From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 09:20:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 09:20:24 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 09:20:24 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: 12 V regulator With the input voltage requirements spanning above and below the output voltage requirements, the only regulator that will operate correctly is a switching buck-boost combination. BobR. Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > I have a requirement for 12 V regulation (+/- 15% or a range of 10.2 to 13.8 > volts). > > My application is driving several 12V time delay relays (TDRs) and I am > building it to work in a drag car that can be powered with 12v + Alternator > or a 16V system. Keep in mind that with the 16V system, the battery charger > can put over 18V's. > > The TDRs pull as low as 1 ma each when in the off state, and as high as 200 > ma each when the relay is triggered. So lets just say my requirements for > a regulator are: > > Input Voltage: 10v to 20v > Output Voltage: 12v (+/- 15%) > Output Current: 1mA to 500mA > > I tried to use a 12V regulator purchased from Digikey just as a test and it > seems to crap out at the lower current levels (I don't have the part number > handy, its at home, and this was a project I was working on over a year ago, > something just stirred up my memory that I never was able to resolve this. > Originally I was not aware of the lower current levels, so the regulator I > purchased worked in the 100ma range, but not at lower (1ma) range. > > Could someone recommend a very reliable 12V regulator that I can use to meet > my needs. > > As a work around I built my own regulator with a 12 V zener, resistor and > 2n2222 transistor that seems to work, however, I am concerned about the > reliability and heat issues with the 2n2222. > > Thanks, > > Steve F > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 10:34:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:34:43 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 10:34:43 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: 12 V regulator Bob Let me re-state my requirement to clear up the request. The regulator needs to supply an Input voltage of 12 Volts (+/- 15%) to the time delay relay. And must be good for a normal 12 volt auto configuration, and also a 16 volt racing battery application. So lets just say the regulator should be able to do the following: Input 12 - 18 V Ouput 12 Volts (1ma to 500ma) If the input swings below 12 (ex 10.5) then it is ok for the output to also swing to 10.5. This is in case the 12V car battery goes a little low due to some problem. Steve -----Original Message----- From: rr [mailto:RRauscher@nni.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 12:22 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: 12 V regulator With the input voltage requirements spanning above and below the output voltage requirements, the only regulator that will operate correctly is a switching buck-boost combination. BobR. Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > I have a requirement for 12 V regulation (+/- 15% or a range of 10.2 to 13.8 > volts). > > My application is driving several 12V time delay relays (TDRs) and I am > building it to work in a drag car that can be powered with 12v + Alternator > or a 16V system. Keep in mind that with the 16V system, the battery charger > can put over 18V's. > > The TDRs pull as low as 1 ma each when in the off state, and as high as 200 > ma each when the relay is triggered. So lets just say my requirements for > a regulator are: > > Input Voltage: 10v to 20v > Output Voltage: 12v (+/- 15%) > Output Current: 1mA to 500mA > > I tried to use a 12V regulator purchased from Digikey just as a test and it > seems to crap out at the lower current levels (I don't have the part number > handy, its at home, and this was a project I was working on over a year ago, > something just stirred up my memory that I never was able to resolve this. > Originally I was not aware of the lower current levels, so the regulator I > purchased worked in the 100ma range, but not at lower (1ma) range. > > Could someone recommend a very reliable 12V regulator that I can use to meet > my needs. > > As a work around I built my own regulator with a 12 V zener, resistor and > 2n2222 transistor that seems to work, however, I am concerned about the > reliability and heat issues with the 2n2222. > > Thanks, > > Steve F > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 12:17:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:17:04 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 12:17:04 -0800 From: Ron Schroeder Subject: RE: 12 V regulator Hi, I would try a LT1086. It is a low dropout version of the LM317. If set to 12V out, the output will regulate with an input down to about 12.4V and then will be slightly less than 1/2V below the input all the way down to about 2 volts. Ron At 01:33 PM 12/3/01 -0500, you wrote: >Bob > >Let me re-state my requirement to clear up the request. > >The regulator needs to supply an Input voltage of 12 Volts (+/- 15%) to the >time delay relay. >And must be good for a normal 12 volt auto configuration, and also a 16 volt >racing battery application. > >So lets just say the regulator should be able to do the following: > >Input 12 - 18 V >Ouput 12 Volts (1ma to 500ma) > >If the input swings below 12 (ex 10.5) then it is ok for the output to also >swing to >10.5. This is in case the 12V car battery goes a little low due to some >problem. > >Steve > >-----Original Message----- >From: rr [mailto:RRauscher@nni.com] >Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 12:22 PM >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: 12 V regulator > > > >With the input voltage requirements spanning above and below >the output voltage requirements, the only regulator that will >operate correctly is a switching buck-boost combination. > >BobR. > > >Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > >> I have a requirement for 12 V regulation (+/- 15% or a range of 10.2 to >13.8 >> volts). >> >> My application is driving several 12V time delay relays (TDRs) and I am >> building it to work in a drag car that can be powered with 12v + >Alternator >> or a 16V system. Keep in mind that with the 16V system, the battery >charger >> can put over 18V's. >> >> The TDRs pull as low as 1 ma each when in the off state, and as high as >200 >> ma each when the relay is triggered. So lets just say my requirements >for >> a regulator are: >> >> Input Voltage: 10v to 20v >> Output Voltage: 12v (+/- 15%) >> Output Current: 1mA to 500mA >> >> I tried to use a 12V regulator purchased from Digikey just as a test and >it >> seems to crap out at the lower current levels (I don't have the part >number >> handy, its at home, and this was a project I was working on over a year >ago, >> something just stirred up my memory that I never was able to resolve this. >> Originally I was not aware of the lower current levels, so the regulator I >> purchased worked in the 100ma range, but not at lower (1ma) range. >> >> Could someone recommend a very reliable 12V regulator that I can use to >meet >> my needs. >> >> As a work around I built my own regulator with a 12 V zener, resistor and >> 2n2222 transistor that seems to work, however, I am concerned about the >> reliability and heat issues with the 2n2222. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Steve F >> >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > Ron Schroeder WD8CDH E. E. S. wd8cdh@bnl.gov rjs@bnl.gov 631 344-4561 Day 631 286-5677 Nite ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 13:42:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:42:28 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:42:28 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: 12 V regulator On Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:53:37 -0600 bcroe@juno.com writes: > This may be a bit late, but trying to regulate 12V out > with 10V in is doing it the hard way. I would use some > CD4541 chips as adjustable timers, very happy at > 5V and well under a $1. No problem with heat either. > They could drive logic FETs which could drive regular > 12V relays unregulated. > > Bruce Roe > > On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:11:37 -0500 Steve.Flanagan > @VerizonWireless.com writes: > > I have a requirement for 12 V regulation (+/- 15% or > > a range of 10.2 to 13.8 volts). > > > > My application is driving several 12V time delay relays > > (TDRs) and I am building it to work in a drag car that > > can be powered with 12v + Alternator or a 16V system. > > Keep in mind that with the 16V system, the battery > > charger can put over 18V's. > > > > The TDRs pull as low as 1 ma each when in the off state, > > and as high as 200 ma each when the relay is triggered. > > So lets just say my requirements for a regulator are: > > > > Input Voltage: 10v to 20v > > Output Voltage: 12v (+/- 15%) > > Output Current: 1mA to 500mA > > > > I tried to use a 12V regulator purchased from Digikey just > > as a test and it seems to crap out at the lower current levels > > (I don't have the part number handy, its at home, and this > > was a project I was working on over a year ago, something > > just stirred up my memory that I never was able to resolve > > this. Originally I was not aware of the lower current levels, > > so the regulator I purchased worked in the 100ma range, > > but not at lower (1ma) range. > > > > Could someone recommend a very reliable 12V regulator > > that I can use to meet my needs. > > > > As a work around I built my own regulator with a 12 V zener, > > resistor and 2n2222 transistor that seems to work, > > however, I am concerned about the reliability and heat > > issues with the 2n2222. > > > > > Steve F ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From majordomo@diy-efi.org Mon Dec 3 13:57:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:54:21 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:54:21 -0300 From: majordomo@diy-efi.org Subject: Majordomo results -- >>>> unsubscribe diy_efi Succeeded. From majordomo@diy-efi.org Mon Dec 3 14:02:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:59:05 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:59:05 -0300 From: majordomo@diy-efi.org Subject: Confirmation for subscribe diy_efi -- Someone (possibly you) has requested that your email address be added to or deleted from the mailing list "diy_efi@diy-efi.org". If you really want this action to be taken, please send the following commands (exactly as shown) back to "majordomo@diy-efi.org": auth 8582680c subscribe diy_efi tsokorai@xperts.cl If you do not want this action to be taken, simply ignore this message and the request will be disregarded. If your mailer will not allow you to send the entire command as a single line, you may split it using backslashes, like so: auth 8582680c subscribe diy_efi \ tsokorai@xperts.cl If you have any questions about the policy of the list owner, please contact "diy_efi-approval@diy-efi.org". Thanks! majordomo@diy-efi.org From majordomo@diy-efi.org Mon Dec 3 14:02:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:59:05 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 13:59:05 -0300 From: majordomo@diy-efi.org Subject: Majordomo results -- >>>> subscribe diy_efi **** Your request to majordomo@diy-efi.org: **** **** subscribe diy_efi tsokorai@xperts.cl **** **** must be authenticated. To accomplish this, another request must be **** sent in with an authorization key, which has been sent to: **** tsokorai@xperts.cl **** **** If the message is not received, there is generally a problem with **** the address. Before reporting this as a problem, please note the **** following: **** **** You only need to give an address to the subscribe command if you want **** to receive list mail at a different address from where you sent the **** command. Otherwise you can simply omit it. **** **** If you do give an address to the subscribe command, it must be a legal **** address. It should not consist solely of your name. The address must **** point to a machine that is reachable from the list server. **** **** If you have any questions about the policy of the list owner, please **** contact "diy_efi-approval@diy-efi.org". **** **** Thanks! **** **** majordomo@diy-efi.org From majordomo@diy-efi.org Mon Dec 3 14:04:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:01:36 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:01:36 -0300 From: majordomo@diy-efi.org Subject: Welcome to diy_efi -- Welcome to the diy_efi mailing list! Please save this message for future reference. Thank you. If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, you can send mail to with the following command in the body of your email message: unsubscribe diy_efi or from another account, besides tsokorai@xperts.cl: unsubscribe diy_efi tsokorai@xperts.cl If you ever need to get in contact with the owner of the list, (if you have trouble unsubscribing, or have questions about the list itself) send email to . This is the general rule for most mailing lists when you need to contact a human. Here's the general information for the list you've subscribed to, in case you don't already have it: ================================================================ Do - It - Yourself Electronic Fuel Injection ================================================================ To subscribe: Send to Majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org subscribe [list name] [your email address *only* if different than your "From" address] To unsubscribe: Send to Majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org unsubscribe [list name] [your *registered* email address if different than your "From" address] For help: Send "help" to Majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org. To post: Send to "DIY_EFI@lists.diy-efi.org" Digest mode: This is available for all of the mailing list. Send "lists" to Majordomo for a listing a mailing lists served. To switch to the digest mode, unsubscribe to the regular list and then subscribe to the digest version (i.e., diy_efi-digest). Charter: This mailing-list is *strictly* dedicated to the discussion of topics related to EFI design and modification. I would like to see discussion on control algorithms, hardware, electronics, and sensor/sensor-interface designs. Additionally, modification and adaptations of OEM ECU's would also be welcomed. For more information: http://www.diy-efi.org/ John S. Gwynne From majordomo@diy-efi.org Mon Dec 3 14:04:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:01:36 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:01:36 -0300 From: majordomo@diy-efi.org Subject: Majordomo results -- >>>> auth 8582680c subscribe diy_efi tsokorai@xperts.cl Succeeded. From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 14:08:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:08:55 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:08:55 -0800 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? FR Wilk ___________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. I > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware for > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his Firebird. > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess I'm > looking for similar equipment. > > Thanks for any help! > > -David > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Thu Nov 29 12:11:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:14:44 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:14:44 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: 12 V regulator I have a requirement for 12 V regulation (+/- 15% or a range of 10.2 to 13.8 volts). My application is driving several 12V time delay relays (TDRs) and I am building it to work in a drag car that can be powered with 12v + Alternator or a 16V system. Keep in mind that with the 16V system, the battery charger can put over 18V's. The TDRs pull as low as 1 ma each when in the off state, and as high as 200 ma each when the relay is triggered. So lets just say my requirements for a regulator are: Input Voltage: 10v to 20v Output Voltage: 12v (+/- 15%) Output Current: 1mA to 500mA I tried to use a 12V regulator purchased from Digikey just as a test and it seems to crap out at the lower current levels (I don't have the part number handy, its at home, and this was a project I was working on over a year ago, something just stirred up my memory that I never was able to resolve this. Originally I was not aware of the lower current levels, so the regulator I purchased worked in the 100ma range, but not at lower (1ma) range. Could someone recommend a very reliable 12V regulator that I can use to meet my needs. As a work around I built my own regulator with a 12 V zener, resistor and 2n2222 transistor that seems to work, however, I am concerned about the reliability and heat issues with the 2n2222. Thanks, Steve F ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sundell@usa.net Fri Nov 30 21:39:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:22:15 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:22:15 -0300 From: "Kris Sundell" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: WB O2 sensor connector - Sumitomo Did you ever get your pictures? If you haven't, I can send you some. Kris -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bryan Zublin Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 3:14 PM To: DIY_EFI@lists.diy-efi.org Subject: WB O2 sensor connector - Sumitomo If someone can email me images of the WB O2 sensor connector, I can check my Sumitomo connector catalog to see if they make a mating connector. Sumitomo makes connectors and wire harnesses for Honda, Acura, Mazda, and probably others. To match the connector, it would be best to have an image of all 6 sides of the connector. The single image on the diy-efi web page is not sufficient. Bryan Zublin bzublin@zublin.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Mon Dec 3 14:22:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:57:07 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 14:57:07 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: 12 V regulator With the input voltage requirements spanning above and below the output voltage requirements, the only regulator that will operate correctly is a switching buck-boost combination. BobR. Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > I have a requirement for 12 V regulation (+/- 15% or a range of 10.2 to 13.8 > volts). > > My application is driving several 12V time delay relays (TDRs) and I am > building it to work in a drag car that can be powered with 12v + Alternator > or a 16V system. Keep in mind that with the 16V system, the battery charger > can put over 18V's. > > The TDRs pull as low as 1 ma each when in the off state, and as high as 200 > ma each when the relay is triggered. So lets just say my requirements for > a regulator are: > > Input Voltage: 10v to 20v > Output Voltage: 12v (+/- 15%) > Output Current: 1mA to 500mA > > I tried to use a 12V regulator purchased from Digikey just as a test and it > seems to crap out at the lower current levels (I don't have the part number > handy, its at home, and this was a project I was working on over a year ago, > something just stirred up my memory that I never was able to resolve this. > Originally I was not aware of the lower current levels, so the regulator I > purchased worked in the 100ma range, but not at lower (1ma) range. > > Could someone recommend a very reliable 12V regulator that I can use to meet > my needs. > > As a work around I built my own regulator with a 12 V zener, resistor and > 2n2222 transistor that seems to work, however, I am concerned about the > reliability and heat issues with the 2n2222. > > Thanks, > > Steve F > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 15:20:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:20:27 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:20:27 -0800 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU My car has the Jetronic Turbo. Thanks for any help! -David -----Original Message----- From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? FR Wilk ___________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. I > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware for > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his Firebird. > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess I'm > looking for similar equipment. > > Thanks for any help! > > -David > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 15:22:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:22:45 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:22:45 -0800 From: Eric Deslauriers MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A I love my MSD6A and I hate every MSD coil I've bought. I went through 4 MSD coils in my 93 Suburban in under 7 months. The stock GM coil (with 230K miles) continues to survive just fine w/ & w/o the 6A. I've had the 6A over 2 years now and still like it. I started carrying the stock coil in the back of the truck since I KNEW the MSD coil would fail (and soon!). MSD is always real nice about replacing it - after I go to where the truck is usually stuck with a no-start condition (always in the middle of the weekday too), take out the MSD coil, put the stock coil in, call them for an RMA#, put it in a box, take it to a shipping joint, pay shipping. Then I get it back, take the stock one out, put the new MSD one in... you get the picture. I think 4 out of 4 makes a bold statement. My $0.02 Eric D skulte wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Kevin Wright wrote: > > > ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > >I'd seriously look to change a table for timing control. > > >They do have a multistep retard box, that I've used without complaint. > > >I have yet to have a Crane box fail. > > >Bruce > > I just caught the above... I will never use a Crane box. Vortech was > including them with their supercharger kits, and nearly everyone I know > with the Vortech has had their Crane box die and get replaced multiple > times. Maybe it's been fixed in the new version, but it's happened too > often for me to use one. My Accel 300+ ignition box has been reliable so > far for 3+ years under the punishment of the oven known as my engine bay > (recently melted most of the wires road racing due to radiant heat from > the turbos). FWIW. > > Andris Skulte > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > Found 'em, thanks. Specs look good; actually a couple > of options > > there. I don't have the option of editing the timing tables, since > > the car is a '70 Cutlass about to receive a MegaSquirt. Maybe when > > the MegaJolt comes down the pipe... the turbos won't happen for a > > while yet. I'm thinking a Hi6R, then add the TRC2 retard control and > > MAP sensor for boost retard when required. > > > > krw > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Kevin Wright" > > >Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > >> ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > >> >I've never had any success with them. > > >> >If it wasn't for NASCAR, I don't think you see them anywhere. > > >> >Bruce > > > > > >> What would you recommend, than? I was going to go with a 6A BTM > > >> (boost retard) when I turbo my Olds. Would Crane or some other > > >> manufacturer be preferable. Anybody else make a boost retard unit? > > >> I'll research the web, of course, but I was hoping someone had > > >> experience/suggestions to make the job quicker. > > >> Kevin Wright > > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > -- > > Kevin Wright > > krwright@wankel.net > > krwright@ev1.net > > http://www.wankel.net/~krwright > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > http://www.skulte.com > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 15:40:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:40:56 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:40:56 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [ADMIN] @home addresses I'll be unsubscribing all @home addresses later today. If you aren't affected by the excite debacle, you will have to resubscribe. There are too many @home addresses bouncing at the moment. Orin, list admin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Mon Dec 3 15:33:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:04:33 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:04:33 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: 12 V regulator Bob Let me re-state my requirement to clear up the request. The regulator needs to supply an Input voltage of 12 Volts (+/- 15%) to the time delay relay. And must be good for a normal 12 volt auto configuration, and also a 16 volt racing battery application. So lets just say the regulator should be able to do the following: Input 12 - 18 V Ouput 12 Volts (1ma to 500ma) If the input swings below 12 (ex 10.5) then it is ok for the output to also swing to 10.5. This is in case the 12V car battery goes a little low due to some problem. Steve -----Original Message----- From: rr [mailto:RRauscher@nni.