heads, to
allow adjustment. If more adjustment is necessary, I suppose you could
probably drill the holes bigger or slot them like a GM using a Dremel. Just
be careful not to over tighten, as there is nothing left to prevent you from
crushing the plastic sensor housing. Of course, on BMWs, like GMs, there is
a shoulder that centers the sensor around the shaft in the middle of the
sensor. I don't know if Mopar sensors have anything besides the bolts to
center them, and if it isn't centered properly, it could potentially cause
binding, resulting in sensor failure or maybe even a stuck throttle. 

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
Behalf Of Clair Davis
Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 7:48 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?

The main issues I had (and which may not apply to your project) were the
following:

IAC wiring - had to sort out hi/lo coils and the Mopar wiring diagrams
don't list them that way.  +/- for each coil is easy enough, but I
rolled the dice on which was hi/lo.  Shouldn't be an issue, but it's a
matter of swapping 4 wires around to fix it if I need to.  This ASSumes
a stepper motor IAC, not the Ford-type thing.  Since you're talking
Jeep, which was and still sort of continues to be its own thing,
ANYTHING could have been used.  Lots of AMC heritage clinging to that
division, and all the EFI control units for the trucks were developed by
the AMC/Jeep engineers.  Vastly different architecture than the pass car
controllers.

TPS function & wiring - My original GM TPS wouldn't bolt up to the
aftermarket Mopar throttle body (go fig), and the TPS I needed was
"handed" opposite from the OEM Magnum TPS.  That is, the throttle shaft
twisted CW rather than CCW, for example.  Found an earlier pre-Magnum TBI
TPS that
did the job, and even shared the GM connector.  Had to swap a couple
wires, though, and many of the Mopar TPS's aren't adjustable.  I'm
thinking the Mopar PCM reads the initial resistance and sets that as the
baseline.  I hope that's not a problem with my 7730.

MAP wiring - just a matter of making sure the wires in the connector are
correct for the sensor, and that the plug fits.  Another non-problem.

Clair






From bill.washington at nec.com.au  Wed Sep 20 18:44:49 2006
From: bill.washington at nec.com.au (Bill Washington)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 09:44:49 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] WIN 98 USB
In-Reply-To: <20060920105106.9793D3B6A6@ns2.nec.com.au>
References: <20060920105106.9793D3B6A6@ns2.nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <4511D271.7060803@nec.com.au>

Ben,
    Then all you have to do is download the WIN98 USB driver from your 
USB manufacturer's website and install it - they should also have a text 
file giving installation instructions.
However that USB driver will probably only work with the one 
manufacturer's device - if you use various USB devices you will probably 
need to install separate drivers for each one.
I am not aware of a generic USB driver for WIN 98.

Regards
Bill

>>
>>  
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject:
> RE: [Diy_efi] Memory Sticks and WIN98SE
> From:
> "Ben P" <benof1987 at hotmail.com>
> Date:
> Wed, 20 Sep 2006 17:30:43 +1000
> To:
> diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
> To:
> diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>
>
> well the computer already has a USB port, but windows wont recognise 
> the usb disk as a drive. what can i do for that?
>
> thanks
> Ben
>
>
>nfo/diy_efi
>  
>


From geoff_h at smartchat.net.au  Wed Sep 20 20:03:45 2006
From: geoff_h at smartchat.net.au (Geoff Harrison)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 11:03:45 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] WIN 98 USB
References: <20060920105106.9793D3B6A6@ns2.nec.com.au>
	<4511D271.7060803@nec.com.au>
Message-ID: <003b01c6dd19$ca7935e0$6500a8c0@fred>

Ben,

Check in device manager to ensure the USB port driver is 
installed
correctly.

Viewing in connection mode, you should see the drive hanging off
the usb port. If not the port is faulty.

If it shows up as an unknown device, you need the driver for the
thumbdrive from the manufacture.

The driver for the usb ports is on the 98SE CD for intel 
chipsets.
VIA, SIS etc will need the driver on the mainboard driver disk.

I have found it helps to dissable power management on the older
ports.

BTW, usb ports on 1999 manufactured boards are flakey.

HTH

Geoff. 


From yakir.green at intel.com  Thu Sep 21 02:22:40 2006
From: yakir.green at intel.com (Green, Yakir)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:22:40 +0300
Subject: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??
Message-ID: <875C321F70C64D43957EE7FB4C73CB8301AB7B08@hasmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com>

I was refering to this:
http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/PC_EFI/

10x


Yakir
-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]
On Behalf Of Andy
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 12:13 AM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??

what pc project ?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Green, Yakir" <yakir.green at intel.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 2:00 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??


Where can I fing info about the PC project??

 

Does anyone have the files?

 

Yakir Green

 

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi


From niche at iinet.net.au  Thu Sep 21 02:37:20 2006
From: niche at iinet.net.au (Mike)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 15:37:20 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??
In-Reply-To: <875C321F70C64D43957EE7FB4C73CB8301AB7B08@hasmsx413.ger.cor
	p.intel.com>
References: <875C321F70C64D43957EE7FB4C73CB8301AB7B08@hasmsx413.ger.corp.intel.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.0.20060921153658.0270a1d0@iinet.net.au>>

The timer bas link is not found, this one works
http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/PC_EFI/timer4.bas

rgds

mike

At 03:22 PM 9/21/06, you wrote:
>I was refering to this:
>http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/PC_EFI/
>
>10x
>
>
>Yakir
>-----Original Message-----
>From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]
>On Behalf Of Andy
>Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 12:13 AM
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??
>
>what pc project ?
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Green, Yakir" <yakir.green at intel.com>
>To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>Sent: Sunday, September 17, 2006 2:00 PM
>Subject: [Diy_efi] Where can I fing info about the PC project??
>
>
>Where can I fing info about the PC project??
>
> 
>
>Does anyone have the files?
>
> 
>
>Yakir Green
>
> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



Regards from


Mike
Perth, Western Australia
VK/VL Commodore Fuse Rail panel that wont warp, twist or melt, guaranteed  !
Twin tyres for most sedans, trikes and motorcycle sidecars
http://niche.iinet.net.au


From steve at donegan.org  Thu Sep 21 12:38:38 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:38:38 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] GM MAF Interceptor Project
Message-ID: <1158860318.10708.8.camel@perky.donegan.org>

The circuit board I designed checks out so far - you can see it at:
https://www.microvore.com/interceptor.jpg

The software right now just supports applying a % bias to the MAF input
and then sends the modified frequency to the stock ECM. In short this is
like the mixture adjustment screw on carb's - you can apply a lean/rich
setting. The board will shortly accept a wideband O2 sensor input so you
can spoof that to the ECM and do goal seeking - ie I want a 15.7:1
(lean) air fuel ratio or a 13.7:1 (rich) - seek for max HP or max
mileage as desired.

I'm applying this to a 1998 LS1 Z28 Camaro - but the MAF I/O will work
for any current GM MAF. Ford MAF's can be handled by one of the 5
available A/D channels on the board but there is no D/A output at
present.
-- 
"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
criminals."-- John Tandervold



From aolause at online.no  Thu Sep 21 14:28:38 2006
From: aolause at online.no (Arvid Olausen)
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 21:28:38 +0200
Subject: [Diy_efi] ECU 1227137
Message-ID: <005f01c6ddb4$243ee030$5854fea9@barton2600>

Any one know were to find fuel and ignition maps in this ecu? 

It is a 1986 Astro 4,3l..

aolause at online.no

From b.shaw at comcast.net  Fri Sep 22 10:37:37 2006
From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill Shaw)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 11:37:37 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] 749 twiki
Message-ID: <45140341.8020206@comcast.net>

I've updated the '749 twiki to add a link to Ludis's schematics and a 
bit more info about driver configurations.

http://www.diy-efi.org/twiki/bin/view.pl/Gmecm/1227749

I had an inquiry this morning that caused me to put this together, and 
it's so easy to add to the tiwki I put it there also.  Thanks again Steve!

Best,

Bill


From daweil at yahoo.com  Fri Sep 22 16:01:26 2006
From: daweil at yahoo.com (David Long)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:01:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Misfire
Message-ID: <20060922210126.56253.qmail@web55006.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

Hi,
   
  New to the list...
   
  I have an Haltech E11v2 working with my VG30DETT on 5bar map sensor. Everything was fine until recently it developped strange problem. It's been frustrating trying to find it. I hope someone can give me some pointers.
   
  When the car is idling, the TPS can not be opened over 40%. And if I open the throttle slowly, the engine will go up to about 5500-6000rpm. In both cases, from that point the AFR will shoot up to more than 20:1. And the motor oil has the gas smell. It is almost like the spark was blowing out during those two conditions.
   
  I first thought it's the TPS. I replace it with 2 used ones, no help and TPS calbration seems to be fine. I cleaned the CAS, TPS and temp sensor connectors, the fuel pressure is good, the ignition coils are good and fire good sparks when I cranked the car, the intake and exhaust system have no clogs, the rpm signal is good when the problem occurs. When I remove the CAS and rotate the CAS shaft manually, the injectors click and the spark plugs fire. I also check there is no leaks from the injectors.
   
  It's driving me nuts. What else could it be? Thanks in advance!

 		
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1?/min.

From tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net  Fri Sep 22 16:43:26 2006
From: tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net (Mike Yates)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:43:26 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Misfire
In-Reply-To: <20060922210126.56253.qmail@web55006.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
References: <20060922210126.56253.qmail@web55006.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <t6m8h29fmi1ikeaqsqeq7gd4iu1njti0ik@4ax.com>

what is the gap on the plugs and what boost are you running?

