From torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu  Fri Jun  1 16:40:24 2007
From: torbjorn.forsman at gengas.nu (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Torbj=F6rn_Forsman?=)
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2007 23:40:24 +0200
Subject: [Diy_efi] Scan Tools
In-Reply-To: <465C1339.5060204@comcast.net>
References: <607LeCkxC3750S07.1180435828@cmsweb07.cms.usa.net>
	<465C1339.5060204@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <46609248.4080401@gengas.nu>

Some modern Audi and VW use both the CAN bus and the older ISO 9141 
interface for diagnostics. Both of them are connected to their pins in 
the OBD connector. Some of the car's ECUs use CAN while others use ISO 
9141. The problem with some scan tools is that if they find a CAN bus, 
then they don't even try to do any connection attempts on ISO 9141. A 
possible way (not tested) would be to isolate the CAN pins if you see 
strange results.
It is also said (but not affirmed) that certain Audi use a non-standard 
baudrate on ISO 9141. This is said to in particular be true for some 
turbo diesel models.

Best regards

Torbj?rn Forsman

Bill Shaw wrote:
> Speaking of scan tools,  anyone know of one that will hook up to a '99  
> Audi A6QA (besides VAG-COM)? The normal tools don't seem to work.
> 
> Bill
> 
> CARL-OTTO RUSTAD wrote:
> 
>> Logan!
>>
>> I bought the Harrison R&D last year, 28 Sept.
>> This is a copy of my question "E-mail",
>> and the answer i received almost instantly.
>>  
>>
>>> Can the following equipment: USB OBDScan+CANtm
>>> do some datalogging, reset fault codes, and
>>> troubleshoot: Dodge 2005-model (gas-fuelinjected)
>>> Ram 1500 4x4 with 5.7cid magnum engine?
>>>     
>>
>>
>>  
>>
>>> Yes, and this Unit will work for all Vehicles from 96 to 2007 and 
>>> beyond.
>>>     
>>
>>
>> The Dodge Ram was a project car, wreck from an accident,
>> body off the frame, broken axle, and wiring partially
>> disconnected etc.
>> The tool was needed to get it all back together,
>> with no trouble codes.
>> Easy to use and cheap.
>> It was even hooked up to a Jeep Wrangler 1996 a while
>> back and works great.
>> Test driving with a cheap laptop connected with USB
>> interface, excellent to use.
>>
>> Take a look at:
>> http://www.obdscan.net/
>> I quess mine is similar to this
>> upgraded version that sells for $139.99
>> http://www.obdscan.net/scantools.htm
>>
>> This is a link to a cheap ALDL interface cable
>> for older vehicles.
>> http://www.enghmotors.com/cable/default.aspx
>> Said to work with many free programs or
>> at least very cheap.
>> I have not tried the cable myself.
>>
>> I'm a newbie on this things, I thought I
>> should give you my experience anyway because
>> I have the same opinion when it comes to people
>> selling stuff, just to tell you later on that you
>> have to pay another bill, and upgrade it to make it work.
>>
>> Regards Carl.
>>
>> ------ Original Message ------
>> Received: Tue, 29 May 2007 04:15:01 AM CEST
>> From: Logan Lingle <llingle at seidata.com>
>> To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>> Subject: [Diy_efi] Scan Tools
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> I've been using a Mac Mentor (Actually a re-branded OTC Genisys, sold 
>> under the Mac Tools Name) for some time and recently went to install 
>> my "Free" upgrade only to find out that it's not "Free" They are 
>> trying to hold me up for more money in the form of a "Smart Insert" 
>> they never told me I needed when I bought it.
>>
>> (Much like they never informed me that the "Free" "Imports" upgrade 
>> doesn't cover "Asian Imports" It's only good for imports from Finland 
>> or New Guinea or something, I suppose. But, I digress.)
>>
>> THEN they tell me the tool is just soooo damned old and for the low, 
>> low price of only $2100.00 and my current scanner,  they'll make me a 
>> deal and replace my archaic, 3  year old,  piece of Aztec, sun dial 
>> crap with their brand new version! Oh boy! OH BOY!
>>
>> I was about to write out the check when a friend of mine told me to 
>> look into a PC or palm based solution. He suggested the following 
>> products and said he had heard good things about them. He's a Service 
>> manager for Ford, and he uses PC based software there. He showed it to 
>> me and it's way cool,  but it's a proprietary Ford product and I need 
>> something universal for both work and experimentation.
>>
>> The products he recommended:
>>
>> http://autoenginuity.com/
>>
>> http://autotap.com/
>>
>> (The autoenginuity product looks particularly appealing.. and it's 
>> priced right.)
>>
>> I added it up and, do you know I could have an Alienware laptop and 
>> either software package for the price of a Mentor new?  So naturally, 
>> I'm interested..  But I was hoping someone here was familiar with 
>> these products and could either offer their opinion on them or 
>> recommend a viable competitor.
>>
>> Besides, I'm sick to death of tossing hardware based scan tools. It 
>> just seems so senseless. I'm not unhappy with the Mentor, it's a good 
>> tool. I just need an upgrade for newer vehicles. Ya know, it seems 
>> silly to keep trashing these things at a thousand or two grand a pop 
>> when I can just download an update and/or buy a new cable and be ready 
>> to go.
>>
>> Your thoughts are appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks and regards.
>>
>> Logan
>>
>>   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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 sonoma at shaw.ca  Sat Jun  2 17:22:12 2007
From: sonoma at shaw.ca (Mike Hudson)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:22:12 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
Message-ID: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>