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 12:22 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: 12 V regulator With the input voltage requirements spanning above and below the output voltage requirements, the only regulator that will operate correctly is a switching buck-boost combination. BobR. Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > I have a requirement for 12 V regulation (+/- 15% or a range of 10.2 to 13.8 > volts). > > My application is driving several 12V time delay relays (TDRs) and I am > building it to work in a drag car that can be powered with 12v + Alternator > or a 16V system. Keep in mind that with the 16V system, the battery charger > can put over 18V's. > > The TDRs pull as low as 1 ma each when in the off state, and as high as 200 > ma each when the relay is triggered. So lets just say my requirements for > a regulator are: > > Input Voltage: 10v to 20v > Output Voltage: 12v (+/- 15%) > Output Current: 1mA to 500mA > > I tried to use a 12V regulator purchased from Digikey just as a test and it > seems to crap out at the lower current levels (I don't have the part number > handy, its at home, and this was a project I was working on over a year ago, > something just stirred up my memory that I never was able to resolve this. > Originally I was not aware of the lower current levels, so the regulator I > purchased worked in the 100ma range, but not at lower (1ma) range. > > Could someone recommend a very reliable 12V regulator that I can use to meet > my needs. > > As a work around I built my own regulator with a 12 V zener, resistor and > 2n2222 transistor that seems to work, however, I am concerned about the > reliability and heat issues with the 2n2222. > > Thanks, > > Steve F > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 16:18:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:18:05 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:18:05 -0800 From: "purplemonster" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A Thank u for you input Eric, what coil might you be using,i got the msd2( that make any sense) ,ALL i have to do know is find one? whats the going price for s second hand one and a new one? Thanks alot Robert WWW.mentalminis.com Email: mentalminis@ntlworld.com Email: purplemonster@ntlworld.com Mini_hybrids group,owner and moderator SIMPLE DIGITAL SYSTEMS -SIMPLY THE BEST ( Engine management systems ) sdsefi-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Deslauriers" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 10:41 PM Subject: Re: MSD 6A > I love my MSD6A and I hate every MSD coil I've bought. I went through 4 > MSD coils in my 93 Suburban in under 7 months. The stock GM coil (with > 230K miles) continues to survive just fine w/ & w/o the 6A. > > I've had the 6A over 2 years now and still like it. > > I started carrying the stock coil in the back of the truck since I KNEW > the MSD coil would fail (and soon!). > > MSD is always real nice about replacing it - after I go to where the > truck is usually stuck with a no-start condition (always in the middle > of the weekday too), take out the MSD coil, put the stock coil in, call > them for an RMA#, put it in a box, take it to a shipping joint, pay > shipping. Then I get it back, take the stock one out, put the new MSD > one in... you get the picture. > > I think 4 out of 4 makes a bold statement. > > My $0.02 > > Eric D > > skulte wrote: > > > > On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Kevin Wright wrote: > > > > > ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > > >I'd seriously look to change a table for timing control. > > > >They do have a multistep retard box, that I've used without complaint. > > > >I have yet to have a Crane box fail. > > > >Bruce > > > > I just caught the above... I will never use a Crane box. Vortech was > > including them with their supercharger kits, and nearly everyone I know > > with the Vortech has had their Crane box die and get replaced multiple > > times. Maybe it's been fixed in the new version, but it's happened too > > often for me to use one. My Accel 300+ ignition box has been reliable so > > far for 3+ years under the punishment of the oven known as my engine bay > > (recently melted most of the wires road racing due to radiant heat from > > the turbos). FWIW. > > > > Andris Skulte > > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > > > Found 'em, thanks. Specs look good; actually a couple > > of options > > > there. I don't have the option of editing the timing tables, since > > > the car is a '70 Cutlass about to receive a MegaSquirt. Maybe when > > > the MegaJolt comes down the pipe... the turbos won't happen for a > > > while yet. I'm thinking a Hi6R, then add the TRC2 retard control and > > > MAP sensor for boost retard when required. > > > > > > krw > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Kevin Wright" > > > >Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > > >> ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > > >> >I've never had any success with them. > > > >> >If it wasn't for NASCAR, I don't think you see them anywhere. > > > >> >Bruce > > > > > > > >> What would you recommend, than? I was going to go with a 6A BTM > > > >> (boost retard) when I turbo my Olds. Would Crane or some other > > > >> manufacturer be preferable. Anybody else make a boost retard unit? > > > >> I'll research the web, of course, but I was hoping someone had > > > >> experience/suggestions to make the job quicker. > > > >> Kevin Wright > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Kevin Wright > > > krwright@wankel.net > > > krwright@ev1.net > > > http://www.wankel.net/~krwright > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > ------------------ > > Andris Skulte > > Skulte Performance Designs > > http://www.skulte.com > > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 16:35:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:35:20 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:35:20 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A I'm working up a super charged EFI 377 sb chevy. Thinking about using HEI + MSD.(7 pin GM module) Any opinions on this or a better set up that won't make me remorgage the house? > > > ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > > >I'd seriously look to change a table for timing control. > > > >They do have a multistep retard box, that I've used without complaint. > > > >I have yet to have a Crane box fail. > > > >Bruce > > > > I just caught the above... I will never use a Crane box. Vortech was > > including them with their supercharger kits, and nearly everyone I know > > with the Vortech has had their Crane box die and get replaced multiple > > times. Maybe it's been fixed in the new version, but it's happened too > > often for me to use one. My Accel 300+ ignition box has been reliable so > > far for 3+ years under the punishment of the oven known as my engine bay > > (recently melted most of the wires road racing due to radiant heat from > > the turbos). FWIW. > > > > Andris Skulte > > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > > > Found 'em, thanks. Specs look good; actually a couple > > of options > > > there. I don't have the option of editing the timing tables, since > > > the car is a '70 Cutlass about to receive a MegaSquirt. Maybe when > > > the MegaJolt comes down the pipe... the turbos won't happen for a > > > while yet. I'm thinking a Hi6R, then add the TRC2 retard control and > > > MAP sensor for boost retard when required. > > > > > > krw > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Kevin Wright" > > > >Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > > >> ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > > >> >I've never had any success with them. > > > >> >If it wasn't for NASCAR, I don't think you see them anywhere. > > > >> >Bruce > > > > > > > >> What would you recommend, than? I was going to go with a 6A BTM > > > >> (boost retard) when I turbo my Olds. Would Crane or some other > > > >> manufacturer be preferable. Anybody else make a boost retard unit? > > > >> I'll research the web, of course, but I was hoping someone had > > > >> experience/suggestions to make the job quicker. > > > >> Kevin Wright > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Kevin Wright > > > krwright@wankel.net > > > krwright@ev1.net > > > http://www.wankel.net/~krwright > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > ------------------ > > Andris Skulte > > Skulte Performance Designs > > http://www.skulte.com > > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 16:40:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:40:51 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:40:51 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A FAST's eDIST. Need a distributor with a cam sync signal (MSD), and then 8 LS1 coils Bruce > I'm working up a super charged EFI 377 sb chevy. Thinking about using HEI + > MSD.(7 pin GM module) Any opinions on this or a better set up that won't > make me remorgage the house? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 16:58:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:58:44 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 16:58:44 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: eDist Info Here's a URL for the eDist http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory ID=1810607119 Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 17:13:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:13:17 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:13:17 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Air Temp effects on Atomization???? Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > One week later we bolted the converted intercooler (water/air) on > and ran the car. It seemed to buck a little and lay down as the > car went down the track. Air charge now only went from 80 deg to > 140 deg F from start to finish line. We lost about 1-2 tenths in > the 1/4 mile over the next few passes, from 7.60 to 7.80 It > slowed down. Yes I was scratching my head. > What do you think would cause the car not running correctly with > the colder air? From all we saw, we came to general conclusion > that at current fuel pressure, with the colder air, the fuel was > not atomizing efficiently. These were all assumptions. Higher pressure post-intercooler. The turbocharger is still putting out the same amount of air (I hope!) but the reduced temperature means that the air molecules are more tightly-packed; which is the same as saying it's at a higher pressure. You're injecting into a higher pressure manifold, so your fuel pressure needs to be increased to maintain the same type of flow through the injector. Can your fuel system do that? Increased pressure and flow? Have you checked manifold and fuel pressures? How about the pre-intercooler pressure to ensure that the turbo is still delivering as before? > Does this make sense, is it harder to burn the same (pressure) of > fuel in colder air? And would this require a harder spray to help > the fuel to atomize. If this is the case, then what is the > coldest you can get the air charge up to before you run into > problems. Atomization depends (in part) on the velocity of injection which is determined by the pressure differential between fuel and manifold pressure. Vapourization depends on temperature; a higher temperature results in more rapid vapourization and less risk of condensation on inlet surfaces, but the density of the charge falls off rapidly with rising temperature. I don't know what the optimum charge temperature would be for a turbo engine; VW tries to maintain an inlet temperature (pre- manifold) of between 25 and 30 degrees C in non-supercharged engines. Their supercharged G60 engine had an intercooler drop of 55 C from a nominal maximum inlet of 150 C. i.e. inlet temperatures as high as 100 C or thereabouts. > I was running the old PV=nrT formula, and trying to understand the > difference between air charge of 130 deg down track vs 265. You're taking energy out of the system at the intercooler so more complex thermodynamics apply. > Basically before and after the change. If you convert to Kelvin > and look at a constant Pressure, the Volume increases by about > 20%. I get 402 deg K vs 333 deg K at the same P, so 402/333 = > 1.20, now wouldn't this 20% increase in volume, provide for a 20% > increase in CFM which should add a decent amount of horsepower???? The volume doesn't change (much) when you change intercooler types; the pressure rises. The charge density increases; the mass of air within the volume. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 17:14:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:14:18 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:14:18 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Soldering Techniques David LaRoe tapped away at the keyboard with: > First reply from a person who really knows how to solder! Carter > uses a 15W heating element while I use a 12W when I can still find > them. In extremes, when soldering to a ground plane, I might go > as high as a 20W element. Soldering larger components (larger diameter leads; especially large-pin connectors) may require more power. A 50W iron, or one that can give you a "burst" of power when needed, is nice to have. Small iron is good for normal PCB work. Using two irons is no problem as you mount the components in a particular order anyway; connectors (unless they're going to get in the way), resistors, capacitors and finally semi's. Of course, one should inspect the PCB before mounting the components, checking for bridges and other defects. If in doubt, use a meter to check continuity/discontinuity. Do your best to check the values of components as you lay them out for assembly. Wash them if it's possible that they've been handled. This is nothing to do with hygiene; solder doesn't work well with oily surfaces. > For disordering, using a solder sucker is ok but it is a skill ^^^^^^^^^^^ Disorder happens all by itself. :-) > operation. Practice,, practice on surplus parts prior to > attempting your first real board. Also useful to practice soldering on another cheap kit; especially when you haven't done it in a while. > Soldering on harnesses is no longer allowed by Mil Spec or NASA. > Too much of a chance of have a cold solder joint or wicking of the > inserted wire. Acquire a good crimping tool for the size pins > you are using and do "pull tests" once in a while for your own > quality control. .............. Do it 100% of the time. Better that it comes apart during assembly than service. Although it looks odd, you can wear some disposable cotton gloves when handling the board and components to be soldered. You will lose some dexterity. The alternative is not to handle the surfaces to be soldered; using pliers to bend leads for insertion and tweezers to hold parts during soldering. > Dave > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Carter Shore" > To: [snip] -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rjs@bnl.gov Mon Dec 3 17:16:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:54:39 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 17:54:39 -0300 From: Ron Schroeder Subject: RE: 12 V regulator Hi, I would try a LT1086. It is a low dropout version of the LM317. If set to 12V out, the output will regulate with an input down to about 12.4V and then will be slightly less than 1/2V below the input all the way down to about 2 volts. Ron At 01:33 PM 12/3/01 -0500, you wrote: >Bob > >Let me re-state my requirement to clear up the request. > >The regulator needs to supply an Input voltage of 12 Volts (+/- 15%) to the >time delay relay. >And must be good for a normal 12 volt auto configuration, and also a 16 volt >racing battery application. > >So lets just say the regulator should be able to do the following: > >Input 12 - 18 V >Ouput 12 Volts (1ma to 500ma) > >If the input swings below 12 (ex 10.5) then it is ok for the output to also >swing to >10.5. This is in case the 12V car battery goes a little low due to some >problem. > >Steve > >-----Original Message----- From: rr [mailto:RRauscher@nni.com] >Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 12:22 PM >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: 12 V regulator > > > >With the input voltage requirements spanning above and below >the output voltage requirements, the only regulator that will >operate correctly is a switching buck-boost combination. > >BobR. > > >Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > >> I have a requirement for 12 V regulation (+/- 15% or a range of 10.2 to >13.8 >> volts). >> >> My application is driving several 12V time delay relays (TDRs) and I am >> building it to work in a drag car that can be powered with 12v + >Alternator >> or a 16V system. Keep in mind that with the 16V system, the battery >charger >> can put over 18V's. >> >> The TDRs pull as low as 1 ma each when in the off state, and as high as >200 >> ma each when the relay is triggered. So lets just say my requirements >for >> a regulator are: >> >> Input Voltage: 10v to 20v >> Output Voltage: 12v (+/- 15%) >> Output Current: 1mA to 500mA >> >> I tried to use a 12V regulator purchased from Digikey just as a test and >it >> seems to crap out at the lower current levels (I don't have the part >number >> handy, its at home, and this was a project I was working on over a year >ago, >> something just stirred up my memory that I never was able to resolve this. >> Originally I was not aware of the lower current levels, so the regulator I >> purchased worked in the 100ma range, but not at lower (1ma) range. >> >> Could someone recommend a very reliable 12V regulator that I can use to >meet >> my needs. >> >> As a work around I built my own regulator with a 12 V zener, resistor and >> 2n2222 transistor that seems to work, however, I am concerned about the >> reliability and heat issues with the 2n2222. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Steve F >> >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > Ron Schroeder WD8CDH E. E. S. wd8cdh@bnl.gov rjs@bnl.gov 631 344-4561 Day 631 286-5677 Nite ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Mon Dec 3 19:17:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:18:23 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 19:18:23 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: 12 V regulator On Sat, 1 Dec 2001 17:53:37 -0600 bcroe@juno.com writes: > This may be a bit late, but trying to regulate 12V out > with 10V in is doing it the hard way. I would use some > CD4541 chips as adjustable timers, very happy at > 5V and well under a $1. No problem with heat either. > They could drive logic FETs which could drive regular > 12V relays unregulated. > > Bruce Roe > > On Thu, 29 Nov 2001 10:11:37 -0500 Steve.Flanagan > @VerizonWireless.com writes: > > I have a requirement for 12 V regulation (+/- 15% or > > a range of 10.2 to 13.8 volts). > > > > My application is driving several 12V time delay relays > > (TDRs) and I am building it to work in a drag car that > > can be powered with 12v + Alternator or a 16V system. > > Keep in mind that with the 16V system, the battery > > charger can put over 18V's. > > > > The TDRs pull as low as 1 ma each when in the off state, > > and as high as 200 ma each when the relay is triggered. > > So lets just say my requirements for a regulator are: > > > > Input Voltage: 10v to 20v > > Output Voltage: 12v (+/- 15%) > > Output Current: 1mA to 500mA > > > > I tried to use a 12V regulator purchased from Digikey just > > as a test and it seems to crap out at the lower current levels > > (I don't have the part number handy, its at home, and this > > was a project I was working on over a year ago, something > > just stirred up my memory that I never was able to resolve > > this. Originally I was not aware of the lower current levels, > > so the regulator I purchased worked in the 100ma range, > > but not at lower (1ma) range. > > > > Could someone recommend a very reliable 12V regulator > > that I can use to meet my needs. > > > > As a work around I built my own regulator with a 12 V zener, > > resistor and 2n2222 transistor that seems to work, > > however, I am concerned about the reliability and heat > > issues with the 2n2222. > > > > > Steve F ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From f_wilk@hotmail.com Mon Dec 3 19:02:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:19:25 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:19:25 -0300 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? FR Wilk ___________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. I > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware for > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his Firebird. > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess I'm > looking for similar equipment. > > Thanks for any help! > > -David > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Eric.Deslauriers@oracle.com Mon Dec 3 19:41:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:43:00 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:43:00 -0300 From: Eric Deslauriers MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A I love my MSD6A and I hate every MSD coil I've bought. I went through 4 MSD coils in my 93 Suburban in under 7 months. The stock GM coil (with 230K miles) continues to survive just fine w/ & w/o the 6A. I've had the 6A over 2 years now and still like it. I started carrying the stock coil in the back of the truck since I KNEW the MSD coil would fail (and soon!). MSD is always real nice about replacing it - after I go to where the truck is usually stuck with a no-start condition (always in the middle of the weekday too), take out the MSD coil, put the stock coil in, call them for an RMA#, put it in a box, take it to a shipping joint, pay shipping. Then I get it back, take the stock one out, put the new MSD one in... you get the picture. I think 4 out of 4 makes a bold statement. My $0.02 Eric D skulte wrote: > > On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Kevin Wright wrote: > > > ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > >I'd seriously look to change a table for timing control. > > >They do have a multistep retard box, that I've used without complaint. > > >I have yet to have a Crane box fail. > > >Bruce > > I just caught the above... I will never use a Crane box. Vortech was > including them with their supercharger kits, and nearly everyone I know > with the Vortech has had their Crane box die and get replaced multiple > times. Maybe it's been fixed in the new version, but it's happened too > often for me to use one. My Accel 300+ ignition box has been reliable so > far for 3+ years under the punishment of the oven known as my engine bay > (recently melted most of the wires road racing due to radiant heat from > the turbos). FWIW. > > Andris Skulte > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > Found 'em, thanks. Specs look good; actually a couple > of options > > there. I don't have the option of editing the timing tables, since > > the car is a '70 Cutlass about to receive a MegaSquirt. Maybe when > > the MegaJolt comes down the pipe... the turbos won't happen for a > > while yet. I'm thinking a Hi6R, then add the TRC2 retard control and > > MAP sensor for boost retard when required. > > > > krw > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Kevin Wright" > > >Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > >> ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > >> >I've never had any success with them. > > >> >If it wasn't for NASCAR, I don't think you see them anywhere. > > >> >Bruce > > > > > >> What would you recommend, than? I was going to go with a 6A BTM > > >> (boost retard) when I turbo my Olds. Would Crane or some other > > >> manufacturer be preferable. Anybody else make a boost retard unit? > > >> I'll research the web, of course, but I was hoping someone had > > >> experience/suggestions to make the job quicker. > > >> Kevin Wright > > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > -- > > Kevin Wright > > krwright@wankel.net > > krwright@ev1.net > > http://www.wankel.net/~krwright > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > http://www.skulte.com > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From davidmga@netzero.net Mon Dec 3 20:19:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:45:36 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:45:36 -0300 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU My car has the Jetronic Turbo. Thanks for any help! -David -----Original Message----- From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? FR Wilk ___________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. I > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware for > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his Firebird. > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess I'm > looking for similar equipment. > > Thanks for any help! > > -David > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 20:49:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:49:53 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 20:49:53 -0800 From: "Kris Weldy" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: test Test ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Mon Dec 3 20:40:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:12:00 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:12:00 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [ADMIN] @home addresses I'll be unsubscribing all @home addresses later today. If you aren't affected by the excite debacle, you will have to resubscribe. There are too many @home addresses bouncing at the moment. Orin, list admin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 21:33:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:33:09 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:33:09 -0800 From: john MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: test testicle -- John McGuire www.jbstreetrods.com john@jbstreetrods.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Mon Dec 3 21:35:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:51:16 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:51:16 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A I'm working up a super charged EFI 377 sb chevy. Thinking about using HEI + MSD.(7 pin GM module) Any opinions on this or a better set up that won't make me remorgage the house? > > > ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > > >I'd seriously look to change a table for timing control. > > > >They do have a multistep retard box, that I've used without complaint. > > > >I have yet to have a Crane box fail. > > > >Bruce > > > > I just caught the above... I will never use a Crane box. Vortech was > > including them with their supercharger kits, and nearly everyone I know > > with the Vortech has had their Crane box die and get replaced multiple > > times. Maybe it's been fixed in the new version, but it's happened too > > often for me to use one. My Accel 300+ ignition box has been reliable so > > far for 3+ years under the punishment of the oven known as my engine bay > > (recently melted most of the wires road racing due to radiant heat from > > the turbos). FWIW. > > > > Andris Skulte > > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > > > Found 'em, thanks. Specs look good; actually a couple > > of options > > > there. I don't have the option of editing the timing tables, since > > > the car is a '70 Cutlass about to receive a MegaSquirt. Maybe when > > > the MegaJolt comes down the pipe... the turbos won't happen for a > > > while yet. I'm thinking a Hi6R, then add the TRC2 retard control and > > > MAP sensor for boost retard when required. > > > > > > krw > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Kevin Wright" > > > >Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > > >> ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > > >> >I've never had any success with them. > > > >> >If it wasn't for NASCAR, I don't think you see them anywhere. > > > >> >Bruce > > > > > > > >> What would you recommend, than? I was going to go with a 6A BTM > > > >> (boost retard) when I turbo my Olds. Would Crane or some other > > > >> manufacturer be preferable. Anybody else make a boost retard unit? > > > >> I'll research the web, of course, but I was hoping someone had > > > >> experience/suggestions to make the job quicker. > > > >> Kevin Wright > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Kevin Wright > > > krwright@wankel.net > > > krwright@ev1.net > > > http://www.wankel.net/~krwright > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > ------------------ > > Andris Skulte > > Skulte Performance Designs > > http://www.skulte.com > > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From purplemonster@ntlworld.com Mon Dec 3 21:19:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:51:57 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 21:51:57 -0300 From: "purplemonster" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A Thank u for you input Eric, what coil might you be using,i got the msd2( that make any sense) ,ALL i have to do know is find one? whats the going price for s second hand one and a new one? Thanks alot Robert WWW.mentalminis.com Email: mentalminis@ntlworld.com Email: purplemonster@ntlworld.com Mini_hybrids group,owner and moderator SIMPLE DIGITAL SYSTEMS -SIMPLY THE BEST ( Engine management systems ) sdsefi-subscribe@yahoogroups.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Deslauriers" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 10:41 PM Subject: Re: MSD 6A > I love my MSD6A and I hate every MSD coil I've bought. I went through 4 > MSD coils in my 93 Suburban in under 7 months. The stock GM coil (with > 230K miles) continues to survive just fine w/ & w/o the 6A. > > I've had the 6A over 2 years now and still like it. > > I started carrying the stock coil in the back of the truck since I KNEW > the MSD coil would fail (and soon!). > > MSD is always real nice about replacing it - after I go to where the > truck is usually stuck with a no-start condition (always in the middle > of the weekday too), take out the MSD coil, put the stock coil in, call > them for an RMA#, put it in a box, take it to a shipping joint, pay > shipping. Then I get it back, take the stock one out, put the new MSD > one in... you get the picture. > > I think 4 out of 4 makes a bold statement. > > My $0.02 > > Eric D > > skulte wrote: > > > > On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Kevin Wright wrote: > > > > > ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > > >I'd seriously look to change a table for timing control. > > > >They do have a multistep retard box, that I've used without complaint. > > > >I have yet to have a Crane box fail. > > > >Bruce > > > > I just caught the above... I will never use a Crane box. Vortech was > > including them with their supercharger kits, and nearly everyone I know > > with the Vortech has had their Crane box die and get replaced multiple > > times. Maybe it's been fixed in the new version, but it's happened too > > often for me to use one. My Accel 300+ ignition box has been reliable so > > far for 3+ years under the punishment of the oven known as my engine bay > > (recently melted most of the wires road racing due to radiant heat from > > the turbos). FWIW. > > > > Andris Skulte > > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > > > Found 'em, thanks. Specs look good; actually a couple > > of options > > > there. I don't have the option of editing the timing tables, since > > > the car is a '70 Cutlass about to receive a MegaSquirt. Maybe when > > > the MegaJolt comes down the pipe... the turbos won't happen for a > > > while yet. I'm thinking a Hi6R, then add the TRC2 retard control and > > > MAP sensor for boost retard when required. > > > > > > krw > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Kevin Wright" > > > >Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > > >> ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > > >> >I've never had any success with them. > > > >> >If it wasn't for NASCAR, I don't think you see them anywhere. > > > >> >Bruce > > > > > > > >> What would you recommend, than? I was going to go with a 6A BTM > > > >> (boost retard) when I turbo my Olds. Would Crane or some other > > > >> manufacturer be preferable. Anybody else make a boost retard unit? > > > >> I'll research the web, of course, but I was hoping someone had > > > >> experience/suggestions to make the job quicker. > > > >> Kevin Wright > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Kevin Wright > > > krwright@wankel.net > > > krwright@ev1.net > > > http://www.wankel.net/~krwright > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > ------------------ > > Andris Skulte > > Skulte Performance Designs > > http://www.skulte.com > > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 3 21:40:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:00:35 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:00:35 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A FAST's eDIST. Need a distributor with a cam sync signal (MSD), and then 8 LS1 coils Bruce > I'm working up a super charged EFI 377 sb chevy. Thinking about using HEI + > MSD.(7 pin GM module) Any opinions on this or a better set up that won't > make me remorgage the house? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 3 21:58:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:23:38 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:23:38 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: eDist Info Here's a URL for the eDist http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory ID=1810607119 Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Nov 30 22:32:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:29:03 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:29:03 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Air Temp effects on Atomization???? Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > One week later we bolted the converted intercooler (water/air) on > and ran the car. It seemed to buck a little and lay down as the > car went down the track. Air charge now only went from 80 deg to > 140 deg F from start to finish line. We lost about 1-2 tenths in > the 1/4 mile over the next few passes, from 7.60 to 7.80 It > slowed down. Yes I was scratching my head. > What do you think would cause the car not running correctly with > the colder air? From all we saw, we came to general conclusion > that at current fuel pressure, with the colder air, the fuel was > not atomizing efficiently. These were all assumptions. Higher pressure post-intercooler. The turbocharger is still putting out the same amount of air (I hope!) but the reduced temperature means that the air molecules are more tightly-packed; which is the same as saying it's at a higher pressure. You're injecting into a higher pressure manifold, so your fuel pressure needs to be increased to maintain the same type of flow through the injector. Can your fuel system do that? Increased pressure and flow? Have you checked manifold and fuel pressures? How about the pre-intercooler pressure to ensure that the turbo is still delivering as before? > Does this make sense, is it harder to burn the same (pressure) of > fuel in colder air? And would this require a harder spray to help > the fuel to atomize. If this is the case, then what is the > coldest you can get the air charge up to before you run into > problems. Atomization depends (in part) on the velocity of injection which is determined by the pressure differential between fuel and manifold pressure. Vapourization depends on temperature; a higher temperature results in more rapid vapourization and less risk of condensation on inlet surfaces, but the density of the charge falls off rapidly with rising temperature. I don't know what the optimum charge temperature would be for a turbo engine; VW tries to maintain an inlet temperature (pre- manifold) of between 25 and 30 degrees C in non-supercharged engines. Their supercharged G60 engine had an intercooler drop of 55 C from a nominal maximum inlet of 150 C. i.e. inlet temperatures as high as 100 C or thereabouts. > I was running the old PV=nrT formula, and trying to understand the > difference between air charge of 130 deg down track vs 265. You're taking energy out of the system at the intercooler so more complex thermodynamics apply. > Basically before and after the change. If you convert to Kelvin > and look at a constant Pressure, the Volume increases by about > 20%. I get 402 deg K vs 333 deg K at the same P, so 402/333 = > 1.20, now wouldn't this 20% increase in volume, provide for a 20% > increase in CFM which should add a decent amount of horsepower???? The volume doesn't change (much) when you change intercooler types; the pressure rises. The charge density increases; the mass of air within the volume. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Nov 28 21:27:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:30:11 -0300 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:30:11 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Soldering Techniques David LaRoe tapped away at the keyboard with: > First reply from a person who really knows how to solder! Carter > uses a 15W heating element while I use a 12W when I can still find > them. In extremes, when soldering to a ground plane, I might go > as high as a 20W element. Soldering larger components (larger diameter leads; especially large-pin connectors) may require more power. A 50W iron, or one that can give you a "burst" of power when needed, is nice to have. Small iron is good for normal PCB work. Using two irons is no problem as you mount the components in a particular order anyway; connectors (unless they're going to get in the way), resistors, capacitors and finally semi's. Of course, one should inspect the PCB before mounting the components, checking for bridges and other defects. If in doubt, use a meter to check continuity/discontinuity. Do your best to check the values of components as you lay them out for assembly. Wash them if it's possible that they've been handled. This is nothing to do with hygiene; solder doesn't work well with oily surfaces. > For disordering, using a solder sucker is ok but it is a skill ^^^^^^^^^^^ Disorder happens all by itself. :-) > operation. Practice,, practice on surplus parts prior to > attempting your first real board. Also useful to practice soldering on another cheap kit; especially when you haven't done it in a while. > Soldering on harnesses is no longer allowed by Mil Spec or NASA. > Too much of a chance of have a cold solder joint or wicking of the > inserted wire. Acquire a good crimping tool for the size pins > you are using and do "pull tests" once in a while for your own > quality control. .............. Do it 100% of the time. Better that it comes apart during assembly than service. Although it looks odd, you can wear some disposable cotton gloves when handling the board and components to be soldered. You will lose some dexterity. The alternative is not to handle the surfaces to be soldered; using pliers to bend leads for insertion and tweezers to hold parts during soldering. > Dave > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Carter Shore" > To: [snip] -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 3 22:47:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:47:42 -0800 Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 22:47:42 -0800 From: "Tom Cheung" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: copy eproms can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 00:05:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:05:23 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 00:05:23 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two manifolds at the intercooler per side. TB IC intake runners |---------|------------| | || |------------| -------| || | -> / || |------------| -------| || |------------| | || | | || |------------| |---------|------------| -Is there any downside of this setup ? -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including intercooler ? Any help would be appreciated. Bernd ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 01:15:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:15:43 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:15:43 -0800 From: "Richard M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: copy eproms Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it may not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and upper 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, irrespective of what state the most significant address bit is in. Regards Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Cheung To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM Subject: copy eproms > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 01:40:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:40:11 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 01:40:11 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from > Spearco directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be > upstream of the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the > turbo in a straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to > the throttle body. I will only need one hose (turbo has a flange > at the outlet). This setup will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m > piping, three silicone hoses and two manifolds at the intercooler > per side. > TB IC intake runners > |---------|------------| > | || |------------| > -------| || | > -> / || |------------| > -------| || |------------| > | || | > | || |------------| > |---------|------------| > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? Your throttle response is going to suck - no pun intended. Can't you put throttles on the end of the runners; one per runner? These can be "ganged" using a linkage inside the plenum to reduce the number of seals required to just one (possibly just a Bowden cable entry). Integrating the intercooler with the plenum will probably require a plenum split anyway - at least during construction. Use that split to construct/integrate the throttles. _________ ____________. | / | | || +------------+ -------+ || |____________. -> || / | -------+ || +------------+ | || |____________. | || / | |_________+------------+ Don't try to run the IC piping through the split if it's a permanent one. Keep the sealing surfaces of the split simple. A flange with o-ring groove is reliable - but watch the temperature and use a suitable o-ring material. The flange could also be sealed with other materials at a pinch. Keep it flat and minimise the stresses carried by the flange bolts. > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > intercooler ? Without seeing how much of an obstruction the IC presents; the total plenum volume is between the throttle and the intake valve - this volume is used when calculating some resonance modes. Depending on why you're calculating the volume, the plenum volume could also be between the end of the inlet runner(s) and the throttle valve. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From volvo4life@attbi.com Tue Dec 4 01:53:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 02:14:09 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 02:14:09 -0300 From: "Kris Weldy" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: test Test ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From john@jbstreetrods.com Tue Dec 4 02:34:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 02:51:16 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 02:51:16 -0300 From: john MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: test testicle -- John McGuire www.jbstreetrods.com john@jbstreetrods.