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:01:26 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:

>Hi,
>   
>  New to the list...
>   
>  I have an Haltech E11v2 working with my VG30DETT on 5bar map sensor. Everything was fine until recently it developped strange problem. It's been frustrating trying to find it. I hope someone can give me some pointers.
>   
>  When the car is idling, the TPS can not be opened over 40%. And if I open the throttle slowly, the engine will go up to about 5500-6000rpm. In both cases, from that point the AFR will shoot up to more than 20:1. And the motor oil has the gas smell. It is almost like the spark was blowing out during those two conditions.
>   
>  I first thought it's the TPS. I replace it with 2 used ones, no help and TPS calbration seems to be fine. I cleaned the CAS, TPS and temp sensor connectors, the fuel pressure is good, the ignition coils are good and fire good sparks when I cranked the car, the intake and exhaust system have no clogs, the rpm signal is good when the problem occurs. When I remove the CAS and rotate the CAS shaft manually, the injectors click and the spark plugs fire. I also check there is no leaks from the injectors.
>   
>  It's driving me nuts. What else could it be? Thanks in advance!
>
> 		
>---------------------------------
>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1?/min.
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net  Fri Sep 22 17:04:36 2006
From: tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net (Mike Yates)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:04:36 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Misfire
In-Reply-To: <t6m8h29fmi1ikeaqsqeq7gd4iu1njti0ik@4ax.com>
References: <20060922210126.56253.qmail@web55006.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
	<t6m8h29fmi1ikeaqsqeq7gd4iu1njti0ik@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <9cm8h2havhbtp24acbs9pltlmahs6c7pdk@4ax.com>

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:43:26 -0700, you wrote:

>what is the gap on the plugs and what boost are you running? also have you checked leak down to figure out if you have a blow-by problem? this may cause fouling.

Mike
>
>On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:01:26 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>>   
>>  New to the list...
>>   
>>  I have an Haltech E11v2 working with my VG30DETT on 5bar map sensor. Everything was fine until recently it developped strange problem. It's been frustrating trying to find it. I hope someone can give me some pointers.
>>   
>>  When the car is idling, the TPS can not be opened over 40%. And if I open the throttle slowly, the engine will go up to about 5500-6000rpm. In both cases, from that point the AFR will shoot up to more than 20:1. And the motor oil has the gas smell. It is almost like the spark was blowing out during those two conditions.
>>   
>>  I first thought it's the TPS. I replace it with 2 used ones, no help and TPS calbration seems to be fine. I cleaned the CAS, TPS and temp sensor connectors, the fuel pressure is good, the ignition coils are good and fire good sparks when I cranked the car, the intake and exhaust system have no clogs, the rpm signal is good when the problem occurs. When I remove the CAS and rotate the CAS shaft manually, the injectors click and the spark plugs fire. I also check there is no leaks from the injectors.
>>   
>>  It's driving me nuts. What else could it be? Thanks in advance!
>>
>> 		
>>---------------------------------
>>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1?/min.
>>_______________________________________________
>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From llemoine at gmail.com  Sat Sep 23 08:34:03 2006
From: llemoine at gmail.com (Lee M. Lemoine)
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 09:34:03 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Misfire
In-Reply-To: <9cm8h2havhbtp24acbs9pltlmahs6c7pdk@4ax.com>
References: <20060922210126.56253.qmail@web55006.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
	<t6m8h29fmi1ikeaqsqeq7gd4iu1njti0ik@4ax.com>
	<9cm8h2havhbtp24acbs9pltlmahs6c7pdk@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <bedc2dea0609230634o318aa5bh7222afac98fb6864@mail.gmail.com>

Another thought would be something in the throttle pump menu going awry, or
something with cold start enrichment or idle control speed (if your using
IAC) i had funky things happen with both of mine...  I ended up enabling the
zero throttle map and unplugging the IAC servo til i could figure out what
was going on -- car ran so good like that i never bothered fixing it...

My logic is that if its revving way up like that it's got to have some sort
of logic mismatch for the amount of air thats coming in, and also has to be
trying to compensate for the idle because it gradually comes back down...
You re-calibrated the haltech for the new MAP sensor right?  i know mine
only takes a 3 bar but its an older unit...

As far as the oil having a gas smell, those ECM's can usually do either a
'fuel cut' or 'spark cut' for 'RPM MANAGEMENT' ...  if it over-revs it'll
cut either the spark or the fuel -- most turbo cars its safer to cut the
spark and go rich than have it cut your spark at higher boost and melt a
hole in your piston -- sounds as if you should take a look for that and flop
it.  Either way, it's revving way up and it sounds like its trying to limit
the RPM travel --  again, if you've got IAC just use your zero throttle map
and disable the IAC totally (unplug the servo) and disable in the haltech.
that'll use whatever your current throttle plate offset is (if you have to
move the set pin be sure to re-calibrate your TPS).

Which brings me up on that one.  Check your TPS by watching the engine data
screen with the haltech software 'online' but without the engine running.
gradually run the throttle up and down and see if it's a nice smooth
movement.  If it's not, sounds like your accellerator pumps (throttle pump)
settings are off..

Let me know how you make out...




On 9/22/06, Mike Yates <tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:43:26 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >what is the gap on the plugs and what boost are you running? also have
> you checked leak down to figure out if you have a blow-by problem? this may
> cause fouling.
>
> Mike
> >
> >On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:01:26 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>  New to the list...
> >>
> >>  I have an Haltech E11v2 working with my VG30DETT on 5bar map sensor.
> Everything was fine until recently it developped strange problem. It's been
> frustrating trying to find it. I hope someone can give me some pointers.
> >>
> >>  When the car is idling, the TPS can not be opened over 40%. And if I
> open the throttle slowly, the engine will go up to about 5500-6000rpm. In
> both cases, from that point the AFR will shoot up to more than 20:1. And the
> motor oil has the gas smell. It is almost like the spark was blowing out
> during those two conditions.
> >>
> >>  I first thought it's the TPS. I replace it with 2 used ones, no help
> and TPS calbration seems to be fine. I cleaned the CAS, TPS and temp sensor
> connectors, the fuel pressure is good, the ignition coils are good and fire
> good sparks when I cranked the car, the intake and exhaust system have no
> clogs, the rpm signal is good when the problem occurs. When I remove the CAS
> and rotate the CAS shaft manually, the injectors click and the spark plugs
> fire. I also check there is no leaks from the injectors.
> >>
> >>  It's driving me nuts. What else could it be? Thanks in advance!
> >>
> >>
> >>---------------------------------
> >>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great
> rates starting at 1?/min.
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Diy_efi mailing list
> >>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Diy_efi mailing list
> >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Sincerely,
Lee M. Lemoine
KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)


From daweil at yahoo.com  Sat Sep 23 19:25:53 2006
From: daweil at yahoo.com (David Long)
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 17:25:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Re: Diy_efi Digest, Vol 19, Issue 28
Message-ID: <20060924002553.62122.qmail@web55001.mail.re4.yahoo.com>

Hi,
   
  Thanks for the reply. My plugs are gapped to 0.035. I tried a different gaps. No change.
   
  Normally I ran 14-15psi of boost. But this happens when the car is at idle.
   
  I didn't recalibrate the map sensor. Everything was working fine when this happened. So it sounds more like a sensor problem.
   
  The motor was newly built. I do have some blow-by. I had to reroute the PCV to solve smoking problem. When I pulled the heads recently, I found out 2 of the 6 cylinders were bored out too large. The pistons were moving side to side. The machine shop screwed up. The compression still looks good. But I have to get a leak down test.
   
  My rev limit is disabled. I do use a idle valve. It's working fine. I can try to disable and adjust the throttle stop and see if it makes a difference.
   
  The TPS works fine. I tried the open it slowly. The throttle % goes up smoothly when gas pedal is pressed down slowly. Does it this mean the TPS is good? 
   
  

diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org wrote:
  Send Diy_efi mailing list submissions to
diy_efi at diy-efi.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
diy_efi-request at diy-efi.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
diy_efi-owner at diy-efi.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Diy_efi digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. Misfire (David Long)
2. Re: Misfire (Mike Yates)
3. Re: Misfire (Mike Yates)
4. Re: Misfire (Lee M. Lemoine)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:01:26 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Long 
Subject: [Diy_efi] Misfire
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Message-ID: <20060922210126.56253.qmail at web55006.mail.re4.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

Hi,

New to the list...

I have an Haltech E11v2 working with my VG30DETT on 5bar map sensor. Everything was fine until recently it developped strange problem. It's been frustrating trying to find it. I hope someone can give me some pointers.

When the car is idling, the TPS can not be opened over 40%. And if I open the throttle slowly, the engine will go up to about 5500-6000rpm. In both cases, from that point the AFR will shoot up to more than 20:1. And the motor oil has the gas smell. It is almost like the spark was blowing out during those two conditions.

I first thought it's the TPS. I replace it with 2 used ones, no help and TPS calbration seems to be fine. I cleaned the CAS, TPS and temp sensor connectors, the fuel pressure is good, the ignition coils are good and fire good sparks when I cranked the car, the intake and exhaust system have no clogs, the rpm signal is good when the problem occurs. When I remove the CAS and rotate the CAS shaft manually, the injectors click and the spark plugs fire. I also check there is no leaks from the injectors.

It's driving me nuts. What else could it be? Thanks in advance!


---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min.

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:43:26 -0700
From: Mike Yates 
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Misfire
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

what is the gap on the plugs and what boost are you running?

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:01:26 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:

>Hi,
> 
> New to the list...
> 
> I have an Haltech E11v2 working with my VG30DETT on 5bar map sensor. Everything was fine until recently it developped strange problem. It's been frustrating trying to find it. I hope someone can give me some pointers.
> 
> When the car is idling, the TPS can not be opened over 40%. And if I open the throttle slowly, the engine will go up to about 5500-6000rpm. In both cases, from that point the AFR will shoot up to more than 20:1. And the motor oil has the gas smell. It is almost like the spark was blowing out during those two conditions.
> 
> I first thought it's the TPS. I replace it with 2 used ones, no help and TPS calbration seems to be fine. I cleaned the CAS, TPS and temp sensor connectors, the fuel pressure is good, the ignition coils are good and fire good sparks when I cranked the car, the intake and exhaust system have no clogs, the rpm signal is good when the problem occurs. When I remove the CAS and rotate the CAS shaft manually, the injectors click and the spark plugs fire. I also check there is no leaks from the injectors.
> 
> It's driving me nuts. What else could it be? Thanks in advance!
>
> 
>---------------------------------
>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min.
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 15:04:36 -0700
From: Mike Yates 
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Misfire
To: tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net, diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Message-ID: <9cm8h2havhbtp24acbs9pltlmahs6c7pdk at 4ax.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:43:26 -0700, you wrote:

>what is the gap on the plugs and what boost are you running? also have you checked leak down to figure out if you have a blow-by problem? this may cause fouling.