Hi
My setup is a full TBI system from a 91Chevy G20 including TBI intake and HD TBI cylinder heads sitting on a 83 350/5.7 block. 
A 3 wire oxygen sensor doesn't have a wire for sensor ground, it uses the o2 sensor body for the ground return path.

I welded in a bung for the o2 just below the connection between the exhaust manifold and the exhaust pipe. The ground for the o2 sensor would have to go through that connection which is not the cleanest ground path. That's why I would like to go with the four wire.

The 4 wire has one wire for: o2 ground, o2 signal, heater positive and heater ground. 




I was thinking of using something like a AC ASF-75 or NTK 21006(Narrow band)

Will the output from the 4 wire o2 output the same voltage at the same AFR as the 1 wire sensor (Narrow band) ???

Does anyone know which year and model vehicle the ASF-75 was used on?

Thanks...

From steve at donegan.org  Sat Jun  2 17:28:56 2007
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:28:56 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
In-Reply-To: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
References: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
Message-ID: <1180823336.25092.16.camel@wopr.donegan.org>

Your ECU won't understand a wideband O2 sensor - my suggestion would be
to just mount a ground lug between the O2 sensor and the bung hole and
make it a 2 wire sensor. Simple, cheap, and should eliminate any fun
re-engineering...

On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 15:22 -0700, Mike Hudson wrote:
> Hi
> My setup is a full TBI system from a 91Chevy G20 including TBI intake and HD TBI cylinder heads sitting on a 83 350/5.7 block. 
> A 3 wire oxygen sensor doesn't have a wire for sensor ground, it uses the o2 sensor body for the ground return path.
> 
> I welded in a bung for the o2 just below the connection between the exhaust manifold and the exhaust pipe. The ground for the o2 sensor would have to go through that connection which is not the cleanest ground path. That's why I would like to go with the four wire.
> 
> The 4 wire has one wire for: o2 ground, o2 signal, heater positive and heater ground. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was thinking of using something like a AC ASF-75 or NTK 21006(Narrow band)
> 
> Will the output from the 4 wire o2 output the same voltage at the same AFR as the 1 wire sensor (Narrow band) ???
> 
> Does anyone know which year and model vehicle the ASF-75 was used on?
> 
> Thanks...
> _______________________________________________
> 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  Sat Jun  2 17:34:53 2007
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:34:53 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
In-Reply-To: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
References: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
Message-ID: <1180823693.25092.21.camel@wopr.donegan.org>

One other note - I hope you welded the bung on the top side of the pipe
very near the manifold - or at a minimum of 90 degrees to 'down' a one
wire sensor requires definite heat from the exhaust to function and all
O2 sensors will get killed by condensation after engine shut off - so at
a minimum an O2 sensor should be parallel to the road surface when
installed...