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 03:02:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 03:02:32 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 03:02:32 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Hello Bernd, the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so throttle response should become even better. I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. Best regards, Bernd Rausch -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 10:40 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from > Spearco directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be > upstream of the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the > turbo in a straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to > the throttle body. I will only need one hose (turbo has a flange > at the outlet). This setup will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m > piping, three silicone hoses and two manifolds at the intercooler > per side. > TB IC intake runners > |---------|------------| > | || |------------| > -------| || | > -> / || |------------| > -------| || |------------| > | || | > | || |------------| > |---------|------------| > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? Your throttle response is going to suck - no pun intended. Can't you put throttles on the end of the runners; one per runner? These can be "ganged" using a linkage inside the plenum to reduce the number of seals required to just one (possibly just a Bowden cable entry). Integrating the intercooler with the plenum will probably require a plenum split anyway - at least during construction. Use that split to construct/integrate the throttles. _________ ____________. | / | | || +------------+ -------+ || |____________. -> || / | -------+ || +------------+ | || |____________. | || / | |_________+------------+ Don't try to run the IC piping through the split if it's a permanent one. Keep the sealing surfaces of the split simple. A flange with o-ring groove is reliable - but watch the temperature and use a suitable o-ring material. The flange could also be sealed with other materials at a pinch. Keep it flat and minimise the stresses carried by the flange bolts. > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > intercooler ? Without seeing how much of an obstruction the IC presents; the total plenum volume is between the throttle and the intake valve - this volume is used when calculating some resonance modes. Depending on why you're calculating the volume, the plenum volume could also be between the end of the inlet runner(s) and the throttle valve. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 04:08:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:08:13 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:08:13 -0800 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Hi, I see upsides and downsides with that setup. Distribution will be great, the IC element will equalize the air flow in the plenum. Throttle response will not be that great but I wouldn't worry to much about that. There is an Alfa guy on the list that has a similar setup. Bends suck, if you can get rid of one that is great and five... In this case I think that you should make the plemum volume as small as possible but that you should have 1X engine displacement on the cylinder head side of the IC. In any case it will be a big plenum. Jörgen Karlsson Gothenburg, Sweden. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From tomcheung@telus.net Tue Dec 4 03:49:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:16:46 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:16:46 -0300 From: "Tom Cheung" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: copy eproms can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 04:22:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:22:20 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 04:22:20 -0800 From: Shane Moseley MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info Thanks for the link. Looks interesting. Could this be the same guys who created the technology behind SEFI8LO and then sold it to FelPro Performance? Ashland, MS is a very, very small town. A short drive from where I'm at too (Memphis). Might have to drive down there and check it out. Will keep my eye on them. Anyone else have info on this company or its products? Latr, Shane Bruce wrote: > Here's a URL for the eDist > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 05:15:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 05:15:34 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 05:15:34 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small to be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it mounts, and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the manifold. For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to draw against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to **straighten** the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and have this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather turbulent chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but they are extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that is about equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge plenum for any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they use coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my GN , and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the 3" are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler ultimate flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an automatic trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque since converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather allowing the engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to best use the above. At least that's the way I'm headed. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rausch, Bernd" To: "Rausch, Bernd" ; Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:04 AM Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of the > intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt > line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I will > only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will > save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > TB IC intake runners > |---------|------------| > | || |------------| > -------| || | > -> / || |------------| > -------| || |------------| > | || | > | || |------------| > |---------|------------| > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > intercooler ? > > > Any help would be appreciated. > Bernd > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 05:33:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 05:33:32 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 05:33:32 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers It's normally from the TB, but in your case the I/C will be your *choke* point. So I'd say only the area below the I/C and not including the runners would be your plenum area. BUT, even that will be inaccurate, since so much of the air will be having to bend with that much more inertia to it. You probably have great distribution, but limited total flow. The whole idea (at least in my mind) is to have as large as area for any opening valve can open to. All your wave tuning and related theory is grand for N/A and low boost situations, when you starting to get serious with HP, you want even distribution, the boost is going to take care of your cylinder filling. If you need an incredible amount of tip in response then you'll want to optimize the runners cross sectional area, lenght and get into the wave tuning of things. Also,, a higher compression ratio, and begin trading in all you HP generating strategies. In looking at some late model race car plenums the are large ugly things. they are worried more about volume, then the wave motion thru the plenum, at least the way it looks to me. Bruce All this talk about waves, has the lil guys yelling surfs up, and checking the tire inflation on the boat trailer. From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > intercooler ? > Without seeing how much of an obstruction the IC presents; the total > plenum volume is between the throttle and the intake valve - this > volume is used when calculating some resonance modes. Depending on > why you're calculating the volume, the plenum volume could also be > between the end of the inlet runner(s) and the throttle valve. > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Tue Dec 4 05:04:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 05:34:33 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 05:34:33 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two manifolds at the intercooler per side. TB IC intake runners |---------|------------| | || |------------| -------| || | -> / || |------------| -------| || |------------| | || | | || |------------| |---------|------------| -Is there any downside of this setup ? -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including intercooler ? Any help would be appreciated. Bernd ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 05:54:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 05:54:38 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 05:54:38 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Racelogic Emulator was RE: Honda ecm..hondata ANyone have any idea how to handle the checksums or any "protection" of the memory on the newer ECU's? I am trying to find out what memory chip the later ECU's I want to mess with are, to see if the racelogic emulator can handle what I am trying to do... Also, what type of equipment is required, and how much does it cost, to program the 27c256 eprom and the later flashproms? Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Ioannis Andrianakis > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 4:32 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Racelogic Emulator was RE: Honda ecm..hondata > > > It will handle emulation of 23c32-27c1024 eproms, > 28/29f010-28/29f040 and > 29f200 and 29f400 flashproms. It will not program the newest > ecus through > the diagnostic port. It will work only if you have direct > access to the > memory to unsolder it and connect the emulator in its place. > Dim Sport has > a unit for some car models to program through the diagnostic port. > > Ioannis Andrianakis > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Stephen Andersen > To: > Sent: 27 Íïåìâñßïõ 2001 04:05 > Subject: Racelogic Emulator was RE: Honda ecm..hondata > > > Does the racelogic emulator, or the other one you listed, > have the capability handle later model OBDII electronics > as well as the "older" EPROM type ECU's? > > If so, can the OBDII models flash program? > > Thanks, > Steve > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 06:00:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:00:31 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:00:31 -0800 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce wrote: > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too > small to be > effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing the > surface area of the piping for heat transfer. I don't agree about the size of the intercooler, check the efficiency of the stock syclone intecooler when it is used with a good heat exchanger and a pump that runs all the time. All cars that I have worked with has had problems with the pipes actually heating the charge, for me it is obvious to use pipes that isolate the charge from the hot under hood air. Stainless steel and plastic are my favorites. > With the in plenum cooler, > you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it > mounts, and > you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the > manifold. I forgot to mention that, it is very important to isolate the plenum. The plenum should be thermally isolated from the head, silicone hoses can be used to connect the separate runners to the plenum. This will be a massive piece and it will probably have to be removed for any work in the engine compartment. Stainless steel runners is also a good option. Isolation of the intake from the engine is good on all port injected cars. It is a good idea to isolate it from the air in the engine compartment too. As mentioned the usable plenum will start after the intercooler. I hope this come out right: ------------------------- TB |IC | | | | \ / | ------------------------- | | | | ______________/ / HEAD _______________/ Jörgen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 06:21:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:21:39 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:21:39 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Hello Bruce, thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is really welcome. But I disagree in several points: I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will need about 800-850cfm for 650hp. With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder head. I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement of the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to much. Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it is the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to the manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the plenum)! Best regards, Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 14:15 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small to be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it mounts, and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the manifold. For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to draw against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to **straighten** the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and have this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather turbulent chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but they are extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that is about equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge plenum for any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they use coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my GN , and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the 3" are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler ultimate flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an automatic trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque since converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather allowing the engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to best use the above. At least that's the way I'm headed. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rausch, Bernd" To: "Rausch, Bernd" ; Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:04 AM Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of the > intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt > line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I will > only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will > save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > TB IC intake runners > |---------|------------| > | || |------------| > -------| || | > -> / || |------------| > -------| || |------------| > | || | > | || |------------| > |---------|------------| > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > intercooler ? > > > Any help would be appreciated. > Bernd > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 06:24:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:24:31 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:24:31 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Jörgen Karlsson" Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce wrote: > > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too > > small to be > > effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing the > > surface area of the piping for heat transfer. > I don't agree about the size of the intercooler, check the efficiency of the > stock syclone intecooler when it is used with a good heat exchanger and a > pump that runs all the time. All cars that I have worked with has had > problems with the pipes actually heating the charge, for me it is obvious to > use pipes that isolate the charge from the hot under hood air. Stainless > steel and plastic are my favorites. Look at the room they had to package things in. For the added weight and complexity, I'd say a air to air as in the GNs was a much better solution. Once you heat soak a syclone, your done for a while, there is just so much more mass with an air to water system to cool off. Again, with way things are with some engine compartments, there is so little air flow thru them, that the plumbing in that case might heat soak. > > With the in plenum cooler, > > you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it > > mounts, and > > you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the > > manifold. > I forgot to mention that, it is very important to isolate the plenum. The > plenum should be thermally isolated from the head, silicone hoses can be > used to connect the separate runners to the plenum. This will be a massive > piece and it will probably have to be removed for any work in the engine > compartment. Stainless steel runners is also a good option. Isolation of the > intake from the engine is good on all port injected cars. It is a good idea > to isolate it from the air in the engine compartment too. Again, your talking specifics to the syclones. I can draw under hood air, and do just fine. Isolating things can be taken to the point of no return. While all that will generate in theory be really nice, alot of it loses it's meaning in day to day use, now if your branching off into specific race car duty, then that is another case. > As mentioned the usable plenum will start after the intercooler. > > I hope this come out right: > > ------------------------- > TB |IC | | > | | \ / | > ------------------------- > | | > | | > ______________/ / > HEAD _______________/ > > Jörgen > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From richm@ntlworld.com Tue Dec 4 06:15:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:36:20 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:36:20 -0300 From: "Richard M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: copy eproms Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it may not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and upper 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, irrespective of what state the most significant address bit is in. Regards Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Cheung To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM Subject: copy eproms > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 06:39:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:39:24 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:39:24 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Rausch, Bernd" Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is > really welcome. But I disagree in several points: > I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), > this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will need > about 800-850cfm for 650hp. > With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC > area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your > intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to > insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder head. You going to use a total of 4.5x9x10 for cooling an engine of 650 HP?. Is this a dragster, or just for really short bursts of speed?. what are your plans for cooling the liquid?. CF for a large ehough plenum to hold all this is going to need some serious ribbing to prevent a sneeze from rupturing it. > I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement of > the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to > much. Your going to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to bend immediately?. Ugh, OK, I don't see it happening that way, but it's your decision. > Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it is > the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup > (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the > intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to the > manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the > plenum)! Me thinks your toooo concerned about an elbow. Is it some really small radius?. Again, I think your thinking in N/A terms, not T/C Bruce > Best regards, > Bernd > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small to > be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing > the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum > cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it mounts, > and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the manifold. > For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to draw > against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to **straighten** > the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and have > this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather turbulent > chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as > International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but they are > extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that is about > equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge plenum for > any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they use > coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. > I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. > For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. > I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my GN, > and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the 3" > are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler ultimate > flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an automatic > trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque since > converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather allowing the > engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. > Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be > fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to best use the > above. At least that's the way I'm headed. > Bruce > From: "Rausch, Bernd" br@rnt.de > Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of > the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt > > line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I > will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will > > save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > > > TB IC intake runners > > |---------|------------| > > | || |------------| > > -------| || | > > -> / || |------------| > > -------| || |------------| > > | || | > > | || |------------| > > |---------|------------| > > > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > intercooler ? > > Any help would be appreciated. > > Bernd > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 06:46:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:46:43 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 06:46:43 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info Ashland seems to be the distribution point. I *think* all the engineering and R+D is done in Michigan. It's FAST now rather then Speedpro that was Felpro. The outfit in Ashland I think is actually TCI, and they are just a warehousing facility, an eye ball on whats going on there would be an interesting development Bruce From: "Shane Moseley" Subject: Re: eDist Info > Thanks for the link. Looks interesting. Could this be the same guys who > created the technology behind SEFI8LO and then sold it to FelPro Performance? > Ashland, MS is a very, very small town. A short drive from where I'm at too > (Memphis). Might have to drive down there and check it out. Will keep my eye > on them. > Anyone else have info on this company or its products? > Latr, > Shane > Bruce wrote: > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory > > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 4 06:39:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:07:50 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:07:50 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from > Spearco directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be > upstream of the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the > turbo in a straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to > the throttle body. I will only need one hose (turbo has a flange > at the outlet). This setup will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m > piping, three silicone hoses and two manifolds at the intercooler > per side. > TB IC intake runners > |---------|------------| > | || |------------| > -------| || | > -> / || |------------| > -------| || |------------| > | || | > | || |------------| > |---------|------------| > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? Your throttle response is going to suck - no pun intended. Can't you put throttles on the end of the runners; one per runner? These can be "ganged" using a linkage inside the plenum to reduce the number of seals required to just one (possibly just a Bowden cable entry). Integrating the intercooler with the plenum will probably require a plenum split anyway - at least during construction. Use that split to construct/integrate the throttles. _________ ____________. | / | | || +------------+ -------+ || |____________. -> || / | -------+ || +------------+ | || |____________. | || / | |_________+------------+ Don't try to run the IC piping through the split if it's a permanent one. Keep the sealing surfaces of the split simple. A flange with o-ring groove is reliable - but watch the temperature and use a suitable o-ring material. The flange could also be sealed with other materials at a pinch. Keep it flat and minimise the stresses carried by the flange bolts. > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > intercooler ? Without seeing how much of an obstruction the IC presents; the total plenum volume is between the throttle and the intake valve - this volume is used when calculating some resonance modes. Depending on why you're calculating the volume, the plenum volume could also be between the end of the inlet runner(s) and the throttle valve. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 07:08:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:08:36 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 07:08:36 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce, I have the information on intercooler size from http://www.spearcointercoolers.com. The core is 2-171. This is a road/track car, and I am going to use two big radiators(12"x16") to cool the liquid. The plenum will be made of aluminium, only the runners will be CF. I do not want to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to bend immediately. This is with the stock plenum without intercooler. My plenum will be straight, like on my ascii drawing below. And I do not see flow in a turbocharged application very different from a n/a. The air is even denser in a turbo application, so flow losses are higher. Of course you can crank up the boost, but you are loosing efficiency and going to have more backpressure this way. Best regards, Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 15:39 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Rausch, Bernd" Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is > really welcome. But I disagree in several points: > I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), > this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will need > about 800-850cfm for 650hp. > With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC > area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your > intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to > insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder head. You going to use a total of 4.5x9x10 for cooling an engine of 650 HP?. Is this a dragster, or just for really short bursts of speed?. what are your plans for cooling the liquid?. CF for a large ehough plenum to hold all this is going to need some serious ribbing to prevent a sneeze from rupturing it. > I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement of > the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to > much. Your going to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to bend immediately?. Ugh, OK, I don't see it happening that way, but it's your decision. > Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it is > the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup > (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the > intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to the > manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the > plenum)! Me thinks your toooo concerned about an elbow. Is it some really small radius?. Again, I think your thinking in N/A terms, not T/C Bruce > Best regards, > Bernd > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small to > be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing > the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum > cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it mounts, > and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the manifold. > For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to draw > against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to **straighten** > the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and have > this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather turbulent > chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as > International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but they are > extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that is about > equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge plenum for > any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they use > coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. > I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. > For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. > I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my GN, > and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the 3" > are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler ultimate > flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an automatic > trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque since > converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather allowing the > engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. > Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be > fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to best use the > above. At least that's the way I'm headed. > Bruce > From: "Rausch, Bernd" br@rnt.de > Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of > the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt > > line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I > will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will > > save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > > > TB IC intake runners > > |---------|------------| > > | || |------------| > > -------| || | > > -> / || |------------| > > -------| || |------------| > > | || | > > | || |------------| > > |---------|------------| > > > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > intercooler ? > > Any help would be appreciated. > > Bernd > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 08:13:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:13:01 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:13:01 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will > be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. In that case, having separate throttles is even more attractive. > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts > throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the > throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so > throttle response should become even better. The plenum volume; that between the throttle valve and the intake valve determines how quickly a pressure change can occur to change airflow. > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or where there's no common plenum. I envisage a common throttle plate with separate butterflies on a common shaft (per side in a Vee engine). It's simple machining to bore some suitable holes through a sandwich of two long aluminium plates, machine a shaft and to make some butterflies. The throttle cable enters what is the post-IC distribution box and pulls on a lever attached to the butterfly shaft. A spring counters the cable to close the butterflies. If the runners leave at opposite sides of the air distribution box, then a relay link can mirror the motion for an identical setup of throttles on the opposite side. There are only two throttle bodies; each with 3 butterflies on a common shaft. A competent machinist can probably make all the throttle parts in less than a day using a lathe and bench drill in addition to some hand tools. A milling machine would be useful but not essential. Especially useful for creating the lip against which the butterflies close on each half of the throttle plate sandwich, and for chasing a groove for the butterfly shaft and its bushes. (Don't skimp on the bushes - the shaft has to be quite thin in places and could be bent by a backfire, causing it to stick subsequently.) Each throttle plate sandwich, complete with butterflies and spring can be held together with screws through one plate tapped into the other. Don't let the price of commercial units fool you into thinking the parts are hard to make. If you want to, you can attach the spigots for the inlet runners directly to the throttle plates and use the plates as a side of the distribution box. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Tue Dec 4 08:01:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:33:20 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:33:20 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Hello Bernd, the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so throttle response should become even better. I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. Best regards, Bernd Rausch -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 10:40 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from > Spearco directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be > upstream of the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the > turbo in a straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to > the throttle body. I will only need one hose (turbo has a flange > at the outlet). This setup will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m > piping, three silicone hoses and two manifolds at the intercooler > per side. > TB IC intake runners > |---------|------------| > | || |------------| > -------| || | > -> / || |------------| > -------| || |------------| > | || | > | || |------------| > |---------|------------| > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? Your throttle response is going to suck - no pun intended. Can't you put throttles on the end of the runners; one per runner? These can be "ganged" using a linkage inside the plenum to reduce the number of seals required to just one (possibly just a Bowden cable entry). Integrating the intercooler with the plenum will probably require a plenum split anyway - at least during construction. Use that split to construct/integrate the throttles. _________ ____________. | / | | || +------------+ -------+ || |____________. -> || / | -------+ || +------------+ | || |____________. | || / | |_________+------------+ Don't try to run the IC piping through the split if it's a permanent one. Keep the sealing surfaces of the split simple. A flange with o-ring groove is reliable - but watch the temperature and use a suitable o-ring material. The flange could also be sealed with other materials at a pinch. Keep it flat and minimise the stresses carried by the flange bolts. > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > intercooler ? Without seeing how much of an obstruction the IC presents; the total plenum volume is between the throttle and the intake valve - this volume is used when calculating some resonance modes. Depending on why you're calculating the volume, the plenum volume could also be between the end of the inlet runner(s) and the throttle valve. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jorgen.m.karlsson@home.se Tue Dec 4 09:07:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:31:25 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:31:25 -0300 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Hi, I see upsides and downsides with that setup. Distribution will be great, the IC element will equalize the air flow in the plenum. Throttle response will not be that great but I wouldn't worry to much about that. There is an Alfa guy on the list that has a similar setup. Bends suck, if you can get rid of one that is great and five... In this case I think that you should make the plemum volume as small as possible but that you should have 1X engine displacement on the cylinder head side of the IC. In any case it will be a big plenum. Jörgen Karlsson Gothenburg, Sweden. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From smoseley@ix.netcom.com Tue Dec 4 09:21:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:39:41 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:39:41 -0300 From: Shane Moseley MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info Thanks for the link. Looks interesting. Could this be the same guys who created the technology behind SEFI8LO and then sold it to FelPro Performance? Ashland, MS is a very, very small town. A short drive from where I'm at too (Memphis). Might have to drive down there and check it out. Will keep my eye on them. Anyone else have info on this company or its products? Latr, Shane Bruce wrote: > Here's a URL for the eDist > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 10:08:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:08:13 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:08:13 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > > the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will > > be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. > In that case, having separate throttles is even more attractive. Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts > > throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the > > throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so > > throttle response should become even better. > The plenum volume; that between the throttle valve and the intake > valve determines how quickly a pressure change can occur to change > airflow. If you just happen to be ignoring the turbo having to spool up or down as the case may be. > > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. > Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or > where there's no common plenum. Or when looking for complex answers to simple guestions. > I envisage a common throttle plate with separate butterflies on a > common shaft (per side in a Vee engine). It's simple machining to > bore some suitable holes through a sandwich of two long aluminium > plates, machine a shaft and to make some butterflies. The throttle > cable enters what is the post-IC distribution box and pulls on a > lever attached to the butterfly shaft. A spring counters the cable > to close the butterflies. Till you start worring about the drill wandering and wind up with the throttle shaft being offset too much, or worse yet, not at all. You'll want it offset so that if the throttle return spring breaks the throttles close rather then remain open. > If the runners leave at opposite sides of the air distribution box, > then a relay link can mirror the motion for an identical setup of > throttles on the opposite side. There are only two throttle bodies; > each with 3 butterflies on a common shaft. then you'll also want a by-pass adjustment for each butterfly to really balance out the air flow at idle. > A competent machinist can probably make all the throttle parts in > less than a day using a lathe and bench drill in addition to some > hand tools. A milling machine would be useful but not essential. > Especially useful for creating the lip against which the butterflies > close on each half of the throttle plate sandwich, and for chasing a > groove for the butterfly shaft and its bushes. (Don't skimp on the > bushes - the shaft has to be quite thin in places and could be bent > by a backfire, causing it to stick subsequently.) Now you want thinning of the butterfly shafts too?. Shall we chrome all the bearing surfaces, or run the shaft on ball bearings, and incorporate seals into all 12-14-16 throttle shaft bearings?. > Each throttle plate sandwich, complete with butterflies and spring > can be held together with screws through one plate tapped into the > other. > Don't let the price of commercial units fool you into thinking the > parts are hard to make. > If you want to, you can attach the spigots for the inlet runners > directly to the throttle plates and use the plates as a side of the > distribution box. Or use *mirrored* runners and have all 6 butterflies in a row. Simplicity is the key to design. I'll stick with my earlier statements. It's much more important to have the plenum so that each cylinder feeds freely from it and not having one runner wall at the end of a large column of air. The one good thing about the SDS refered to intake fabrication was that they continued the plenum past the last cylinder's runner wall. As soon as the machine shop is done with my manifold I'll get back with on what really works in the real world rather then just day dreaming or quoting theory Bruce > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 10:42:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:42:19 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:42:19 -0800 From: "Timothy J Burgess" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re:copy eproms Or you may use the larger PROM to store two separate loads of code (or four loads with a 27C512) & easily select between the two. Here's how I built up the multiple load selection hardware: Attach a 5 x 1 header to a 28 pin DIP socket near pin 28 - connect header pin 1 to socket pin 28 (+5 volts), connect header pin 3 to socket pin 27 (programmer address msb; A14), connect header pin 5 to socket pin 14 (gnd), connect header pin 2 to header pin 4. Attach the wires to just below the body of the socket. Bend up pin 27 (address 14) of the PROM. Install the PROM in the socket. Solder a wire between pin 27 of the PROM and pin 2 of the header. Use a jumper (shorting) block to select the PROM mode: Short header pins 1 & 2 = Use load @ address 0x4000 to 0x7FFF. Short header pins 4 & 5 = Use load @ address 0x0 to 0x3FFF. Short header pins 2 & 3 = Program PROM. Load both 16K PROM loads at the starting address indicated above (0x0 & 0x4000) in the PROM programmer memory before programming the 32K PROM. If a 27C512 PROM is used, A15 is the address msb & it is located at pin 1 of the 28 pin DIP. The PROM data sheets (pinouts) may be found at http://www.atmel.com/atmel/products/. Tim Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:15:30 -0000 From: "Richard M" Subject: Re: copy eproms Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it may not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and upper 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, irrespective of what state the most significant address bit is in. Regards Rich - ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Cheung To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM Subject: copy eproms > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 10:15:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:45:53 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:45:53 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small to be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it mounts, and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the manifold. For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to draw against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to **straighten** the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and have this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather turbulent chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but they are extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that is about equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge plenum for any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they use coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my GN , and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the 3" are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler ultimate flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an automatic trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque since converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather allowing the engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to best use the above. At least that's the way I'm headed. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rausch, Bernd" To: "Rausch, Bernd" ; Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:04 AM Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of the > intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt > line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I will > only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will > save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > TB IC intake runners > |---------|------------| > | || |------------| > -------| || | > -> / || |------------| > -------| || |------------| > | || | > | || |------------| > |---------|------------| > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > intercooler ? > > > Any help would be appreciated. > Bernd > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 10:33:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:55:29 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 10:55:29 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers It's normally from the TB, but in your case the I/C will be your *choke* point. So I'd say only the area below the I/C and not including the runners would be your plenum area. BUT, even that will be inaccurate, since so much of the air will be having to bend with that much more inertia to it. You probably have great distribution, but limited total flow. The whole idea (at least in my mind) is to have as large as area for any opening valve can open to. All your wave tuning and related theory is grand for N/A and low boost situations, when you starting to get serious with HP, you want even distribution, the boost is going to take care of your cylinder filling. If you need an incredible amount of tip in response then you'll want to optimize the runners cross sectional area, lenght and get into the wave tuning of things. Also,, a higher compression ratio, and begin trading in all you HP generating strategies. In looking at some late model race car plenums the are large ugly things. they are worried more about volume, then the wave motion thru the plenum, at least the way it looks to me. Bruce All this talk about waves, has the lil guys yelling surfs up, and checking the tire inflation on the boat trailer. From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > intercooler ? > Without seeing how much of an obstruction the IC presents; the total > plenum volume is between the throttle and the intake valve - this > volume is used when calculating some resonance modes. Depending on > why you're calculating the volume, the plenum volume could also be > between the end of the inlet runner(s) and the throttle valve. > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jorgen.m.karlsson@home.se Tue Dec 4 11:00:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:10:30 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:10:30 -0300 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce wrote: > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too > small to be > effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing the > surface area of the piping for heat transfer. I don't agree about the size of the intercooler, check the efficiency of the stock syclone intecooler when it is used with a good heat exchanger and a pump that runs all the time. All cars that I have worked with has had problems with the pipes actually heating the charge, for me it is obvious to use pipes that isolate the charge from the hot under hood air. Stainless steel and plastic are my favorites. > With the in plenum cooler, > you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it > mounts, and > you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the > manifold. I forgot to mention that, it is very important to isolate the plenum. The plenum should be thermally isolated from the head, silicone hoses can be used to connect the separate runners to the plenum. This will be a massive piece and it will probably have to be removed for any work in the engine compartment. Stainless steel runners is also a good option. Isolation of the intake from the engine is good on all port injected cars. It is a good idea to isolate it from the air in the engine compartment too. As mentioned the usable plenum will start after the intercooler. I hope this come out right: ------------------------- TB |IC | | | | \ / | ------------------------- | | | | ______________/ / HEAD _______________/ Jörgen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Tue Dec 4 10:39:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:12:52 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:12:52 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Racelogic Emulator was RE: Honda ecm..hondata ANyone have any idea how to handle the checksums or any "protection" of the memory on the newer ECU's? I am trying to find out what memory chip the later ECU's I want to mess with are, to see if the racelogic emulator can handle what I am trying to do... Also, what type of equipment is required, and how much does it cost, to program the 27c256 eprom and the later flashproms? Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Ioannis Andrianakis > Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2001 4:32 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Racelogic Emulator was RE: Honda ecm..hondata > > > It will handle emulation of 23c32-27c1024 eproms, > 28/29f010-28/29f040 and > 29f200 and 29f400 flashproms. It will not program the newest > ecus through > the diagnostic port. It will work only if you have direct > access to the > memory to unsolder it and connect the emulator in its place. > Dim Sport has > a unit for some car models to program through the diagnostic port. > > Ioannis Andrianakis > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Stephen Andersen > To: > Sent: 27 Íïåìâñßïõ 2001 04:05 > Subject: Racelogic Emulator was RE: Honda ecm..hondata > > > Does the racelogic emulator, or the other one you listed, > have the capability handle later model OBDII electronics > as well as the "older" EPROM type ECU's? > > If so, can the OBDII models flash program? > > Thanks, > Steve > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 11:22:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:22:06 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:22:06 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Rausch, Bernd" Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > I have the information on intercooler size from > http://www.spearcointercoolers.com. The core is 2-171. > This is a road/track car, and I am going to use two big > radiators(12"x16") to cool the liquid. > The plenum will be made of aluminium, only the runners will be CF. > I do not want to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to > bend > immediately. This is with the stock plenum without intercooler. My > plenum will be straight, like on my ascii drawing below. For any one valve to be drawing air, the air will have to be bent to feed it from any area other then the I/C area directly above the port. > And I do not see flow in a turbocharged application very different from > a n/a. The air is even denser in a turbo application, so flow losses are > higher. Of course you can crank up the boost, but you are loosing > efficiency and going to have more backpressure this way. In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute when in boost. If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure differences between the two types of motors then Bruce > Best regards, > Bernd > > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > From: "Rausch, Bernd" > Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is > > really welcome. But I disagree in several points: > > I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), > > this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will > need > > about 800-850cfm for 650hp. > > With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC > > area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your > > intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to > > insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder > head. > > You going to use a total of 4.5x9x10 for cooling an engine of 650 HP?. > Is this a dragster, or just for really short bursts of speed?. > what are your plans for cooling the liquid?. > CF for a large ehough plenum to hold all this is going to need some > serious ribbing to prevent a sneeze from rupturing it. > > I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement > of the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to much. > Your going to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to > bend > immediately?. Ugh, OK, I don't see it happening that way, but it's your > decision. > > Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it > is the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup > > (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the > > intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to > the manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the > > plenum)! > Me thinks your toooo concerned about an elbow. Is it some really small > radius?. > Again, I think your thinking in N/A terms, not T/C > Bruce > > Best regards, > > Bernd > > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small > to be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be > losing the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum > > cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all > it mounts, and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the > manifold. > > For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to > draw against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to > **straighten** the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and > have this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather > turbulent chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as > > International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but > they are extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that > is about equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge > plenum for any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they > use coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. > > I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. > > For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. > > I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my > GN, and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the > 3" are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler > ultimate flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an > automatic trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque > since converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather > allowing the engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. > > Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be > > fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to > best use the above. At least that's the way I'm headed. > > Bruce > > From: "Rausch, Bernd" br@rnt.de > > Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > > > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > > > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > > > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of > > the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a > straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I > > will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup > will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > > > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > > > > > TB IC intake runners > > > |---------|------------| > > > | || |------------| > > > -------| || | > > > -> / || |------------| > > > -------| || |------------| > > > | || | > > > | || |------------| > > > |---------|------------| > > > > > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > > intercooler ? > > > Any help would be appreciated. > > > Bernd ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 11:24:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:42:08 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:42:08 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Jörgen Karlsson" Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce wrote: > > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too > > small to be > > effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing the > > surface area of the piping for heat transfer. > I don't agree about the size of the intercooler, check the efficiency of the > stock syclone intecooler when it is used with a good heat exchanger and a > pump that runs all the time. All cars that I have worked with has had > problems with the pipes actually heating the charge, for me it is obvious to > use pipes that isolate the charge from the hot under hood air. Stainless > steel and plastic are my favorites. Look at the room they had to package things in. For the added weight and complexity, I'd say a air to air as in the GNs was a much better solution. Once you heat soak a syclone, your done for a while, there is just so much more mass with an air to water system to cool off. Again, with way things are with some engine compartments, there is so little air flow thru them, that the plumbing in that case might heat soak. > > With the in plenum cooler, > > you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it > > mounts, and > > you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the > > manifold. > I forgot to mention that, it is very important to isolate the plenum. The > plenum should be thermally isolated from the head, silicone hoses can be > used to connect the separate runners to the plenum. This will be a massive > piece and it will probably have to be removed for any work in the engine > compartment. Stainless steel runners is also a good option. Isolation of the > intake from the engine is good on all port injected cars. It is a good idea > to isolate it from the air in the engine compartment too. Again, your talking specifics to the syclones. I can draw under hood air, and do just fine. Isolating things can be taken to the point of no return. While all that will generate in theory be really nice, alot of it loses it's meaning in day to day use, now if your branching off into specific race car duty, then that is another case. > As mentioned the usable plenum will start after the intercooler. > > I hope this come out right: > > ------------------------- > TB |IC | | > | | \ / | > ------------------------- > | | > | | > ______________/ / > HEAD _______________/ > > Jörgen > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Tue Dec 4 11:20:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:43:59 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:43:59 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Hello Bruce, thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is really welcome. But I disagree in several points: I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will need about 800-850cfm for 650hp. With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder head. I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement of the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to much. Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it is the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to the manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the plenum)! Best regards, Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 14:15 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small to be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it mounts, and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the manifold. For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to draw against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to **straighten** the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and have this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather turbulent chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but they are extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that is about equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge plenum for any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they use coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my GN , and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the 3" are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler ultimate flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an automatic trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque since converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather allowing the engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to best use the above. At least that's the way I'm headed. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rausch, Bernd" To: "Rausch, Bernd" ; Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:04 AM Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of the > intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt > line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I will > only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will > save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > TB IC intake runners > |---------|------------| > | || |------------| > -------| || | > -> / || |------------| > -------| || |------------| > | || | > | || |------------| > |---------|------------| > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > intercooler ? > > > Any help would be appreciated. > Bernd > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 11:46:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:46:16 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:46:16 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers I want to keep it simple, like Bruce is suggesting, that means 6 TB is out of question. I do not have problems with idle or part throttle (mild cam). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the intake port. A good point was to insulate the plenum from the heat of the head, I will do this with CF runners or with short silicone hoses in the runners. Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 19:08 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > > the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will > > be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. > In that case, having separate throttles is even more attractive. Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts > > throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the > > throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so > > throttle response should become even better. > The plenum volume; that between the throttle valve and the intake > valve determines how quickly a pressure change can occur to change > airflow. If you just happen to be ignoring the turbo having to spool up or down as the case may be. > > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. > Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or > where there's no common plenum. Or when looking for complex answers to simple guestions. > I envisage a common throttle plate with separate butterflies on a > common shaft (per side in a Vee engine). It's simple machining to > bore some suitable holes through a sandwich of two long aluminium > plates, machine a shaft and to make some butterflies. The throttle > cable enters what is the post-IC distribution box and pulls on a > lever attached to the butterfly shaft. A spring counters the cable > to close the butterflies. Till you start worring about the drill wandering and wind up with the throttle shaft being offset too much, or worse yet, not at all. You'll want it offset so that if the throttle return spring breaks the throttles close rather then remain open. > If the runners leave at opposite sides of the air distribution box, > then a relay link can mirror the motion for an identical setup of > throttles on the opposite side. There are only two throttle bodies; > each with 3 butterflies on a common shaft. then you'll also want a by-pass adjustment for each butterfly to really balance out the air flow at idle. > A competent machinist can probably make all the throttle parts in > less than a day using a lathe and bench drill in addition to some > hand tools. A milling machine would be useful but not essential. > Especially useful for creating the lip against which the butterflies > close on each half of the throttle plate sandwich, and for chasing a > groove for the butterfly shaft and its bushes. (Don't skimp on the > bushes - the shaft has to be quite thin in places and could be bent > by a backfire, causing it to stick subsequently.) Now you want thinning of the butterfly shafts too?. Shall we chrome all the bearing surfaces, or run the shaft on ball bearings, and incorporate seals into all 12-14-16 throttle shaft bearings?. > Each throttle plate sandwich, complete with butterflies and spring > can be held together with screws through one plate tapped into the > other. > Don't let the price of commercial units fool you into thinking the > parts are hard to make. > If you want to, you can attach the spigots for the inlet runners > directly to the throttle plates and use the plates as a side of the > distribution box. Or use *mirrored* runners and have all 6 butterflies in a row. Simplicity is the key to design. I'll stick with my earlier statements. It's much more important to have the plenum so that each cylinder feeds freely from it and not having one runner wall at the end of a large column of air. The one good thing about the SDS refered to intake fabrication was that they continued the plenum past the last cylinder's runner wall. As soon as the machine shop is done with my manifold I'll get back with on what really works in the real world rather then just day dreaming or quoting theory Bruce > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 11:46:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:46:56 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 11:46:56 -0800 From: "Tom Cheung" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re:copy eproms great stuff Tim, you have answered my next questions but as i am totally green at eproms addressing programming, etc... would it be too much to ask for specifics i can understand...?? i do have 2 programs that i want to put onto a 27c256 1) factory program on a 27c128 2) performance program ona 27c128 a little foggy about loading the 2 programs onto the burner software, I will be buying it next week (needhams pb10) and can i switch between the 2 programs while the car is running? if what you described i can accomplish...fitting both programs on a single 27c256 and able to switch between them as i wish...that would be just fantastic mucho gracias!! Tom Cheung tcheung@associated-labels.com www.associated-labels.