Mike
>
>On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:01:26 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
>
>>Hi,
>> 
>> New to the list...
>> 
>> I have an Haltech E11v2 working with my VG30DETT on 5bar map sensor. Everything was fine until recently it developped strange problem. It's been frustrating trying to find it. I hope someone can give me some pointers.
>> 
>> When the car is idling, the TPS can not be opened over 40%. And if I open the throttle slowly, the engine will go up to about 5500-6000rpm. In both cases, from that point the AFR will shoot up to more than 20:1. And the motor oil has the gas smell. It is almost like the spark was blowing out during those two conditions.
>> 
>> I first thought it's the TPS. I replace it with 2 used ones, no help and TPS calbration seems to be fine. I cleaned the CAS, TPS and temp sensor connectors, the fuel pressure is good, the ignition coils are good and fire good sparks when I cranked the car, the intake and exhaust system have no clogs, the rpm signal is good when the problem occurs. When I remove the CAS and rotate the CAS shaft manually, the injectors click and the spark plugs fire. I also check there is no leaks from the injectors.
>> 
>> It's driving me nuts. What else could it be? Thanks in advance!
>>
>> 
>>---------------------------------
>>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1?/min.
>>_______________________________________________
>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 09:34:03 -0400
From: "Lee M. Lemoine" 
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Misfire
To: tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net, diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Another thought would be something in the throttle pump menu going awry, or
something with cold start enrichment or idle control speed (if your using
IAC) i had funky things happen with both of mine... I ended up enabling the
zero throttle map and unplugging the IAC servo til i could figure out what
was going on -- car ran so good like that i never bothered fixing it...

My logic is that if its revving way up like that it's got to have some sort
of logic mismatch for the amount of air thats coming in, and also has to be
trying to compensate for the idle because it gradually comes back down...
You re-calibrated the haltech for the new MAP sensor right? i know mine
only takes a 3 bar but its an older unit...

As far as the oil having a gas smell, those ECM's can usually do either a
'fuel cut' or 'spark cut' for 'RPM MANAGEMENT' ... if it over-revs it'll
cut either the spark or the fuel -- most turbo cars its safer to cut the
spark and go rich than have it cut your spark at higher boost and melt a
hole in your piston -- sounds as if you should take a look for that and flop
it. Either way, it's revving way up and it sounds like its trying to limit
the RPM travel -- again, if you've got IAC just use your zero throttle map
and disable the IAC totally (unplug the servo) and disable in the haltech.
that'll use whatever your current throttle plate offset is (if you have to
move the set pin be sure to re-calibrate your TPS).

Which brings me up on that one. Check your TPS by watching the engine data
screen with the haltech software 'online' but without the engine running.
gradually run the throttle up and down and see if it's a nice smooth
movement. If it's not, sounds like your accellerator pumps (throttle pump)
settings are off..

Let me know how you make out...




On 9/22/06, Mike Yates wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:43:26 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >what is the gap on the plugs and what boost are you running? also have
> you checked leak down to figure out if you have a blow-by problem? this may
> cause fouling.
>
> Mike
> >
> >On Fri, 22 Sep 2006 14:01:26 -0700 (PDT), you wrote:
> >
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >> New to the list...
> >>
> >> I have an Haltech E11v2 working with my VG30DETT on 5bar map sensor.
> Everything was fine until recently it developped strange problem. It's been
> frustrating trying to find it. I hope someone can give me some pointers.
> >>
> >> When the car is idling, the TPS can not be opened over 40%. And if I
> open the throttle slowly, the engine will go up to about 5500-6000rpm. In
> both cases, from that point the AFR will shoot up to more than 20:1. And the
> motor oil has the gas smell. It is almost like the spark was blowing out
> during those two conditions.
> >>
> >> I first thought it's the TPS. I replace it with 2 used ones, no help
> and TPS calbration seems to be fine. I cleaned the CAS, TPS and temp sensor
> connectors, the fuel pressure is good, the ignition coils are good and fire
> good sparks when I cranked the car, the intake and exhaust system have no
> clogs, the rpm signal is good when the problem occurs. When I remove the CAS
> and rotate the CAS shaft manually, the injectors click and the spark plugs
> fire. I also check there is no leaks from the injectors.
> >>
> >> It's driving me nuts. What else could it be? Thanks in advance!
> >>
> >>
> >>---------------------------------
> >>Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great
> rates starting at 1?/min.
> >>_______________________________________________
> >>Diy_efi mailing list
> >>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >>Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Diy_efi mailing list
> >Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> >Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> >Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Sincerely,
Lee M. Lemoine
KB1NQI - Amateur Radio
http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)


------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi


End of Diy_efi Digest, Vol 19, Issue 28
***************************************


 			
---------------------------------
Get your own web address for just $1.99/1st yr. We'll help. Yahoo! Small Business.

From sonoma at shaw.ca  Sun Sep 24 13:38:42 2006
From: sonoma at shaw.ca (Mike)
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:38:42 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Intake Manifold choices SBC carb to TBI conversion
Message-ID: <003f01c6e008$a9394220$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85>

Hi,

 

Well I finally decided the carb must go and be replaced. Time to convert my 350 chev from a 4bbl carb to TBI

 

I'm thinking of using a stock GM TBI intake 87-91 on my 83 Chev, I will have to modify the two bolt holes to make it fit, but it will have stock locations for coolant temp etc and hopefully it will be a neater looking installation.

 

My only concern is heat on the TBI intake which I believe is cast aluminum, this motor is in a motorhome it doesn't over heat but it still gets pretty hot climbing hills in a 10,500LB G series van chassis.

 

Anyone had any problems with alum intakes because of heat in there motorhomes or tow vehicles

 

I would like to use a stock TBI intake with or without spacer or an edelbrock TBI intake, instead of the cast iron QJet manifold with an adapter plate.

 

The vehicle isn't required to have emissions testing and didn't have an EGR valve from the factory.  I may run an EGR valve but haven't decided yet.

 

Any info or experiences would be appreciated.

 

Mike. 


From steve at donegan.org  Sun Sep 24 13:51:53 2006
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 11:51:53 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Intake Manifold choices SBC carb to TBI conversion
In-Reply-To: <003f01c6e008$a9394220$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85>
References: <003f01c6e008$a9394220$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85>
Message-ID: <1159123913.3000.3.camel@perky.donegan.org>

Well, you could use any 4BBL manifold you like and a Holley 4BBL
throttle body and plumb the intake ports for injectors. Given it's a
motorhome type application going for an RV style cam and an RV style low
profile manifold should keep things in the right zone for low RPM
torque. If you're not handy with tools doing this conversion will not be
easy.

On Sun, 2006-09-24 at 11:38 -0700, Mike wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>  
> 
> Well I finally decided the carb must go and be replaced. Time to convert my 350 chev from a 4bbl carb to TBI
> 
>  
> 
> I'm thinking of using a stock GM TBI intake 87-91 on my 83 Chev, I will have to modify the two bolt holes to make it fit, but it will have stock locations for coolant temp etc and hopefully it will be a neater looking installation.
> 
>  
> 
> My only concern is heat on the TBI intake which I believe is cast aluminum, this motor is in a motorhome it doesn't over heat but it still gets pretty hot climbing hills in a 10,500LB G series van chassis.
> 
>  
> 
> Anyone had any problems with alum intakes because of heat in there motorhomes or tow vehicles
> 
>  
> 
> I would like to use a stock TBI intake with or without spacer or an edelbrock TBI intake, instead of the cast iron QJet manifold with an adapter plate.
> 
>  
> 
> The vehicle isn't required to have emissions testing and didn't have an EGR valve from the factory.  I may run an EGR valve but haven't decided yet.
> 
>  
> 
> Any info or experiences would be appreciated.
> 
>  
> 
> Mike. 
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
-- 
"Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
criminals."-- John Tandervold



From sonoma at shaw.ca  Sun Sep 24 14:24:02 2006
From: sonoma at shaw.ca (Mike)
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 12:24:02 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Intake Manifold choices SBC carb to TBI conversion
References: <003f01c6e008$a9394220$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85>
	<1159123913.3000.3.camel@perky.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <010b01c6e00e$fe957710$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85>

Hi Steven,
I'm going with TBI to keep costs down and so I can use mostly stock parts, 
I plan to install an RV cam at some point in time
Thanks for the reply    Mike...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven P. Donegan" <steve at donegan.org>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 11:51 AM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Intake Manifold choices SBC carb to TBI conversion


> Well, you could use any 4BBL manifold you like and a Holley 4BBL
> throttle body and plumb the intake ports for injectors. Given it's a
> motorhome type application going for an RV style cam and an RV style low
> profile manifold should keep things in the right zone for low RPM
> torque. If you're not handy with tools doing this conversion will not be
> easy.
>
> On Sun, 2006-09-24 at 11:38 -0700, Mike wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>>
>> Well I finally decided the carb must go and be replaced. Time to convert 
>> my 350 chev from a 4bbl carb to TBI
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm thinking of using a stock GM TBI intake 87-91 on my 83 Chev, I will 
>> have to modify the two bolt holes to make it fit, but it will have stock 
>> locations for coolant temp etc and hopefully it will be a neater looking 
>> installation.
>>
>>
>>
>> My only concern is heat on the TBI intake which I believe is cast 
>> aluminum, this motor is in a motorhome it doesn't over heat but it still 
>> gets pretty hot climbing hills in a 10,500LB G series van chassis.
>>
>>
>>
>> Anyone had any problems with alum intakes because of heat in there 
>> motorhomes or tow vehicles
>>
>>
>>
>> I would like to use a stock TBI intake with or without spacer or an 
>> edelbrock TBI intake, instead of the cast iron QJet manifold with an 
>> adapter plate.
>>
>>
>>
>> The vehicle isn't required to have emissions testing and didn't have an 
>> EGR valve from the factory.  I may run an EGR valve but haven't decided 
>> yet.
>>
>>
>>
>> Any info or experiences would be appreciated.
>>
>>
>>
>> Mike.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Diy_efi mailing list
>> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> -- 
> "Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
> criminals."-- John Tandervold
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 




From atomic at extendwireless.net  Sun Sep 24 23:21:46 2006
From: atomic at extendwireless.net (Charles Woock)
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 23:21:46 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Intake Manifold choices SBC carb to TBI conversion
References: <003f01c6e008$a9394220$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85><1159123913.3000.3.camel@perky.donegan.org>
	<010b01c6e00e$fe957710$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85>
Message-ID: <001501c6e05a$1dc6bcc0$02dea8c0@AIRBRIDGE>

It is not a hard project but it will be time consuming.  And, I'm not sure 
it will be any cheaper than buying a new carb.  By the time you get all the 
engine parts, ecm, sensors, wiring harness, relays and all the misc. 
stuff... it will add up, unless you already have a donor vehicle that you 
are going to strip.  You'll also need to find a place to mount the O2 
sensor...