On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 15:22 -0700, Mike Hudson wrote:
> Hi
> My setup is a full TBI system from a 91Chevy G20 including TBI intake and HD TBI cylinder heads sitting on a 83 350/5.7 block. 
> A 3 wire oxygen sensor doesn't have a wire for sensor ground, it uses the o2 sensor body for the ground return path.
> 
> I welded in a bung for the o2 just below the connection between the exhaust manifold and the exhaust pipe. The ground for the o2 sensor would have to go through that connection which is not the cleanest ground path. That's why I would like to go with the four wire.
> 
> The 4 wire has one wire for: o2 ground, o2 signal, heater positive and heater ground. 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was thinking of using something like a AC ASF-75 or NTK 21006(Narrow band)
> 
> Will the output from the 4 wire o2 output the same voltage at the same AFR as the 1 wire sensor (Narrow band) ???
> 
> Does anyone know which year and model vehicle the ASF-75 was used on?
> 
> Thanks...
> _______________________________________________
> 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 sonoma at shaw.ca  Sat Jun  2 17:59:27 2007
From: sonoma at shaw.ca (Mike Hudson)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 15:59:27 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
References: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
	<1180823693.25092.21.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <00b601c7a569$aea0c770$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>



> One other note - I hope you welded the bung on the top side of the pipe
> very near the manifold - or at a minimum of 90 degrees to 'down' a one
> wire sensor requires definite heat from the exhaust to function and all
> O2 sensors will get killed by condensation after engine shut off - so at
> a minimum an O2 sensor should be parallel to the road surface when
> installed...

I was aware during the install of the condensation and the exhaust heat 
factors.

 The sensor bung is on the top side as close to the exhaust manifold as 
possible.

Wish I had grabbed the stock exhaust manifolds at the time but I didn't :-( 



From sonoma at shaw.ca  Sat Jun  2 18:07:03 2007
From: sonoma at shaw.ca (Mike Hudson)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:07:03 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
References: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
	<1180823336.25092.16.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <00b901c7a56a$be0a7020$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven P. Donegan" <steve at donegan.org>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor


> Your ECU won't understand a wideband O2 sensor - my suggestion would be
> to just mount a ground lug between the O2 sensor and the bung hole and
> make it a 2 wire sensor. Simple, cheap, and should eliminate any fun
> re-engineering...

I believe the AC Delco AFS-75 or NTK 21006 is a four wire narrow band 
sensor.

I don't know if the voltage at the same AFR is much different than the 
original single wire and a four wire?
/diy_efi 



From steve at donegan.org  Sat Jun  2 18:14:16 2007
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:14:16 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
In-Reply-To: <00b601c7a569$aea0c770$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
References: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
	<1180823693.25092.21.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
	<00b601c7a569$aea0c770$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
Message-ID: <1180826056.25092.26.camel@wopr.donegan.org>

Cool - being an Engineer Geek I sensed a potential pitfall and offered a
note to try and help you avoid it - sounds like you have it fully in
hand - but do note - wide band O2 sensors and narrow band ones are
completely different animals in all respects. I think just adding a
solid ground reference to the bung will solve your needs...

On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 15:59 -0700, Mike Hudson wrote:
> 
> > One other note - I hope you welded the bung on the top side of the pipe
> > very near the manifold - or at a minimum of 90 degrees to 'down' a one
> > wire sensor requires definite heat from the exhaust to function and all
> > O2 sensors will get killed by condensation after engine shut off - so at
> > a minimum an O2 sensor should be parallel to the road surface when
> > installed...
> 
> I was aware during the install of the condensation and the exhaust heat 
> factors.
> 
>  The sensor bung is on the top side as close to the exhaust manifold as 
> possible.
> 
> Wish I had grabbed the stock exhaust manifolds at the time but I didn't :-( 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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  Sat Jun  2 18:28:00 2007
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:28:00 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
In-Reply-To: <00b901c7a56a$be0a7020$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
References: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
	<1180823336.25092.16.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
	<00b901c7a56a$be0a7020$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
Message-ID: <1180826880.25092.31.camel@wopr.donegan.org>

Well - given you are trying to 'retrofit' a system to an original
non-efi vehicle I would suggest you start with using the entire original
set of sensors the ECU is accustomed to. After you have a functional
system you can fill the list in on exactly what you're trying to
accomplish and any/all of us will do our best to help.