I'm doing a conversion now and it seems like it is taking forever.

Good luck.  Charles



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mike" <sonoma at shaw.ca>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:24 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Intake Manifold choices SBC carb to TBI conversion


> Hi Steven,
> I'm going with TBI to keep costs down and so I can use mostly stock parts, 
> I plan to install an RV cam at some point in time
> Thanks for the reply    Mike...
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Steven P. Donegan" <steve at donegan.org>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 11:51 AM
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Intake Manifold choices SBC carb to TBI conversion
>
>
>> Well, you could use any 4BBL manifold you like and a Holley 4BBL
>> throttle body and plumb the intake ports for injectors. Given it's a
>> motorhome type application going for an RV style cam and an RV style low
>> profile manifold should keep things in the right zone for low RPM
>> torque. If you're not handy with tools doing this conversion will not be
>> easy.
>>
>> On Sun, 2006-09-24 at 11:38 -0700, Mike wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well I finally decided the carb must go and be replaced. Time to convert 
>>> my 350 chev from a 4bbl carb to TBI
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm thinking of using a stock GM TBI intake 87-91 on my 83 Chev, I will 
>>> have to modify the two bolt holes to make it fit, but it will have stock 
>>> locations for coolant temp etc and hopefully it will be a neater looking 
>>> installation.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> My only concern is heat on the TBI intake which I believe is cast 
>>> aluminum, this motor is in a motorhome it doesn't over heat but it still 
>>> gets pretty hot climbing hills in a 10,500LB G series van chassis.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Anyone had any problems with alum intakes because of heat in there 
>>> motorhomes or tow vehicles
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I would like to use a stock TBI intake with or without spacer or an 
>>> edelbrock TBI intake, instead of the cast iron QJet manifold with an 
>>> adapter plate.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The vehicle isn't required to have emissions testing and didn't have an 
>>> EGR valve from the factory.  I may run an EGR valve but haven't decided 
>>> yet.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any info or experiences would be appreciated.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Diy_efi mailing list
>>> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>> -- 
>> "Each new law makes only a single guarantee. It will create new
>> criminals."-- John Tandervold
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Diy_efi mailing list
>> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 




From torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu  Mon Sep 25 11:17:48 2006
From: torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torbj=F6rn_Forsman?=)
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 18:17:48 +0200
Subject: [Diy_efi] Intake Manifold choices SBC carb to TBI conversion
In-Reply-To: <003f01c6e008$a9394220$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85>
References: <003f01c6e008$a9394220$6401a8c0@duron4569bdb85>
Message-ID: <4518012C.5080901@gengas.nu>

I don't think you will have any problems due to heat spreading to the 
intake manifold. The manifold's temperature will be determined by the 
cooling water, as it has water circulation for preheating. Also, the 
evaporation of the fuel helps cool down the manifold.

I recommend that you use EGR if the TBI calibration you decide to use 
originates from an engine with EGR. Some GM engines (at least the OHC 
4-cylinder engines found in european GM cars from mid- and late 80's) 
are known to run with so early ignition timing that they have a tendence 
to knock if the EGR is not working. In particular, this does matter if 
your TBI system does not have a knock sensor.

Best regards

Torbj?rn Forsman

Mike wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>  
> 
> Well I finally decided the carb must go and be replaced. Time to convert my 350 chev from a 4bbl carb to TBI
> 
>  
> 
> I'm thinking of using a stock GM TBI intake 87-91 on my 83 Chev, I will have to modify the two bolt holes to make it fit, but it will have stock locations for coolant temp etc and hopefully it will be a neater looking installation.
> 
>  
> 
> My only concern is heat on the TBI intake which I believe is cast aluminum, this motor is in a motorhome it doesn't over heat but it still gets pretty hot climbing hills in a 10,500LB G series van chassis.
> 
>  
> 
> Anyone had any problems with alum intakes because of heat in there motorhomes or tow vehicles
> 
>  
> 
> I would like to use a stock TBI intake with or without spacer or an edelbrock TBI intake, instead of the cast iron QJet manifold with an adapter plate.
> 
>  
> 
> The vehicle isn't required to have emissions testing and didn't have an EGR valve from the factory.  I may run an EGR valve but haven't decided yet.
> 
>  
> 
> Any info or experiences would be appreciated.
> 
>  
> 
> Mike. 
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> 



From PrecisionFuelInjection at msn.com  Mon Sep 25 12:39:19 2006
From: PrecisionFuelInjection at msn.com (dustin allmaras)
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 10:39:19 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Firing injectors
References: <BAY0-MC6-F12OS8vu6N00486742@bay0-mc6-f12.bay0.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <BAY123-DAV8A09C82D081C29BD76153DE240@phx.gbl>

My apologies for not following up all the great responses I received to my flowbench questions a month or so ago. I've been busy, Life happens. I think the most appealing solution for me was to use a 555 timer circuit with a pot to adjust the cycle time and some additional circuitry to make it work with both high and low impedance injectors. 

I have enough electronics knowledge to get me into trouble. I put a megasquirt together, that's about the limit of my abilities. Can anybody suggest a schematic for a 555 based circuit with all the goodies to fire both high and low impedence injectors? The circuit would have to be robust enough to fire 8 injectors simultaneously. Thanks again for all your thoughts.

Dustin 

From spyro at f2s.com  Mon Sep 25 14:44:04 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:44:04 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] WIN 98 USB
In-Reply-To: <003b01c6dd19$ca7935e0$6500a8c0@fred>
References: <20060920105106.9793D3B6A6@ns2.nec.com.au>	<4511D271.7060803@nec.com.au>
	<003b01c6dd19$ca7935e0$6500a8c0@fred>
Message-ID: <45183184.7020107@f2s.com>

Geoff Harrison wrote:

> BTW, usb ports on 1999 manufactured boards are flakey.

Thats something of a blanket statement... what basis do you have for 
such a wild claim ?


From geoff_h at smartchat.net.au  Mon Sep 25 17:24:45 2006
From: geoff_h at smartchat.net.au (Geoff Harrison)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 08:24:45 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] WIN 98 USB
References: <20060920105106.9793D3B6A6@ns2.nec.com.au><4511D271.7060803@nec.com.au>
	<003b01c6dd19$ca7935e0$6500a8c0@fred> <45183184.7020107@f2s.com>
Message-ID: <000901c6e0f1$68cbba80$6500a8c0@fred>

Good question Ian, I should have qualified my statement.
Having 10 years exp in the IT industry, including 5 years
with a large retailer supporting HP, IBM, Packard Bell / NEC
Acer, Compucon, as well as generic systems, dating back to
1988, (I learnt on 286s) I have seen many main boards.

Quite a number of SIS and VIA based mainboards manufactured
around 99 have had faulty USB ports, ranging from dead, 
intermittently
dead, and working on some devices but not others. Otherwise
the boards are fine.
Intel chipset boards don't appear to have the same issue.
IIRC, the problem was with USB ver1. USB ver1.1 was more
"univerversal"

Oh and my Toshiba Satellite 2100CDT (1999) has issues with
large data transfers via usb - ethernet. Web browsing is fine, 
but
fails to download a large file.
Geoff Harrison IT Services.
Port Macquarie  NSW.

Tel 02 6583 3736
Mob 0401 324 639

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ian Molton" <spyro at f2s.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 5:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] WIN 98 USB


> Geoff Harrison wrote:
>> BTW, usb ports on 1999 manufactured boards are flakey.
>
> Thats something of a blanket statement... what basis do you 
> have for such a wild claim ?
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi 


From clair.davis at charter.net  Mon Sep 25 22:27:17 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 22:27:17 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Mopar tuning
References: <004601c6dcf2$5807f270$0600a8c0@CC2>
Message-ID: <003e01c6e11b$abbe9b80$6501a8c0@davis>

The Mopar TPS units center the same way, IIRC, with the same type of
shoulder as the GM's, etc.  That's a good idea on pressing out the bushings,
I was dreading how long it would take to "waller out" the bushing with a
dremel.  Alternatively, you could press out the bushing and drill it
oversize, press back in to provide some adjustment, too.

Clair (still not quite ready to fire the old girl up...)
FTWTX

PS, I need to talk Cadillac with you some time...


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Cad Company Support" <support at cad500parts.com>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 3:21 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Mopar tuning


> BMW TPS units are not adjustable, either, but when necessary, I drove the
> brass bushing out of the hole, and used washers behind the screw heads, to
> allow adjustment. If more adjustment is necessary, I suppose you could
> probably drill the holes bigger or slot them like a GM using a Dremel.
Just
> be careful not to over tighten, as there is nothing left to prevent you
from
> crushing the plastic sensor housing. Of course, on BMWs, like GMs, there
is
> a shoulder that centers the sensor around the shaft in the middle of the
> sensor. I don't know if Mopar sensors have anything besides the bolts to
> center them, and if it isn't centered properly, it could potentially cause
> binding, resulting in sensor failure or maybe even a stuck throttle.
>
> Chris
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org] On
> Behalf Of Clair Davis
> Sent: Friday, September 15, 2006 7:48 PM
> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Mopar tuning?
>
> The main issues I had (and which may not apply to your project) were the
> following:
>
> IAC wiring - had to sort out hi/lo coils and the Mopar wiring diagrams
> don't list them that way.  +/- for each coil is easy enough, but I
> rolled the dice on which was hi/lo.  Shouldn't be an issue, but it's a
> matter of swapping 4 wires around to fix it if I need to.  This ASSumes
> a stepper motor IAC, not the Ford-type thing.  Since you're talking
> Jeep, which was and still sort of continues to be its own thing,
> ANYTHING could have been used.  Lots of AMC heritage clinging to that
> division, and all the EFI control units for the trucks were developed by
> the AMC/Jeep engineers.  Vastly different architecture than the pass car
> controllers.
>
> TPS function & wiring - My original GM TPS wouldn't bolt up to the
> aftermarket Mopar throttle body (go fig), and the TPS I needed was
> "handed" opposite from the OEM Magnum TPS.  That is, the throttle shaft
> twisted CW rather than CCW, for example.  Found an earlier pre-Magnum TBI
> TPS that
> did the job, and even shared the GM connector.  Had to swap a couple
> wires, though, and many of the Mopar TPS's aren't adjustable.  I'm
> thinking the Mopar PCM reads the initial resistance and sets that as the
> baseline.  I hope that's not a problem with my 7730.
>
> MAP wiring - just a matter of making sure the wires in the connector are
> correct for the sensor, and that the plug fits.  Another non-problem.
>
> Clair
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



From spyro at f2s.com  Tue Sep 26 08:43:11 2006
From: spyro at f2s.com (Ian Molton)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:43:11 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] WIN 98 USB
In-Reply-To: <000901c6e0f1$68cbba80$6500a8c0@fred>
References: <20060920105106.9793D3B6A6@ns2.nec.com.au><4511D271.7060803@nec.com.au>	<003b01c6dd19$ca7935e0$6500a8c0@fred>
	<45183184.7020107@f2s.com> <000901c6e0f1$68cbba80$6500a8c0@fred>
Message-ID: <45192E6F.9010408@f2s.com>

Geoff Harrison wrote:

> Intel chipset boards don't appear to have the same issue.
> IIRC, the problem was with USB ver1. USB ver1.1 was more
> "univerversal"

Ok thats more in line with what I found. Early SiS and VIA USB 1.0 gear 
was nasty stuff.

I've got a nasty right now with my via ME6000 board - the USB ports seem 
to have gone 'soft', delivering less than their rated 500mA which 
occasionally causes the DSP in my speedtouch USB to lock up. the device 
otherwise works, just cant sync the DSL line.

plugging in a powered hub helps immensely.


From support at cad500parts.com  Tue Sep 26 11:15:01 2006
From: support at cad500parts.com (Chris)
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 10:15:01 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE: Mopar tuning
In-Reply-To: <003e01c6e11b$abbe9b80$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <002401c6e187$10042720$0600a8c0@CC2>

That's useful info. I never really looked at the Dodge setup that close. The
BMW bushings only have a lip on one end, so they pressed out really easy
with the right size pin punch and some hand pressure. 
My EFI experience is mostly in an OEM repair environment, so I'm mostly
lurking here, but I'll throw an idea when I have one.

Using this address for the list was actually an oops on my part, but I'm
always willing to talk Cadillac. Unless it's EFI related, just e-mail me
direct so as not to spam the board :-)

Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: Clair Davis [mailto:clair.davis at charter.net] 
Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 9:27 PM
To: support at cad500parts.com; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] RE: Mopar tuning

The Mopar TPS units center the same way, IIRC, with the same type of
shoulder as the GM's, etc.  That's a good idea on pressing out the bushings,
I was dreading how long it would take to "waller out" the bushing with a
dremel.  Alternatively, you could press out the bushing and drill it
oversize, press back in to provide some adjustment, too.

Clair (still not quite ready to fire the old girl up...)
FTWTX

PS, I need to talk Cadillac with you some time...






From clair.davis at charter.net  Wed Sep 27 21:40:41 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2006 21:40:41 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
Message-ID: <001a01c6e2a7$7df8a1e0$6501a8c0@davis>

Background... I've got a 69 Plymouth Valiant I'm multipoint-injecting with a
7730 box.  I've got two wires left to run, and one of them is killin' me:
Key On Power.

On my old Plymouth, the ignition switch has 5 wires: BATT, START, ACC,
IGN-1, and IGN-2.  IGN-1 is the "run" power to the coil, dropped down with a
ballast resistor to keep the coil happy.  IGN-2 is 12V straight to the coil
for hotter sparks while cranking.

The IGN-1 circuit is DEFINITELY dead while cranking, and IGN-2 is ONLY hot
while cranking.  Once the engine fires, you let up on the key, the switch
rolls back to IGN-1 and you go on about your way.  Problem is, I can't tell
how long the dead skip is in the transition between the two circuits.

Is this a problem?  Seems like it might be, as the "key on" signal seems to
be the trigger for the whole start-up routine with the ECM.  Is a GM
ignition switch one where there is no break in the power from "run" to
"start" and back, or am I overthinking things?  Mopar guys that run MSD
ignitions splice IGN-1 and IGN-2 together for the MSD to work, but that's
hardly the same animal.

Thanks in advance!

Clair



From llemoine at gmail.com  Wed Sep 27 23:26:18 2006
From: llemoine at gmail.com (Lee M. Lemoine)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 00:26:18 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <001a01c6e2a7$7df8a1e0$6501a8c0@davis>
References: <001a01c6e2a7$7df8a1e0$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <bedc2dea0609272126k2fd0ac40tecf266b51f72da8f@mail.gmail.com>

I think i understand what your saying here, not being familiar with coils or
any of that sort of thing (Hey, i was born in '82 and fuel injection is
older than i am)...  That being said, i've never once tuned a carbeurator.

I believe your problem is that you don't have the correct setup on your
ignition.  You need a feed thats hot during cranking and in the 'on'
position.  I take it the ACC circuit shuts down while cranking also ?
(radio, wipers, etc)  That'd be my first guess.  If you can't get constant
power during cranking, a few things could be tried...

My thought on this instance, would be to utilizing a set of  zennier diodes
to power the ECM's "key on power leg"using the "IGN2" while cranking.
Simply using diodes, your essentially jumpering from the 'IGN2" position
back to your "IGN1" circuit, but preventing the IGN2 circuit from powering
anything up in the car other than the ECM.  I'd also toss in a large-ish
capacitor in line to 'fill in' that "gap" you speak of when the ignition
switch jumps the gaps as the key turns through different postiions.  This
way a new branch off of your IGN1 circuit is hot in both the start and run
positions.

If you need a schematic or further explanation, let me know i can draw out a
schematic.  It shouldn't cost too much as the ECM doesn't pull too much
current during cranking -- the diodes will be the largest cost, with the
capacitor being secondary.   It's a simple wiring job and can be done at any
convenient point in the wiring harness (so you don't have to picture taking
your column switch apart to accomplish this!)



On 9/27/06, Clair Davis <clair.davis at charter.net> wrote:
>
> Background... I've got a 69 Plymouth Valiant I'm multipoint-injecting with
> a
> 7730 box.  I've got two wires left to run, and one of them is killin' me:
> Key On Power.
>
> On my old Plymouth, the ignition switch has 5 wires: BATT, START, ACC,
> IGN-1, and IGN-2.  IGN-1 is the "run" power to the coil, dropped down with
> a
> ballast resistor to keep the coil happy.  IGN-2 is 12V straight to the
> coil
> for hotter sparks while cranking.
>
> The IGN-1 circuit is DEFINITELY dead while cranking, and IGN-2 is ONLY hot
> while cranking.  Once the engine fires, you let up on the key, the switch
> rolls back to IGN-1 and you go on about your way.  Problem is, I can't
> tell
> how long the dead skip is in the transition between the two circuits.
>
> Is this a problem?  Seems like it might be, as the "key on" signal seems
> to
> be the trigger for the whole start-up routine with the ECM.  Is a GM
> ignition switch one where there is no break in the power from "run" to
> "start" and back, or am I overthinking things?  Mopar guys that run MSD
> ignitions splice IGN-1 and IGN-2 together for the MSD to work, but that's
> hardly the same animal.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Clair
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Sincerely,
Lee M. Lemoine
KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)


From llemoine at gmail.com  Wed Sep 27 23:30:26 2006
From: llemoine at gmail.com (Lee M. Lemoine)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 00:30:26 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <bedc2dea0609272126k2fd0ac40tecf266b51f72da8f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <001a01c6e2a7$7df8a1e0$6501a8c0@davis>
	<bedc2dea0609272126k2fd0ac40tecf266b51f72da8f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bedc2dea0609272130j2109484dtaa146bbabd369178@mail.gmail.com>

Forgive me .  I meant rectifier diodes.

On 9/28/06, Lee M. Lemoine <llemoine at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think i understand what your saying here, not being familiar with coils
> or any of that sort of thing (Hey, i was born in '82 and fuel injection is
> older than i am)...  That being said, i've never once tuned a carbeurator.
>
> I believe your problem is that you don't have the correct setup on your
> ignition.  You need a feed thats hot during cranking and in the 'on'
> position.  I take it the ACC circuit shuts down while cranking also ?
> (radio, wipers, etc)  That'd be my first guess.  If you can't get constant
> power during cranking, a few things could be tried...
>
> My thought on this instance, would be to utilizing a set of  zennier
> diodes to power the ECM's "key on power leg"using the "IGN2" while
> cranking.  Simply using diodes, your essentially jumpering from the 'IGN2"
> position back to your "IGN1" circuit, but preventing the IGN2 circuit from
> powering anything up in the car other than the ECM.  I'd also toss in a
> large-ish capacitor in line to 'fill in' that "gap" you speak of when the
> ignition switch jumps the gaps as the key turns through different
> postiions.  This way a new branch off of your IGN1 circuit is hot in both
> the start and run positions.
>
> If you need a schematic or further explanation, let me know i can draw out
> a schematic.  It shouldn't cost too much as the ECM doesn't pull too much
> current during cranking -- the diodes will be the largest cost, with the
> capacitor being secondary.   It's a simple wiring job and can be done at any
> convenient point in the wiring harness (so you don't have to picture taking
> your column switch apart to accomplish this!)
>
>
>
> On 9/27/06, Clair Davis <clair.davis at charter.net> wrote:
> >
> > Background... I've got a 69 Plymouth Valiant I'm multipoint-injecting
> > with a
> > 7730 box.  I've got two wires left to run, and one of them is killin'
> > me:
> > Key On Power.
> >
> > On my old Plymouth, the ignition switch has 5 wires: BATT, START, ACC,
> > IGN-1, and IGN-2.  IGN-1 is the "run" power to the coil, dropped down
> > with a
> > ballast resistor to keep the coil happy.  IGN-2 is 12V straight to the
> > coil
> > for hotter sparks while cranking.
> >
> > The IGN-1 circuit is DEFINITELY dead while cranking, and IGN-2 is ONLY
> > hot
> > while cranking.  Once the engine fires, you let up on the key, the
> > switch
> > rolls back to IGN-1 and you go on about your way.  Problem is, I can't
> > tell
> > how long the dead skip is in the transition between the two circuits.
> >
> > Is this a problem?  Seems like it might be, as the "key on" signal seems
> > to
> > be the trigger for the whole start-up routine with the ECM.  Is a GM
> > ignition switch one where there is no break in the power from "run" to
> > "start" and back, or am I overthinking things?  Mopar guys that run MSD
> > ignitions splice IGN-1 and IGN-2 together for the MSD to work, but
> > that's
> > hardly the same animal.
> >
> > Thanks in advance!
> >
> > Clair
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Diy_efi mailing list
> > Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> > Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> > Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Sincerely,
> Lee M. Lemoine
> KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
> http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
> '06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
> '93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)