On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 16:07 -0700, Mike Hudson wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Steven P. Donegan" <steve at donegan.org>
> To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
> Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2007 3:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
> 
> 
> > Your ECU won't understand a wideband O2 sensor - my suggestion would be
> > to just mount a ground lug between the O2 sensor and the bung hole and
> > make it a 2 wire sensor. Simple, cheap, and should eliminate any fun
> > re-engineering...
> 
> I believe the AC Delco AFS-75 or NTK 21006 is a four wire narrow band 
> sensor.
> 
> I don't know if the voltage at the same AFR is much different than the 
> original single wire and a four wire?
> /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 sonoma at shaw.ca  Sat Jun  2 18:37:43 2007
From: sonoma at shaw.ca (Mike Hudson)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:37:43 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
References: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
	<1180823693.25092.21.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
	<00b601c7a569$aea0c770$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
	<1180826056.25092.26.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <00e001c7a56f$06e9b180$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>


> Cool - being an Engineer Geek I sensed a potential pitfall and offered a
> note to try and help you avoid it - sounds like you have it fully in
> hand - but do note - wide band O2 sensors and narrow band ones are
> completely different animals in all respects. I think just adding a
> solid ground reference to the bung will solve your needs...

Hi Steven

I think I'll just use the single wire o2 and add a ground tab like you said. 
Worry about the heated sensor when I get the headers.

I work in the aircraft industry so I like things to be fail-safe:-)

Thanks again




From steve at donegan.org  Sat Jun  2 18:43:27 2007
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:43:27 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
In-Reply-To: <00e001c7a56f$06e9b180$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
References: <007601c7a564$7acd5c60$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
	<1180823693.25092.21.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
	<00b601c7a569$aea0c770$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
	<1180826056.25092.26.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
	<00e001c7a56f$06e9b180$0402a8c0@duronf7b3061b5>
Message-ID: <1180827807.25092.32.camel@wopr.donegan.org>

Nice to know - I fly little ones for fun :-)

On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 16:37 -0700, Mike Hudson wrote:
> > Cool - being an Engineer Geek I sensed a potential pitfall and offered a
> > note to try and help you avoid it - sounds like you have it fully in
> > hand - but do note - wide band O2 sensors and narrow band ones are
> > completely different animals in all respects. I think just adding a
> > solid ground reference to the bung will solve your needs...
> 
> Hi Steven
> 
> I think I'll just use the single wire o2 and add a ground tab like you said. 
> Worry about the heated sensor when I get the headers.
> 
> I work in the aircraft industry so I like things to be fail-safe:-)
> 
> Thanks again
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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_the_j at hotmail.com  Sat Jun  2 23:02:07 2007
From: b_the_j at hotmail.com (Ben Heidorn)
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 00:02:07 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
In-Reply-To: <1180827807.25092.32.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <BAY130-F17FDD070A6E9F791D60EE9BE220@phx.gbl>

2 and 4 wire sensors are resistors that modify signals sent from the ecm, 1 
and 3 wire sensors are galvanic batteries that produce thier own signal. 3 
and 4 wire sensors are equiped with heaters. you probably wont find the need 
for a heated o2 unless you are going to run headers with the sensor mounted 
down on the collector. Do a search for posts in the electrical forum of TGO 
by b_the_j and you'll see how i ran mine.