-- 
Sincerely,
Lee M. Lemoine
KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)


From WSCowell at aol.com  Thu Sep 28 00:04:35 2006
From: WSCowell at aol.com (WSCowell at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 01:04:35 EDT
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
Message-ID: <c73.1030b37.324cb1e3@aol.com>

>My thought on this instance, would be to utilizing a set of   zennier diodes
>to power the ECM's "key on power leg"using the "IGN2"  while cranking.
 
Zener diodes would not be a good idea.  A decent rectifier diode with  a high 
PIV and appropriate forward current rating would be correct.  You  could do 
damage with a Zener.  They are meant to conduct in "reverse  breakdown" mode.  
That's exactly what you don't want.
 
Will C



From llemoine at gmail.com  Thu Sep 28 06:22:40 2006
From: llemoine at gmail.com (Lee M. Lemoine)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 07:22:40 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <c73.1030b37.324cb1e3@aol.com>
References: <c73.1030b37.324cb1e3@aol.com>
Message-ID: <bedc2dea0609280422q2cddd628o1293a7ddf94e171f@mail.gmail.com>

Yeah, i realized that about 20 seconds after i sent it out, hence the
revision.   my original thoughts were with relays...



On 9/28/06, WSCowell at aol.com <WSCowell at aol.com> wrote:
>
> >My thought on this instance, would be to utilizing a set of   zennier
> diodes
> >to power the ECM's "key on power leg"using the "IGN2"  while cranking.
>
> Zener diodes would not be a good idea.  A decent rectifier diode with  a
> high
> PIV and appropriate forward current rating would be correct.  You  could
> do
> damage with a Zener.  They are meant to conduct in "reverse  breakdown"
> mode.
> That's exactly what you don't want.
>
> Will C
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Sincerely,
Lee M. Lemoine
KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)


From Tim.VanSetten at l-3com.com  Thu Sep 28 08:32:47 2006
From: Tim.VanSetten at l-3com.com (Van Setten, Tim @ ACSSD)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 06:32:47 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <bedc2dea0609280422q2cddd628o1293a7ddf94e171f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8846C6D2B241184780AAFD4C43D2B74B064EA3@LIBERTY.phx.acssd.l-3com.com>

Use the diodes on the control coil side of a relay.  This way, the
switched part of the relay is supplying 100% power from the battery to
the ECM (no voltage drops).  The mechanical delay of the relay should be
fine between the two sources on the control side.  One could always put
a cap on the control side of the relay to increase this "Hold"
time......Tim.


From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net  Thu Sep 28 08:39:52 2006
From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 06:39:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <001a01c6e2a7$7df8a1e0$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <20060928133952.93681.qmail@web80501.mail.yahoo.com>

Ign1 ------|>|------|
                         |-------------- to 'Key-On' circuits
Ign2 ------|>|------|

Use 5Amp 100PIV diodes for the above, it will privide +12V (sans .7V for forward diode, which is insignificant) to the circuits that require power when cranking and running. I've done this many times, KISS is your friend!

Hit your local RadioShack:
Hit your local RadioShack:
6A 50V Rectifier 4pack
276-1661 for $2.49 per package



----- Original Message ----
From: Clair Davis <clair.davis at charter.net>
To: diy_efi <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 9:40:41 PM
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730


Background... I've got a 69 Plymouth Valiant I'm multipoint-injecting with a
7730 box.  I've got two wires left to run, and one of them is killin' me:
Key On Power.

On my old Plymouth, the ignition switch has 5 wires: BATT, START, ACC,
IGN-1, and IGN-2.  IGN-1 is the "run" power to the coil, dropped down with a
ballast resistor to keep the coil happy.  IGN-2 is 12V straight to the coil
for hotter sparks while cranking.

The IGN-1 circuit is DEFINITELY dead while cranking, and IGN-2 is ONLY hot
while cranking.  Once the engine fires, you let up on the key, the switch
rolls back to IGN-1 and you go on about your way.  Problem is, I can't tell
how long the dead skip is in the transition between the two circuits.

Is this a problem?  Seems like it might be, as the "key on" signal seems to
be the trigger for the whole start-up routine with the ECM.  Is a GM
ignition switch one where there is no break in the power from "run" to
"start" and back, or am I overthinking things?  Mopar guys that run MSD
ignitions splice IGN-1 and IGN-2 together for the MSD to work, but that's
hardly the same animal.

Thanks in advance!

Clair

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

From five10man at commspeed.net  Thu Sep 28 10:50:54 2006
From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 08:50:54 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <20060928133952.93681.qmail@web80501.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20060928133952.93681.qmail@web80501.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <451BEF5E.6030707@commspeed.net>

Use a cap in parallel with the diodes if there's a dead spot between ign 
1 and ign 2.  Customer had a Jeep with a weird switch that dropped out 
just long enough to make everything hiccup, and the diodes / cap were 
the fix.  It may keep your power on a touch longer than the key is on, 
but it hasn't been a problem on this project at least.

Rick McLeod wrote:

>Ign1 ------|>|------|
>                         |-------------- to 'Key-On' circuits
>Ign2 ------|>|------|
>
>Use 5Amp 100PIV diodes for the above, it will privide +12V (sans .7V for forward diode, which is insignificant) to the circuits that require power when cranking and running. I've done this many times, KISS is your friend!
>
>Hit your local RadioShack:
>Hit your local RadioShack:
>6A 50V Rectifier 4pack
>276-1661 for $2.49 per package
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Clair Davis <clair.davis at charter.net>
>To: diy_efi <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 9:40:41 PM
>Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>
>
>Background... I've got a 69 Plymouth Valiant I'm multipoint-injecting with a
>7730 box.  I've got two wires left to run, and one of them is killin' me:
>Key On Power.
>
>On my old Plymouth, the ignition switch has 5 wires: BATT, START, ACC,
>IGN-1, and IGN-2.  IGN-1 is the "run" power to the coil, dropped down with a
>ballast resistor to keep the coil happy.  IGN-2 is 12V straight to the coil
>for hotter sparks while cranking.
>
>The IGN-1 circuit is DEFINITELY dead while cranking, and IGN-2 is ONLY hot
>while cranking.  Once the engine fires, you let up on the key, the switch
>rolls back to IGN-1 and you go on about your way.  Problem is, I can't tell
>how long the dead skip is in the transition between the two circuits.
>
>Is this a problem?  Seems like it might be, as the "key on" signal seems to
>be the trigger for the whole start-up routine with the ECM.  Is a GM
>ignition switch one where there is no break in the power from "run" to
>"start" and back, or am I overthinking things?  Mopar guys that run MSD
>ignitions splice IGN-1 and IGN-2 together for the MSD to work, but that's
>hardly the same animal.
>
>Thanks in advance!
>
>Clair
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>
>  
>


From dunvegan at sbcglobal.net  Thu Sep 28 12:39:44 2006
From: dunvegan at sbcglobal.net (Rick McLeod)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 10:39:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <451BEF5E.6030707@commspeed.net>
Message-ID: <20060928173944.42148.qmail@web80505.mail.yahoo.com>

Good advise, but every ignition I've ever seen though has been MBB, not BBM. (Make Before Break vs. Break Before Make)


----- Original Message ----
From: Tom Visel <five10man at commspeed.net>
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 10:50:54 AM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730


Use a cap in parallel with the diodes if there's a dead spot between ign 
1 and ign 2.  Customer had a Jeep with a weird switch that dropped out 
just long enough to make everything hiccup, and the diodes / cap were 
the fix.  It may keep your power on a touch longer than the key is on, 
but it hasn't been a problem on this project at least.

Rick McLeod wrote:

>Ign1 ------|>|------|
>                         |-------------- to 'Key-On' circuits
>Ign2 ------|>|------|
>
>Use 5Amp 100PIV diodes for the above, it will privide +12V (sans .7V for forward diode, which is insignificant) to the circuits that require power when cranking and running. I've done this many times, KISS is your friend!
>
>Hit your local RadioShack:
>Hit your local RadioShack:
>6A 50V Rectifier 4pack
>276-1661 for $2.49 per package
>
>
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Clair Davis <clair.davis at charter.net>
>To: diy_efi <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 9:40:41 PM
>Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>
>
>Background... I've got a 69 Plymouth Valiant I'm multipoint-injecting with a
>7730 box.  I've got two wires left to run, and one of them is killin' me:
>Key On Power.
>
>On my old Plymouth, the ignition switch has 5 wires: BATT, START, ACC,
>IGN-1, and IGN-2.  IGN-1 is the "run" power to the coil, dropped down with a
>ballast resistor to keep the coil happy.  IGN-2 is 12V straight to the coil
>for hotter sparks while cranking.
>
>The IGN-1 circuit is DEFINITELY dead while cranking, and IGN-2 is ONLY hot
>while cranking.  Once the engine fires, you let up on the key, the switch
>rolls back to IGN-1 and you go on about your way.  Problem is, I can't tell
>how long the dead skip is in the transition between the two circuits.
>
>Is this a problem?  Seems like it might be, as the "key on" signal seems to
>be the trigger for the whole start-up routine with the ECM.  Is a GM
>ignition switch one where there is no break in the power from "run" to
>"start" and back, or am I overthinking things?  Mopar guys that run MSD
>ignitions splice IGN-1 and IGN-2 together for the MSD to work, but that's
>hardly the same animal.
>
>Thanks in advance!
>
>Clair
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>
>  
>
_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

From five10man at commspeed.net  Thu Sep 28 14:10:12 2006
From: five10man at commspeed.net (Tom Visel)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 12:10:12 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <20060928173944.42148.qmail@web80505.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20060928173944.42148.qmail@web80505.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <451C1E14.9050207@commspeed.net>

Mebbe it was just a crappy old switch.  Something he was in love with 
and the parts stores couldn't match, in any case.  I had to keep it when 
I did the FI conversion, and ended up using a relay, diode, and cap to 
keep it powered up.  Lots of fun - odd fire V6, MSD crank trigger to run 
the FI, original-style distributor for spark.  TBI feeding an early GN 
carbed-turbo setup.  Customer with more money than sense decided this 
was the hot setup for his rock crawler CJ5.  I don't pick 'em, I just 
fix 'em.
TomV

Rick McLeod wrote:

>Good advise, but every ignition I've ever seen though has been MBB, not BBM. (Make Before Break vs. Break Before Make)
>
>
>----- Original Message ----
>From: Tom Visel <five10man at commspeed.net>
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 10:50:54 AM
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>
>
>Use a cap in parallel with the diodes if there's a dead spot between ign 
>1 and ign 2.  Customer had a Jeep with a weird switch that dropped out 
>just long enough to make everything hiccup, and the diodes / cap were 
>the fix.  It may keep your power on a touch longer than the key is on, 
>but it hasn't been a problem on this project at least.
>
>Rick McLeod wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Ign1 ------|>|------|
>>                        |-------------- to 'Key-On' circuits
>>Ign2 ------|>|------|
>>
>>Use 5Amp 100PIV diodes for the above, it will privide +12V (sans .7V for forward diode, which is insignificant) to the circuits that require power when cranking and running. I've done this many times, KISS is your friend!
>>
>>Hit your local RadioShack:
>>Hit your local RadioShack:
>>6A 50V Rectifier 4pack
>>276-1661 for $2.49 per package
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----
>>From: Clair Davis <clair.davis at charter.net>
>>To: diy_efi <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>>Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 9:40:41 PM
>>Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>>
>>
>>Background... I've got a 69 Plymouth Valiant I'm multipoint-injecting with a
>>7730 box.  I've got two wires left to run, and one of them is killin' me:
>>Key On Power.
>>
>>On my old Plymouth, the ignition switch has 5 wires: BATT, START, ACC,
>>IGN-1, and IGN-2.  IGN-1 is the "run" power to the coil, dropped down with a
>>ballast resistor to keep the coil happy.  IGN-2 is 12V straight to the coil
>>for hotter sparks while cranking.
>>
>>The IGN-1 circuit is DEFINITELY dead while cranking, and IGN-2 is ONLY hot
>>while cranking.  Once the engine fires, you let up on the key, the switch
>>rolls back to IGN-1 and you go on about your way.  Problem is, I can't tell
>>how long the dead skip is in the transition between the two circuits.
>>
>>Is this a problem?  Seems like it might be, as the "key on" signal seems to
>>be the trigger for the whole start-up routine with the ECM.  Is a GM
>>ignition switch one where there is no break in the power from "run" to
>>"start" and back, or am I overthinking things?  Mopar guys that run MSD
>>ignitions splice IGN-1 and IGN-2 together for the MSD to work, but that's
>>hardly the same animal.
>>
>>Thanks in advance!
>>
>>Clair
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>_______________________________________________
>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>
>  
>


From clair.davis at charter.net  Thu Sep 28 21:47:55 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 21:47:55 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
References: <20060928173944.42148.qmail@web80505.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <002201c6e371$ab03cb40$6501a8c0@davis>

This, folks, appears to be true here, too.  I basically made a little test
light circuit to see if there was an obvious break in the circuit between
IGN-1 and IGN-2.  Using an 1187 dash light, I wired I1 and I2 (and ACC just
for fun) together with a 9V battery.  I could not see any dimming of the
bulb between run and start, regardless of how fast or slow I turned the key.

Turning the key was the big problem, as I had to disassemble the dang lock
tumbler to make the motion consistent.  Kind of hated to do that, as 1969
ignition cylinders are unique (last year for dash-mounting for Mopar) but
I've got NO idea where the key for that sucker is.  Not much of a
theft-deterrent at this point.

Thanks, Rick, Tom, Tim, Will, and Lee for all the guidance.  Maybe I'll
finally get these last two wires done this weekend!

Clair


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rick McLeod" <dunvegan at sbcglobal.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730


> Good advise, but every ignition I've ever seen though has been MBB, not
BBM. (Make Before Break vs. Break Before Make)
>
>



From johnnybee8 at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 30 12:24:35 2006
From: johnnybee8 at hotmail.com (John Bee)
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 10:24:35 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] 88 Grand Prix
Message-ID: <BAY107-F279B2C77B8DAC25802E92881190@phx.gbl>

Hello All
LOoking for some advice. I am replacing the automatic tranny with a 5 speed 
manual in a 88 Grand Prix. The car is using a 1227727 ECU and the 5 speed is 
out of a 88 celebrity sw. The automatic has a 7 pin connector and a 2 pin 
connector coming out of it, the wiring diagram I have only shows 5 wires, 4 
of which go to the ECU and one is power. The 5 speed only have 2 2pin 
connectors. I have no idea what the gear ratio of both transaxles are but 
both cars have the same engine (2.8 L) and wheel size. Does Anybody know 
what these wires are and or what I need to do to get this convertion to 
work?
Thanks in advance!
John B.

_________________________________________________________________
Get today's hot entertainment gossip  http://movies.msn.com/movies/hotgossip



From boucherj at prodigy.net  Sat Sep 30 17:28:23 2006
From: boucherj at prodigy.net (Joe Boucher)
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 17:28:23 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <002201c6e371$ab03cb40$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDMEFEENAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>

How about this idea.  Install a start button that is energized when the key
is in the on position.  Turn key to on, press starter button.

That's kinda cool.  I like starter buttons.

The Honda S2000 has one and a couple of other high end, late model cars.
Probably not something you would casually find in a  a low end junkyard.

But it sounds like you don't have problem other than finding the key.

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
Behalf Of Clair Davis
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:48 PM
To: Rick McLeod; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730


This, folks, appears to be true here, too.  I basically made a little test
light circuit to see if there was an obvious break in the circuit between
IGN-1 and IGN-2.  Using an 1187 dash light, I wired I1 and I2 (and ACC just
for fun) together with a 9V battery.  I could not see any dimming of the
bulb between run and start, regardless of how fast or slow I turned the key.

Turning the key was the big problem, as I had to disassemble the dang lock
tumbler to make the motion consistent.  Kind of hated to do that, as 1969
ignition cylinders are unique (last year for dash-mounting for Mopar) but
I've got NO idea where the key for that sucker is.  Not much of a
theft-deterrent at this point.

Thanks, Rick, Tom, Tim, Will, and Lee for all the guidance.  Maybe I'll
finally get these last two wires done this weekend!

Clair


----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick McLeod" <dunvegan at sbcglobal.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:39 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730


> Good advise, but every ignition I've ever seen though has been MBB, not
BBM. (Make Before Break vs. Break Before Make)
>
>

_______________________________________________
Diy_efi mailing list
Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi



From llemoine at gmail.com  Sat Sep 30 20:24:26 2006
From: llemoine at gmail.com (Lee M. Lemoine)
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 02:24:26 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDMEFEENAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>
References: <002201c6e371$ab03cb40$6501a8c0@davis>
	<FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDMEFEENAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>
Message-ID: <bedc2dea0609301824t330157a0ya8c122023c504ae2@mail.gmail.com>

leave it to someone else to find a simpler solution, although i'm pretty
sure the start button won't give the coil the full 12v, leading back to the
orignal issues...



On 9/30/06, Joe Boucher <boucherj at prodigy.net> wrote:
>
> How about this idea.  Install a start button that is energized when the
> key
> is in the on position.  Turn key to on, press starter button.
>
> That's kinda cool.  I like starter buttons.
>
> The Honda S2000 has one and a couple of other high end, late model cars.
> Probably not something you would casually find in a  a low end junkyard.
>
> But it sounds like you don't have problem other than finding the key.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
> Behalf Of Clair Davis
> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:48 PM
> To: Rick McLeod; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>
>
> This, folks, appears to be true here, too.  I basically made a little test
> light circuit to see if there was an obvious break in the circuit between
> IGN-1 and IGN-2.  Using an 1187 dash light, I wired I1 and I2 (and ACC
> just
> for fun) together with a 9V battery.  I could not see any dimming of the
> bulb between run and start, regardless of how fast or slow I turned the
> key.
>
> Turning the key was the big problem, as I had to disassemble the dang lock
> tumbler to make the motion consistent.  Kind of hated to do that, as 1969
> ignition cylinders are unique (last year for dash-mounting for Mopar) but
> I've got NO idea where the key for that sucker is.  Not much of a
> theft-deterrent at this point.
>
> Thanks, Rick, Tom, Tim, Will, and Lee for all the guidance.  Maybe I'll
> finally get these last two wires done this weekend!
>
> Clair
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick McLeod" <dunvegan at sbcglobal.net>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>
>
> > Good advise, but every ignition I've ever seen though has been MBB, not
> BBM. (Make Before Break vs. Break Before Make)
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



-- 
Sincerely,
Lee M. Lemoine
KB1NQI  - Amateur Radio
http://www.turbochargedsoul.com/
'06 Subaru Legacy GT Limited - 250/250 AWD 5EAT
'93 Chevy Cavalier Z24 Convertible - 300/330 FWD 5MT (Mclaren Turbo!)