>From: "Steven P. Donegan" <steve at donegan.org>
>Reply-To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
>Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
>Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2007 16:43:27 -0700
>
>Nice to know - I fly little ones for fun :-)
>
>On Sat, 2007-06-02 at 16:37 -0700, Mike Hudson wrote:
> > > Cool - being an Engineer Geek I sensed a potential pitfall and offered 
>a
> > > note to try and help you avoid it - sounds like you have it fully in
> > > hand - but do note - wide band O2 sensors and narrow band ones are
> > > completely different animals in all respects. I think just adding a
> > > solid ground reference to the bung will solve your needs...
> >
> > Hi Steven
> >
> > I think I'll just use the single wire o2 and add a ground tab like you 
>said.
> > Worry about the heated sensor when I get the headers.
> >
> > I work in the aircraft industry so I like things to be fail-safe:-)
> >
> > Thanks again
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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?t miss your chance to WIN $10,000 and other great prizes from Microsoft 
Office Live http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/aub0540003042mrt/direct/01/



From clshore at yahoo.com  Sun Jun  3 08:13:20 2007
From: clshore at yahoo.com (Carter Shore)
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 06:13:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
In-Reply-To: <BAY130-F17FDD070A6E9F791D60EE9BE220@phx.gbl>
Message-ID: <804324.22260.qm@web35706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

C'mon folks,
characterizing commercial O2 sensors solely by the
number of leads is like trying to do the same with
IC's. (8 pins? gotta be an op-amp, right?)

What actually matters is what's inside. The number of
leads will usually be due to some combination of the
following:

They are either narrow-band or wide-band.
They are either heated, or not.
They have seperate ground wire, or are case grounded.
They have built in calibration/sensor elements or not.

etc., etc.

Carter

--- Ben Heidorn <b_the_j at hotmail.com> wrote:

> 2 and 4 wire sensors are resistors that modify
> signals sent from the ecm, 1 
> and 3 wire sensors are galvanic batteries that
> produce thier own signal. 3 
> and 4 wire sensors are equiped with heaters. you
> probably wont find the need 
> for a heated o2 unless you are going to run headers
> with the sensor mounted 
> down on the collector. Do a search for posts in the
> electrical forum of TGO 
> by b_the_j and you'll see how i ran mine.
> 
> 



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/


From steve at donegan.org  Sun Jun  3 09:34:02 2007
From: steve at donegan.org (Steven P. Donegan)
Date: Sun, 03 Jun 2007 07:34:02 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
In-Reply-To: <804324.22260.qm@web35706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <804324.22260.qm@web35706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1180881242.28618.4.camel@wopr.donegan.org>

A one wire sensor, by electrical requirements can only be narrow band.
Unless some genius comes up with the circuitry that can handle the temps
to make it just nicely do the currently required feedback work
internally :-) Well, even if that were done a wide band requires (again
at this time) a current source - that would likely make the sensor at
least require 3 current paths one of which could be the bung itself...

On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 06:13 -0700, Carter Shore wrote:
> C'mon folks,
> characterizing commercial O2 sensors solely by the
> number of leads is like trying to do the same with
> IC's. (8 pins? gotta be an op-amp, right?)
> 
> What actually matters is what's inside. The number of
> leads will usually be due to some combination of the
> following:
> 
> They are either narrow-band or wide-band.
> They are either heated, or not.
> They have seperate ground wire, or are case grounded.
> They have built in calibration/sensor elements or not.
> 
> etc., etc.
> 
> Carter
> 
> --- Ben Heidorn <b_the_j at hotmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > 2 and 4 wire sensors are resistors that modify
> > signals sent from the ecm, 1 
> > and 3 wire sensors are galvanic batteries that
> > produce thier own signal. 3 
> > and 4 wire sensors are equiped with heaters. you
> > probably wont find the need 
> > for a heated o2 unless you are going to run headers
> > with the sensor mounted 
> > down on the collector. Do a search for posts in the
> > electrical forum of TGO 
> > by b_the_j and you'll see how i ran mine.
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>        
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Need a vacation? Get great deals
> to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
> http://travel.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



From blundardiyefi at gmail.com  Sun Jun  3 11:34:59 2007
From: blundardiyefi at gmail.com (Dave B)
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 12:34:59 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Definitive LS1/LS2 coil information
Message-ID: <dd9e70170706030934u6f88c9bx706518eb0a71cd@mail.gmail.com>

I've done a *lot* of searching on the 'net and the archives.  Some of the
information I've found has been helpful, but a lot of it has been
inconsistent.

I have a set of LS2 coils (the newer, round style) that I will be using for
experimentation.  These are the 4 pin style.