From clair.davis at charter.net  Sat Sep 30 20:41:55 2006
From: clair.davis at charter.net (Clair Davis)
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 20:41:55 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
References: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDMEFEENAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>
Message-ID: <004901c6e4fa$c89988e0$6501a8c0@davis>

Hehehe... I've had more cars with starter buttons than I care to think
about.  It's one of those little items that would be used by my wife or
mother (Dad's a victim, too) as evidence that we'd hacked on a car...
Agreed though on the cool factor of one of the big S-2000 buttons.  If I
were to get one of those, I'd check the Honda dealer first, and I'm sure
there are some aftermarket solutions, too.

Got my wiring done today.  I came this >< close to using a relay to power
the coil with power to the small side of the relay coming from the two key
switches.  Checking again, the relay would not have powered off through the
key operation, but using a 9V battery to run things test, I "noticed" a BIG
voltage spike when I broke the circuit.  I had to be holding the relay a
certain way to do it, but I suspect it was just like an ignition coil.  I
can't swear that it would have had any affect on the ECM, but I didn't want
to risk it.  It really felt like a good "tingle" you get when brushing up
too close to a bare 120V house wire.  Hot enough to feel through my finger,
and this from a little 9V battery.

Not quite off-topic, how much current does a typical "oil can" coil draw on
the (+) terminal?  This is a Jacobs Energy Coil steel cylinder oil-filled
unit if that makes a difference.  OEM has 18ga wires running power to the
coil, so I'm guessing those will continue to be fine.

Clair


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Boucher" <boucherj at prodigy.net>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2006 5:28 PM
Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730


> How about this idea.  Install a start button that is energized when the
key
> is in the on position.  Turn key to on, press starter button.
>
> That's kinda cool.  I like starter buttons.
>
> The Honda S2000 has one and a couple of other high end, late model cars.
> Probably not something you would casually find in a  a low end junkyard.
>
> But it sounds like you don't have problem other than finding the key.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
> Behalf Of Clair Davis
> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:48 PM
> To: Rick McLeod; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>
>
> This, folks, appears to be true here, too.  I basically made a little test
> light circuit to see if there was an obvious break in the circuit between
> IGN-1 and IGN-2.  Using an 1187 dash light, I wired I1 and I2 (and ACC
just
> for fun) together with a 9V battery.  I could not see any dimming of the
> bulb between run and start, regardless of how fast or slow I turned the
key.
>
> Turning the key was the big problem, as I had to disassemble the dang lock
> tumbler to make the motion consistent.  Kind of hated to do that, as 1969
> ignition cylinders are unique (last year for dash-mounting for Mopar) but
> I've got NO idea where the key for that sucker is.  Not much of a
> theft-deterrent at this point.
>
> Thanks, Rick, Tom, Tim, Will, and Lee for all the guidance.  Maybe I'll
> finally get these last two wires done this weekend!
>
> Clair
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Rick McLeod" <dunvegan at sbcglobal.net>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>
>
> > Good advise, but every ignition I've ever seen though has been MBB, not
> BBM. (Make Before Break vs. Break Before Make)
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Diy_efi mailing list
> Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
> Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
> Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>



From benof1987 at hotmail.com  Sat Sep 30 20:54:36 2006
From: benof1987 at hotmail.com (Ben P)
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 11:54:36 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] 88 Grand Prix
In-Reply-To: <BAY107-F279B2C77B8DAC25802E92881190@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <BAY106-F20A266E9E3AE5DC8236417A81E0@phx.gbl>

i dont know anything about the buicks, but as a general rule, at least two 
of those wires will be gear selector indicator, one will be a neutral/park 
starter lockout, and one will activate the reverse lights. Once you find out 
which wire is which, the lockout can either be connected to the manual (see 
below) or bridged to give you an option if the the engine dies in the middle 
of a train crossing.

There may also be an electronic speedo signal wire (or two) connected to a 
'bolt-on'part of the gearbox. If this is present (and there is no speedo 
cable, not to be confused with a kickdown cable, which sometimes are 
attached in wierd spots), the same unit, or a similar one, should be present 
on the manual gearbox. swapping the auto one over to the manual gearbox 
should result in a working speedo (that is also correct if the diff ratio is 
unchanged)

The other two wires on the manual gearbox may be neutral starter lockout 
(yes, some manuals have them) and a reverse light switch.

Re. the rest of the conversion, check to see that the gearboxes are the same 
length and have the same output spline. If they are (which is likely if the 
gearbox you are using was available in the buick grand prix) then you wont 
need a tailshaft, and as an added bonus, if the gearbox was available in the 
buick, the gearbox crossmember (or at the very least the holes in the body 
that it bolt to) should be the same.

happy conversion
Ben

(I'm going by what I need to do to my car to convert it to manual, except I 
have 17 wires apart from the gear selector, lockouts, and speedo. bloody 
electronic gearboxes need to know how hot your @$$ is before it gets out of 
limp home mode...




>From: "John Bee" <johnnybee8 at hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: [Diy_efi] 88 Grand Prix
>Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 10:24:35 -0700
>
>Hello All
>LOoking for some advice. I am replacing the automatic tranny with a 5 speed 
>manual in a 88 Grand Prix. The car is using a 1227727 ECU and the 5 speed 
>is out of a 88 celebrity sw. The automatic has a 7 pin connector and a 2 
>pin connector coming out of it, the wiring diagram I have only shows 5 
>wires, 4 of which go to the ECU and one is power. The 5 speed only have 2 
>2pin connectors. I have no idea what the gear ratio of both transaxles are 
>but both cars have the same engine (2.8 L) and wheel size. Does Anybody 
>know what these wires are and or what I need to do to get this convertion 
>to work?
>Thanks in advance!
>John B.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Get today's hot entertainment gossip  
>http://movies.msn.com/movies/hotgossip
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi

_________________________________________________________________
Want $250 of std talk, text & more for $49 a month? Go to  
http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fadsfac%2Enet%2Flink%2Easp%3Fcc%3DTEL217%2E31371%2E0%26clk%3D1%26creativeID%3D44933&_t=758220942&_r=emailtaglinetelstra&_m=EXT



From donsauman at cythera.net  Sat Sep 30 23:28:42 2006
From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman)
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 12:28:42 +0800
Subject: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
In-Reply-To: <004901c6e4fa$c89988e0$6501a8c0@davis>
References: <FCEMJBLIAFAJNGDCOAGDMEFEENAA.boucherj@prodigy.net>
	<004901c6e4fa$c89988e0$6501a8c0@davis>
Message-ID: <451F43FA.2040400@cythera.net>

Not absolutely certain of your wiring arrangement, but it is usual to 
put a reverse biased diode across relay coils to suppress back-EMF.

Don

Clair Davis wrote:

>Hehehe... I've had more cars with starter buttons than I care to think
>about.  It's one of those little items that would be used by my wife or
>mother (Dad's a victim, too) as evidence that we'd hacked on a car...
>Agreed though on the cool factor of one of the big S-2000 buttons.  If I
>were to get one of those, I'd check the Honda dealer first, and I'm sure
>there are some aftermarket solutions, too.
>
>Got my wiring done today.  I came this >< close to using a relay to power
>the coil with power to the small side of the relay coming from the two key
>switches.  Checking again, the relay would not have powered off through the
>key operation, but using a 9V battery to run things test, I "noticed" a BIG
>voltage spike when I broke the circuit.  I had to be holding the relay a
>certain way to do it, but I suspect it was just like an ignition coil.  I
>can't swear that it would have had any affect on the ECM, but I didn't want
>to risk it.  It really felt like a good "tingle" you get when brushing up
>too close to a bare 120V house wire.  Hot enough to feel through my finger,
>and this from a little 9V battery.
>
>Not quite off-topic, how much current does a typical "oil can" coil draw on
>the (+) terminal?  This is a Jacobs Energy Coil steel cylinder oil-filled
>unit if that makes a difference.  OEM has 18ga wires running power to the
>coil, so I'm guessing those will continue to be fine.
>
>Clair
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Joe Boucher" <boucherj at prodigy.net>
>To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2006 5:28 PM
>Subject: RE: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>
>
>  
>
>>How about this idea.  Install a start button that is energized when the
>>    
>>
>key
>  
>
>>is in the on position.  Turn key to on, press starter button.
>>
>>That's kinda cool.  I like starter buttons.
>>
>>The Honda S2000 has one and a couple of other high end, late model cars.
>>Probably not something you would casually find in a  a low end junkyard.
>>
>>But it sounds like you don't have problem other than finding the key.
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
>>Behalf Of Clair Davis
>>Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 9:48 PM
>>To: Rick McLeod; diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>>
>>
>>This, folks, appears to be true here, too.  I basically made a little test
>>light circuit to see if there was an obvious break in the circuit between
>>IGN-1 and IGN-2.  Using an 1187 dash light, I wired I1 and I2 (and ACC
>>    
>>
>just
>  
>
>>for fun) together with a 9V battery.  I could not see any dimming of the
>>bulb between run and start, regardless of how fast or slow I turned the
>>    
>>
>key.
>  
>
>>Turning the key was the big problem, as I had to disassemble the dang lock
>>tumbler to make the motion consistent.  Kind of hated to do that, as 1969
>>ignition cylinders are unique (last year for dash-mounting for Mopar) but
>>I've got NO idea where the key for that sucker is.  Not much of a
>>theft-deterrent at this point.
>>
>>Thanks, Rick, Tom, Tim, Will, and Lee for all the guidance.  Maybe I'll
>>finally get these last two wires done this weekend!
>>
>>Clair
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Rick McLeod" <dunvegan at sbcglobal.net>
>>To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
>>Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2006 12:39 PM
>>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Key-On Power for 7730
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Good advise, but every ignition I've ever seen though has been MBB, not
>>>      
>>>
>>BBM. (Make Before Break vs. Break Before Make)
>>    
>>
>>>      
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Diy_efi mailing list
>>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>>
>>    
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Diy_efi mailing list
>Diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subscribe: http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/diy_efi
>Main WWW page:  http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi
>
>  
>

-- 
Don Sauman
Cythera Communication
35 Asteroid Way
Carlisle 6101
Western Australia

P: 08 9361 0337
F: 08 9361 0581
M: 0427 389 547