Apparently, the 4 pins are 12volt power, power ground, logic ground and a 5
volt logic trigger.  They start charging on the rising edge of the control
pulse and fire on the falling edge.  (or do they?  some sources seem to
indicate the the autodwell can delay or change firing so that it is not
always just the falling edge.  this sounded weird and I don't beleive it.)

Unquestionably, the coils have a built-in ignitor module.

Some sources say the coils are "smart coils" that control their own dwell
adaptively.

Some sources say the coils are psudo-smart coils that are only capable of
limiting how long they stay charged by automatically discharging after
100ms.

Some sources say "just feed them about 5ms of dwell and let them do their
thing.  drop pulse to fire"
Some sources say 4ms had less misfires than 3ms or 4 ms (
http://forum.aempower.com/forum/index.php/topic,774.15.html)  Many sources
seem to indicate that ignition module dwell timing control can produce power
gains, seeming to indicate that there is some manual control over dwell.

So, my questions:

1. Does anyone have a datasheet or pertinent technical literature from
Denso?
2. Does anyone know how much load the coils present on the logic side?  Is
it small enough to be directly driven by say a logic gate or would using a
small FET be necessary?  I'm trying to avoid propagation delays as much as
possible, and avoiding the prop delay of an extra transistor would be nice.
3. Does anyone have a definitive answer on how much dwell to feed these
coils, or how the dwell control works?

Thanks in advance,
-Dave


From wopontour at hotmail.com  Sun Jun  3 17:29:46 2007
From: wopontour at hotmail.com (WopOnTour)
Date: Sun, 3 Jun 2007 16:29:46 -0600
Subject: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor
References: <804324.22260.qm@web35706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<1180881242.28618.4.camel@wopr.donegan.org>
Message-ID: <BAY122-DAV11FC8C80C9629F5BB2EBCBBA220@phx.gbl>

Mike
Just run the ground circuit for the 4 wire sensor back to the common 
"sensor" ground return to the ECM and it should do just fine. Depending on 
your ECM you might be able to run the heaters via a relay to the A.I.R. 
airpump output. It generally only runs for 240 sec or closed loop which ever 
comes first.
HTH
WOT

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steven P. Donegan" <steve at donegan.org>
To: <diy_efi at diy-efi.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2007 8:34 AM
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] One wire o2 sensor to four wire sensor


>A one wire sensor, by electrical requirements can only be narrow band.
> Unless some genius comes up with the circuitry that can handle the temps
> to make it just nicely do the currently required feedback work
> internally :-) Well, even if that were done a wide band requires (again
> at this time) a current source - that would likely make the sensor at
> least require 3 current paths one of which could be the bung itself...
>
> On Sun, 2007-06-03 at 06:13 -0700, Carter Shore wrote:
>> C'mon folks,
>> characterizing commercial O2 sensors solely by the
>> number of leads is like trying to do the same with
>> IC's. (8 pins? gotta be an op-amp, right?)
>>
>> What actually matters is what's inside. The number of
>> leads will usually be due to some combination of the
>> following:
>>
>> They are either narrow-band or wide-band.
>> They are either heated, or not.
>> They have seperate ground wire, or are case grounded.
>> They have built in calibration/sensor elements or not.
>>
>> etc., etc.
>>
>> Carter
>>
>> --- Ben Heidorn <b_the_j at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > 2 and 4 wire sensors are resistors that modify
>> > signals sent from the ecm, 1
>> > and 3 wire sensors are galvanic batteries that
>> > produce thier own signal. 3
>> > and 4 wire sensors are equiped with heaters. you
>> > probably wont find the need
>> > for a heated o2 unless you are going to run headers
>> > with the sensor mounted
>> > down on the collector. Do a search for posts in the
>> > electrical forum of TGO
>> > by b_the_j and you'll see how i ran mine.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>> Need a vacation? Get great deals
>> to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
>> http://travel.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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 phil at injec.com  Thu Jun  7 12:31:11 2007
From: phil at injec.com (Phil Lamovie)
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 03:31:11 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow
Message-ID: <466840DF.9C6E46D2@injec.com>


Hi quiet folks,

this is fun and interesting and.....

 http://www.aviationweek.com/media/flash/legacyanimation.mov



From b.shaw at comcast.net  Thu Jun  7 13:00:54 2007
From: b.shaw at comcast.net (Bill Shaw)
Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:00:54 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow
In-Reply-To: <466840DF.9C6E46D2@injec.com>
References: <466840DF.9C6E46D2@injec.com>
Message-ID: <466847D6.5000303@comcast.net>

Very cool!

Phil Lamovie wrote:
> Hi quiet folks,
>
> this is fun and interesting and.....
>
>  http://www.aviationweek.com/media/flash/legacyanimation.mov
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 WSCowell at aol.com  Thu Jun  7 14:24:18 2007
From: WSCowell at aol.com (WSCowell at aol.com)
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 15:24:18 EDT
Subject: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow
Message-ID: <d08.12395f4e.3399b562@aol.com>

 
In a message dated 07/06/2007 19:05:52 GMT Standard Time,  b.shaw at comcast.net 
writes:

http://www.aviationweek.com/media/flash/legacyanimation.mov



Good grief, I can't begin to imagine the tip and side rotor seal  problems.  
It really puts the Wankel in the shade.  I'll stick my neck  out and say it 
will never make it out o fthe lab and into production.
 
Will C



   


From airhawk at hawkgt.net  Thu Jun  7 14:54:38 2007
From: airhawk at hawkgt.net (The AirHawk)
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 14:54:38 -0500
Subject: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow
Message-ID: <ef5faaafe516463c960f21d9aa40db8a@hawkgt.net>


		My thought exactly. I counted something along the lines of 18 Apex seals, Two-Dozen Side seals, and on, and on.......

-Scott C.

----------------------------------------

				From: WSCowell at aol.com
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 2:25 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow 

In a message dated 07/06/2007 19:05:52 GMT Standard Time, b.shaw at comcast.net 
writes:

http://www.aviationweek.com/media/flash/legacyanimation.mov

Good grief, I can't begin to imagine the tip and side rotor seal problems. 
It really puts the Wankel in the shade. I'll stick my neck out and say it 
will never make it out o fthe lab and into production.

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




From A6intruder at myo-p.com  Thu Jun  7 22:05:31 2007
From: A6intruder at myo-p.com (Daniel Nicoson)
Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2007 23:05:31 -0400
Subject: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow
In-Reply-To: <ef5faaafe516463c960f21d9aa40db8a@hawkgt.net>
Message-ID: <KMEGIPPMDGHIFFAKGOLEMEKPJJAA.A6intruder@myo-p.com>

Very clever arrangement but I can't imagine seals lasting that break contact
several times per rotation.

Dan Nicoson

-----Original Message-----
From: diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:diy_efi-bounces at diy-efi.org]On
Behalf Of The AirHawk
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 3:55 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow


                My thought exactly. I counted something along the lines of
18 Apex seals, Two-Dozen Side seals, and on, and on.......

-Scott C.

----------------------------------------

                                From: WSCowell at aol.com
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 2:25 PM
To: diy_efi at diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow

In a message dated 07/06/2007 19:05:52 GMT Standard Time, b.shaw at comcast.net
writes:

http://www.aviationweek.com/media/flash/legacyanimation.mov

Good grief, I can't begin to imagine the tip and side rotor seal problems.
It really puts the Wankel in the shade. I'll stick my neck out and say it
will never make it out o fthe lab and into production.

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


_______________________________________________
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 Jun  8 13:18:20 2007
From: tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net (Mike Yates)
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 11:18:20 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow
In-Reply-To: <d08.12395f4e.3399b562@aol.com>
References: <d08.12395f4e.3399b562@aol.com>
Message-ID: <ab7j63l9pk4h948r60dh6a367i9l1211oi@4ax.com>

Innovative but less than practical from a manufacturing
standpoint...plus the ports seem to work via magic and not
physics....intake port overlap is bad and exhaust port is way too
small to support any RPM...afaict.

Mike


On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 15:24:18 EDT, you wrote:

> 
>In a message dated 07/06/2007 19:05:52 GMT Standard Time,  b.shaw at comcast.net 
>writes:
>
>http://www.aviationweek.com/media/flash/legacyanimation.mov
>
>
>
>Good grief, I can't begin to imagine the tip and side rotor seal  problems.  
>It really puts the Wankel in the shade.  I'll stick my neck  out and say it 
>will never make it out o fthe lab and into production.
> 
>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



From tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net  Fri Jun  8 14:22:56 2007
From: tmc_mike_yates at sbcglobal.net (Mike Yates)
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 12:22:56 -0700
Subject: [Diy_efi] Warning this is hard to follow
In-Reply-To: <ab7j63l9pk4h948r60dh6a367i9l1211oi@4ax.com>
References: <d08.12395f4e.3399b562@aol.com>
	<ab7j63l9pk4h948r60dh6a367i9l1211oi@4ax.com>
Message-ID: <cq7j639spubbodjahhicr2qb1eapce0jr3@4ax.com>

www.legacyengine.com


On Fri, 08 Jun 2007 11:18:20 -0700, you wrote:

>Innovative but less than practical from a manufacturing
>standpoint...plus the ports seem to work via magic and not
>physics....intake port overlap is bad and exhaust port is way too
>small to support any RPM...afaict.
>
>Mike
>
>
>On Thu, 7 Jun 2007 15:24:18 EDT, you wrote:
>
>> 
>>In a message dated 07/06/2007 19:05:52 GMT Standard Time,  b.shaw at comcast.net 
>>writes:
>>
>>http://www.aviationweek.com/media/flash/legacyanimation.mov
>>
>>
>>
>>Good grief, I can't begin to imagine the tip and side rotor seal  problems.  
>>It really puts the Wankel in the shade.  I'll stick my neck  out and say it 
>>will never make it out o fthe lab and into production.
>> 
>>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
>
>_______________________________________________
>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 j_holland at btopenworld.com  Sat Jun 23 18:06:35 2007
From: j_holland at btopenworld.com (James Holland)
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 00:06:35 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] MH6211 Processor
Message-ID: <mailman.16.1311919665.4627.diy_efi@diy-efi.org>

I'm currently attempting to reverse engineer a DSM ECU fitted with an MH6211
processor, this is a Mitsubishi processor in an 84pin PLCC package. The
processor seems to be based on the 68HC11. It has separate address and data
busses similar to a 68HC11K but has a different pinout. I have extracted the
binary image from the EPROM and have disassembled it using DHC11 and a lot
of manual disassembling. I have pretty much got the schematics drawn out
now. I don't currently have a logic analyser but I will be buying/borrowing
one soon. Does anyone have any information on the architecture of this
processor? I can't find anything on the net. I'm looking for a way to tie up
the different code sections with their functions.

TIA

James



From mdacmail at optusnet.com.au  Sun Jun 24 20:10:23 2007
From: mdacmail at optusnet.com.au (mdacmail at optusnet.com.au)
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 11:10:23 +1000
Subject: [Diy_efi] 68HC11
Message-ID: <200706250110.l5P1AOor009496@mail06.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/20070625/ceaee3ce/attachment.pl 

From j_holland at btopenworld.com  Mon Jun 25 16:22:33 2007
From: j_holland at btopenworld.com (James Holland)
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:22:33 +0100
Subject: [Diy_efi] RE:MH6211
Message-ID: <mailman.17.1311919665.4627.diy_efi@diy-efi.org>



> 
> You mean info specific to MH6211 or the 68HC11 generally? There should be
> heaps of stuff for the 68HC11. I played with an expanded mode 68HC11 based
> ecu once if you need a hand mate.
> 

I'm looking for specific information on the MH6211. I did a design a good
few years ago using a 68HC811E2 in expanded mode. I'm a hardware designer,
the application software was written by a 'proper' software engineer but I
did write some test software so I have some knowledge of the HC11
architecture. I spent a long time on it using a logic analyzer debugging a
few problems so I know whats involved. I'm sure that there are at least a
couple of people with knowledge of the 6211, its used on a few DSM ECUs. I
was hoping for some tips but I do understand if they don't want to share.
I'm sure that it was hard won knowledge. 
I've ordered an Intronix USB logic analyzer. It should be more than capable
of doing the job and is small enough to tuck up under the dashboard :-)
Cheers
James