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy J Burgess" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:40 AM Subject: Re:copy eproms > Or you may use the larger PROM to store two separate loads of code (or four > loads with a 27C512) & easily select between the two. Here's how I built > up the multiple load selection hardware: Attach a 5 x 1 header to a 28 pin > DIP socket near pin 28 - connect header pin 1 to socket pin 28 (+5 volts), > connect header pin 3 to socket pin 27 (programmer address msb; A14), > connect header pin 5 to socket pin 14 (gnd), connect header pin 2 to header > pin 4. Attach the wires to just below the body of the socket. Bend up > pin 27 (address 14) of the PROM. Install the PROM in the socket. Solder a > wire between pin 27 of the PROM and pin 2 of the header. Use a jumper > (shorting) block to select the PROM mode: Short header pins 1 & 2 = Use > load @ address 0x4000 to 0x7FFF. Short header pins 4 & 5 = Use load @ > address 0x0 to 0x3FFF. Short header pins 2 & 3 = Program PROM. Load both > 16K PROM loads at the starting address indicated above (0x0 & 0x4000) in > the PROM programmer memory before programming the 32K PROM. If a 27C512 > PROM is used, A15 is the address msb & it is located at pin 1 of the 28 pin > DIP. The PROM data sheets (pinouts) may be found at > http://www.atmel.com/atmel/products/. > > Tim > > > Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:15:30 -0000 > From: "Richard M" > Subject: Re: copy eproms > > Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it may > not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to > duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and > upper > 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, > irrespective > of what state the most significant address bit is in. > Regards > Rich > - ----- Original Message ----- > From: Tom Cheung > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM > Subject: copy eproms > > > > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:04:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:04:40 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:04:40 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers OK, I understand what you mean. The air going out of the core is bent to the intake runner with the open valve. Tis is why I want to have a rather big plenum. But when you have a normal intercooler, the air is bent going inwards and again going outwards. That is the same effect, even worse with intercooler with the piping 90deg to the airflow, like the most intercoolers. I did not mean meachanical stress when comparing na to turbocharged engines. I did mean airflow plays the same role with a turbocharged engine, maybe is even more important because the air is denser. It is right that the plenum pressure is helping to push the piston down, but this has nothing to do with airflow. At the exhaust stroke, backpressure is much higher that in a na engine. Best regards, Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 20:22 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Rausch, Bernd" Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > I have the information on intercooler size from > http://www.spearcointercoolers.com. The core is 2-171. > This is a road/track car, and I am going to use two big > radiators(12"x16") to cool the liquid. > The plenum will be made of aluminium, only the runners will be CF. > I do not want to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to > bend > immediately. This is with the stock plenum without intercooler. My > plenum will be straight, like on my ascii drawing below. For any one valve to be drawing air, the air will have to be bent to feed it from any area other then the I/C area directly above the port. > And I do not see flow in a turbocharged application very different from > a n/a. The air is even denser in a turbo application, so flow losses are > higher. Of course you can crank up the boost, but you are loosing > efficiency and going to have more backpressure this way. In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute when in boost. If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure differences between the two types of motors then Bruce > Best regards, > Bernd > > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > From: "Rausch, Bernd" > Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is > > really welcome. But I disagree in several points: > > I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), > > this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will > need > > about 800-850cfm for 650hp. > > With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC > > area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your > > intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to > > insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder > head. > > You going to use a total of 4.5x9x10 for cooling an engine of 650 HP?. > Is this a dragster, or just for really short bursts of speed?. > what are your plans for cooling the liquid?. > CF for a large ehough plenum to hold all this is going to need some > serious ribbing to prevent a sneeze from rupturing it. > > I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement > of the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to much. > Your going to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to > bend > immediately?. Ugh, OK, I don't see it happening that way, but it's your > decision. > > Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it > is the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup > > (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the > > intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to > the manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the > > plenum)! > Me thinks your toooo concerned about an elbow. Is it some really small > radius?. > Again, I think your thinking in N/A terms, not T/C > Bruce > > Best regards, > > Bernd > > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small > to be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be > losing the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum > > cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all > it mounts, and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the > manifold. > > For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to > draw against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to > **straighten** the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and > have this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather > turbulent chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as > > International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but > they are extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that > is about equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge > plenum for any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they > use coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. > > I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. > > For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. > > I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my > GN, and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the > 3" are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler > ultimate flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an > automatic trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque > since converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather > allowing the engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. > > Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be > > fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to > best use the above. At least that's the way I'm headed. > > Bruce > > From: "Rausch, Bernd" br@rnt.de > > Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > > > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > > > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > > > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of > > the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a > straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I > > will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup > will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > > > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > > > > > TB IC intake runners > > > |---------|------------| > > > | || |------------| > > > -------| || | > > > -> / || |------------| > > > -------| || |------------| > > > | || | > > > | || |------------| > > > |---------|------------| > > > > > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > > intercooler ? > > > Any help would be appreciated. > > > Bernd ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:04:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:04:59 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:04:59 -0800 From: TwoLnBlktp90@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers --part1_d6.fb90ec1.293e863e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/4/01 11:48:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, br@rnt.de writes: > ). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the > plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the > intake port Just a quick question, but why doesn't anyone build throttle bodies like the dedenbear throttle stops, with a dissc that slides out of the way instead of a butterfly? Ricky --part1_d6.fb90ec1.293e863e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/4/01 11:48:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, br@rnt.de writes:


). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the
plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the
intake port
Just a quick question, but why doesn't anyone build throttle bodies like the dedenbear throttle stops, with a dissc that slides out of the way instead of a butterfly?

Ricky --part1_d6.fb90ec1.293e863e_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 11:46:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:05:57 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:05:57 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info Ashland seems to be the distribution point. I *think* all the engineering and R+D is done in Michigan. It's FAST now rather then Speedpro that was Felpro. The outfit in Ashland I think is actually TCI, and they are just a warehousing facility, an eye ball on whats going on there would be an interesting development Bruce From: "Shane Moseley" Subject: Re: eDist Info > Thanks for the link. Looks interesting. Could this be the same guys who > created the technology behind SEFI8LO and then sold it to FelPro Performance? > Ashland, MS is a very, very small town. A short drive from where I'm at too > (Memphis). Might have to drive down there and check it out. Will keep my eye > on them. > Anyone else have info on this company or its products? > Latr, > Shane > Bruce wrote: > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory > > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 11:39:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:07:25 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:07:25 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Rausch, Bernd" Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is > really welcome. But I disagree in several points: > I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), > this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will need > about 800-850cfm for 650hp. > With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC > area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your > intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to > insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder head. You going to use a total of 4.5x9x10 for cooling an engine of 650 HP?. Is this a dragster, or just for really short bursts of speed?. what are your plans for cooling the liquid?. CF for a large ehough plenum to hold all this is going to need some serious ribbing to prevent a sneeze from rupturing it. > I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement of > the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to > much. Your going to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to bend immediately?. Ugh, OK, I don't see it happening that way, but it's your decision. > Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it is > the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup > (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the > intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to the > manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the > plenum)! Me thinks your toooo concerned about an elbow. Is it some really small radius?. Again, I think your thinking in N/A terms, not T/C Bruce > Best regards, > Bernd > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small to > be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing > the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum > cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it mounts, > and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the manifold. > For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to draw > against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to **straighten** > the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and have > this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather turbulent > chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as > International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but they are > extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that is about > equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge plenum for > any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they use > coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. > I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. > For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. > I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my GN, > and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the 3" > are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler ultimate > flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an automatic > trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque since > converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather allowing the > engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. > Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be > fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to best use the > above. At least that's the way I'm headed. > Bruce > From: "Rausch, Bernd" br@rnt.de > Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of > the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt > > line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I > will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will > > save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > > > TB IC intake runners > > |---------|------------| > > | || |------------| > > -------| || | > > -> / || |------------| > > -------| || |------------| > > | || | > > | || |------------| > > |---------|------------| > > > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > intercooler ? > > Any help would be appreciated. > > Bernd > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:17:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:17:59 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:17:59 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Non email DIY list??? Not sure who to address this to, but maybe Steve Ravet could chime in if he knows? Currently I receive my diyefi updates via individual emails (and I assume this is the same for all on list). 1) Is there a push to get this list on a bulletin board WWW site that has threaded topics. This way we can eliminate sorting out 100's of emails and deleting unwanted ones. We can just visit the site, look at the topics, and chime in when we want. 2) Or does this already exist for this news group and I am just not aware of it. 3) Will if ever happen? If not, what is the factors that prevent this from moving to that style forum. Email is not an efficient method for a news group with the vast amount of topics we discuss. Thanks, Steve F ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:25:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:25:07 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:25:07 -0800 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re:copy eproms I have done this with a BOSCH Motronic. You tie the upper most address to a switch that switches from 0V to 5V. Bring the switch out so that it is accessed from the outside. A flip of the switch changes between the two programs (upper & lower 128 banks). FR Wilk _________________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Cheung" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:43 AM Subject: Re: Re:copy eproms > great stuff Tim, you have answered my next questions > but as i am totally green at eproms addressing programming, etc... > > would it be too much to ask for specifics i can understand...?? > > i do have 2 programs that i want to put onto a 27c256 > 1) factory program on a 27c128 > 2) performance program ona 27c128 > > a little foggy about loading the 2 programs onto the burner software, I will > be buying it next week (needhams pb10) > and can i switch between the 2 programs while the car is running? > > if what you described i can accomplish...fitting both programs on a single > 27c256 and able to switch between them > as i wish...that would be just fantastic > > mucho gracias!! > > > Tom Cheung > > tcheung@associated-labels.com > www.associated-labels.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Timothy J Burgess" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:40 AM > Subject: Re:copy eproms > > > > Or you may use the larger PROM to store two separate loads of code (or > four > > loads with a 27C512) & easily select between the two. Here's how I built > > up the multiple load selection hardware: Attach a 5 x 1 header to a 28 > pin > > DIP socket near pin 28 - connect header pin 1 to socket pin 28 (+5 volts), > > connect header pin 3 to socket pin 27 (programmer address msb; A14), > > connect header pin 5 to socket pin 14 (gnd), connect header pin 2 to > header > > pin 4. Attach the wires to just below the body of the socket. Bend up > > pin 27 (address 14) of the PROM. Install the PROM in the socket. Solder > a > > wire between pin 27 of the PROM and pin 2 of the header. Use a jumper > > (shorting) block to select the PROM mode: Short header pins 1 & 2 = Use > > load @ address 0x4000 to 0x7FFF. Short header pins 4 & 5 = Use load @ > > address 0x0 to 0x3FFF. Short header pins 2 & 3 = Program PROM. Load both > > 16K PROM loads at the starting address indicated above (0x0 & 0x4000) in > > the PROM programmer memory before programming the 32K PROM. If a 27C512 > > PROM is used, A15 is the address msb & it is located at pin 1 of the 28 > pin > > DIP. The PROM data sheets (pinouts) may be found at > > http://www.atmel.com/atmel/products/. > > > > Tim > > > > > > Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:15:30 -0000 > > From: "Richard M" > > Subject: Re: copy eproms > > > > Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it > may > > not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to > > duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and > > upper > > 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, > > irrespective > > of what state the most significant address bit is in. > > Regards > > Rich > > - ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Tom Cheung > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM > > Subject: copy eproms > > > > > > > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > > > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > > > > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:29:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:29:44 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:29:44 -0800 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Non email DIY list??? Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > Currently I receive my diyefi updates via individual emails (and I assume > this is the same for all on list). There is also a digest mode, sent once per day, with all of the days emails in it. > > 1) Is there a push to get this list on a bulletin board WWW site that has > threaded topics. This way we can eliminate sorting out 100's of emails and > deleting unwanted ones. We can just visit the site, look at the topics, and > chime in when we want. The DIY list will stay an email list, although if other people want to create a WWW based list they're certainly free to do so. Most email clients will sort by thread for you so you can skip threads that aren't of interest. The archives are available in html format sorted by thread, although since I have to create them by hand they may lag a month or so behind. These are read only, new posts must be emailed. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:30:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:30:59 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:30:59 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers If you're talking about an actual throttle control that slides rather then pivots, the problem can be sealing them, and / or them sticking. As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare and expensive. Bruce From: TwoLnBlktp90@aol.com Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the intake port Just a quick question, but why doesn't anyone build throttle bodies like the dedenbear throttle stops, with a dissc that slides out of the way instead of a butterfly? Ricky ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Tue Dec 4 12:07:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:33:13 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:33:13 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce, I have the information on intercooler size from http://www.spearcointercoolers.com. The core is 2-171. This is a road/track car, and I am going to use two big radiators(12"x16") to cool the liquid. The plenum will be made of aluminium, only the runners will be CF. I do not want to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to bend immediately. This is with the stock plenum without intercooler. My plenum will be straight, like on my ascii drawing below. And I do not see flow in a turbocharged application very different from a n/a. The air is even denser in a turbo application, so flow losses are higher. Of course you can crank up the boost, but you are loosing efficiency and going to have more backpressure this way. Best regards, Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 15:39 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Rausch, Bernd" Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is > really welcome. But I disagree in several points: > I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), > this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will need > about 800-850cfm for 650hp. > With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC > area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your > intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to > insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder head. You going to use a total of 4.5x9x10 for cooling an engine of 650 HP?. Is this a dragster, or just for really short bursts of speed?. what are your plans for cooling the liquid?. CF for a large ehough plenum to hold all this is going to need some serious ribbing to prevent a sneeze from rupturing it. > I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement of > the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to > much. Your going to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to bend immediately?. Ugh, OK, I don't see it happening that way, but it's your decision. > Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it is > the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup > (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the > intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to the > manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the > plenum)! Me thinks your toooo concerned about an elbow. Is it some really small radius?. Again, I think your thinking in N/A terms, not T/C Bruce > Best regards, > Bernd > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small to > be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be losing > the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum > cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all it mounts, > and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the manifold. > For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to draw > against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to **straighten** > the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and have > this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather turbulent > chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as > International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but they are > extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that is about > equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge plenum for > any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they use > coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. > I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. > For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. > I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my GN, > and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the 3" > are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler ultimate > flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an automatic > trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque since > converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather allowing the > engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. > Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be > fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to best use the > above. At least that's the way I'm headed. > Bruce > From: "Rausch, Bernd" br@rnt.de > Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of > the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a straigt > > line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I > will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup will > > save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > > > TB IC intake runners > > |---------|------------| > > | || |------------| > > -------| || | > > -> / || |------------| > > -------| || |------------| > > | || | > > | || |------------| > > |---------|------------| > > > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > intercooler ? > > Any help would be appreciated. > > Bernd > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:33:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:33:59 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:33:59 -0800 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU Unfortunately Jetronics are not computerized. They have no chip. It is all circuitry and no CPU. FR Wilk _____________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 3:19 PM Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU > My car has the Jetronic Turbo. > > Thanks for any help! > > -David > > -----Original Message----- > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? > > FR Wilk > ___________________________________ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Goldstein" > To: > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM > Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. I > > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware for > > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his Firebird. > > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess I'm > > looking for similar equipment. > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > -David > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:35:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:35:56 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:35:56 -0800 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Steve's Parts Kit I had a couple of questions about the capacitors that came with steve's parts kits. Which component on the list (C1, C2,...) is the ceramic disk capictor? Also, what are the capacitances of the two largest film resistors (the red ones)? And, i remeber someone mentioning a Digikey-like company which does not have a minimum order. I'm looking to build the analog LED display for the WB unit, but need some parts (especially the LED banks). Thanks, David Gregory ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:49:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:49:50 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:49:50 -0800 From: "Shawn Fogg" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce, "As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare and expensive." Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow into the engine so it doesn't need any throttle body. http://www.autospeed.com/A_1083/page1.html Shawn ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 12:53:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:53:06 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 12:53:06 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit From: "David Gregory" Subject: Steve's Parts Kit > I had a couple of questions about the capacitors that came with steve's > parts kits. > Which component on the list (C1, C2,...) is the ceramic disk capictor? C8 > Also, what are the capacitances of the two largest film resistors (the red > ones)? the larger of the two goes at C10 and the smaller at C7 > And, i remeber someone mentioning a Digikey-like company which does not have > a minimum order. I'm looking to build the analog LED display for the WB > unit, but need some parts (especially the LED banks). I can't help you on that one. Bruce Don't give any lil guys a smart coil. Right now their having a contest to see who they can get to *hold this* the most times. Bashful's developed a stutter now...... > David Gregory ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 13:03:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:03:17 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:03:17 -0800 From: "Sam Weatherby" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info Interesting... I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. Anyone know a source for that? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:58 PM Subject: eDist Info > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 13:06:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:06:24 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:06:24 -0800 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers If in fact there is no throttle body, that would have a tremendous impact on idle and part throttle fuel economy. Probably approaching a diesel engine. > -----Original Message----- > From: Shawn Fogg [mailto:sfogg@attglobal.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 4:02 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Bruce, > > "As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare > and expensive." > > Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? > > The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow > into the engine so it doesn't need any throttle body. > > http://www.autospeed.com/A_1083/page1.html > > Shawn > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 13:16:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:16:03 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:16:03 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info might try Electromotive (the one in WV), I think they use those and 60s Bruce From: "Sam Weatherby" Subject: Re: eDist Info > Interesting... > I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. > All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. > Anyone know a source for that? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: eDist Info > > Here's a URL for the eDist > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory > > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 13:18:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:18:55 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:18:55 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers They don't show one in the cut away, makes me wonder thou, have a worm gear driving the whole show thou. Bruce From: "Shirley, Mark R" Subject: RE: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > If in fact there is no throttle body, that would have a > tremendous impact on idle and part throttle fuel economy. > Probably approaching a diesel engine. > > From: Shawn Fogg [mailto:sfogg@attglobal.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 4:02 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Bruce, > > "As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare > > and expensive." > > Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? > > The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow > > into the engine so it doesn't need any throttle body. > > http://www.autospeed.com/A_1083/page1.html > > Shawn ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 13:21:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:21:23 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:21:23 -0800 From: "Shawn Fogg" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce, "As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare and expensive." Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow into the engine so it doesn't need any throttle body. http://www.autospeed.com/A_1083/page1.html Shawn ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 13:21:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:21:23 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:21:23 -0800 From: "Tom Cheung" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re:copy eproms great stuff Tim, you have answered my next questions but as i am totally green at eproms addressing programming, etc... would it be too much to ask for specifics i can understand...?? i do have 2 programs that i want to put onto a 27c256 1) factory program on a 27c128 2) performance program ona 27c128 a little foggy about loading the 2 programs onto the burner software, I will be buying it next week (needhams pb10) and can i switch between the 2 programs while the car is running? if what you described i can accomplish...fitting both programs on a single 27c256 and able to switch between them as i wish...that would be just fantastic mucho gracias!! Tom Cheung tcheung@associated-labels.com www.associated-labels.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy J Burgess" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:40 AM Subject: Re:copy eproms > Or you may use the larger PROM to store two separate loads of code (or four > loads with a 27C512) & easily select between the two. Here's how I built > up the multiple load selection hardware: Attach a 5 x 1 header to a 28 pin > DIP socket near pin 28 - connect header pin 1 to socket pin 28 (+5 volts), > connect header pin 3 to socket pin 27 (programmer address msb; A14), > connect header pin 5 to socket pin 14 (gnd), connect header pin 2 to header > pin 4. Attach the wires to just below the body of the socket. Bend up > pin 27 (address 14) of the PROM. Install the PROM in the socket. Solder a > wire between pin 27 of the PROM and pin 2 of the header. Use a jumper > (shorting) block to select the PROM mode: Short header pins 1 & 2 = Use > load @ address 0x4000 to 0x7FFF. Short header pins 4 & 5 = Use load @ > address 0x0 to 0x3FFF. Short header pins 2 & 3 = Program PROM. Load both > 16K PROM loads at the starting address indicated above (0x0 & 0x4000) in > the PROM programmer memory before programming the 32K PROM. If a 27C512 > PROM is used, A15 is the address msb & it is located at pin 1 of the 28 pin > DIP. The PROM data sheets (pinouts) may be found at > http://www.atmel.com/atmel/products/. > > Tim > > > Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:15:30 -0000 > From: "Richard M" > Subject: Re: copy eproms > > Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it may > not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to > duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and > upper > 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, > irrespective > of what state the most significant address bit is in. > Regards > Rich > - ----- Original Message ----- > From: Tom Cheung > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM > Subject: copy eproms > > > > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 4 13:12:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:47:36 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 13:47:36 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will > be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. In that case, having separate throttles is even more attractive. > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts > throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the > throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so > throttle response should become even better. The plenum volume; that between the throttle valve and the intake valve determines how quickly a pressure change can occur to change airflow. > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or where there's no common plenum. I envisage a common throttle plate with separate butterflies on a common shaft (per side in a Vee engine). It's simple machining to bore some suitable holes through a sandwich of two long aluminium plates, machine a shaft and to make some butterflies. The throttle cable enters what is the post-IC distribution box and pulls on a lever attached to the butterfly shaft. A spring counters the cable to close the butterflies. If the runners leave at opposite sides of the air distribution box, then a relay link can mirror the motion for an identical setup of throttles on the opposite side. There are only two throttle bodies; each with 3 butterflies on a common shaft. A competent machinist can probably make all the throttle parts in less than a day using a lathe and bench drill in addition to some hand tools. A milling machine would be useful but not essential. Especially useful for creating the lip against which the butterflies close on each half of the throttle plate sandwich, and for chasing a groove for the butterfly shaft and its bushes. (Don't skimp on the bushes - the shaft has to be quite thin in places and could be bent by a backfire, causing it to stick subsequently.) Each throttle plate sandwich, complete with butterflies and spring can be held together with screws through one plate tapped into the other. Don't let the price of commercial units fool you into thinking the parts are hard to make. If you want to, you can attach the spigots for the inlet runners directly to the throttle plates and use the plates as a side of the distribution box. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 14:12:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:12:31 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:12:31 -0800 From: Brian Renegar Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit >C8 Actually the schematics say C2. But I spoke with BobR and he said they are compatible. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 14:21:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:21:20 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:21:20 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit If you look at the lead spacing you'll understand my answer. Also, using the large one at C2 also gets the grouping there rather close. Bruce From: "Brian Renegar" Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit > >C8 > Actually the schematics say C2. But I spoke with BobR and he said they are > compatible. > Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 14:30:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:30:42 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:30:42 -0800 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: eDist Info Ford 2.5L engine from Ranger had 36-1 tooth wheel. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sam Weatherby [mailto:SWeatherby@winisp.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:52 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: eDist Info > > > Interesting... > I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. > All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. > Anyone know a source for that? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bruce" > To: > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:58 PM > Subject: eDist Info > > > > > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > > > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.a sp?ListHistory > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 14:49:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:49:45 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:49:45 -0800 From: skulte MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, David Gregory wrote: > I had a couple of questions about the capacitors that came with steve's > parts kits. Hmm. I guess the parts kits were shipped? I still hadn't received mine and was wondering when I should expect it. Andris Skulte Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 15:17:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:17:49 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:17:49 -0800 From: "Sam Weatherby" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info Any idea how they are mounted? I have the balancer from a Explorer 5.0, but it has an integral pulley that does not line up with my existing pulleys. The crown vic unit looks like it slides on the crank behind the dampner. That is looking like my best bet, but I have only seen pictures of that... -srw ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shirley, Mark R" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:25 PM Subject: RE: eDist Info > Ford 2.5L engine from Ranger had 36-1 tooth wheel. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sam Weatherby [mailto:SWeatherby@winisp.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:52 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: eDist Info > > > > > > Interesting... > > I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. > > All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. > > Anyone know a source for that? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Bruce" > > To: > > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:58 PM > > Subject: eDist Info > > > > > > > > > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > > > > > > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.a > sp?ListHistory > > ID=1810607119 > > > > Bruce > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 15:08:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:34:06 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 15:34:06 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > > the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will > > be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. > In that case, having separate throttles is even more attractive. Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts > > throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the > > throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so > > throttle response should become even better. > The plenum volume; that between the throttle valve and the intake > valve determines how quickly a pressure change can occur to change > airflow. If you just happen to be ignoring the turbo having to spool up or down as the case may be. > > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. > Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or > where there's no common plenum. Or when looking for complex answers to simple guestions. > I envisage a common throttle plate with separate butterflies on a > common shaft (per side in a Vee engine). It's simple machining to > bore some suitable holes through a sandwich of two long aluminium > plates, machine a shaft and to make some butterflies. The throttle > cable enters what is the post-IC distribution box and pulls on a > lever attached to the butterfly shaft. A spring counters the cable > to close the butterflies. Till you start worring about the drill wandering and wind up with the throttle shaft being offset too much, or worse yet, not at all. You'll want it offset so that if the throttle return spring breaks the throttles close rather then remain open. > If the runners leave at opposite sides of the air distribution box, > then a relay link can mirror the motion for an identical setup of > throttles on the opposite side. There are only two throttle bodies; > each with 3 butterflies on a common shaft. then you'll also want a by-pass adjustment for each butterfly to really balance out the air flow at idle. > A competent machinist can probably make all the throttle parts in > less than a day using a lathe and bench drill in addition to some > hand tools. A milling machine would be useful but not essential. > Especially useful for creating the lip against which the butterflies > close on each half of the throttle plate sandwich, and for chasing a > groove for the butterfly shaft and its bushes. (Don't skimp on the > bushes - the shaft has to be quite thin in places and could be bent > by a backfire, causing it to stick subsequently.) Now you want thinning of the butterfly shafts too?. Shall we chrome all the bearing surfaces, or run the shaft on ball bearings, and incorporate seals into all 12-14-16 throttle shaft bearings?. > Each throttle plate sandwich, complete with butterflies and spring > can be held together with screws through one plate tapped into the > other. > Don't let the price of commercial units fool you into thinking the > parts are hard to make. > If you want to, you can attach the spigots for the inlet runners > directly to the throttle plates and use the plates as a side of the > distribution box. Or use *mirrored* runners and have all 6 butterflies in a row. Simplicity is the key to design. I'll stick with my earlier statements. It's much more important to have the plenum so that each cylinder feeds freely from it and not having one runner wall at the end of a large column of air. The one good thing about the SDS refered to intake fabrication was that they continued the plenum past the last cylinder's runner wall. As soon as the machine shop is done with my manifold I'll get back with on what really works in the real world rather then just day dreaming or quoting theory Bruce > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From tjburgess@west.raytheon.com Tue Dec 4 15:40:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:21:25 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:21:25 -0300 From: "Timothy J Burgess" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re:copy eproms Or you may use the larger PROM to store two separate loads of code (or four loads with a 27C512) & easily select between the two. Here's how I built up the multiple load selection hardware: Attach a 5 x 1 header to a 28 pin DIP socket near pin 28 - connect header pin 1 to socket pin 28 (+5 volts), connect header pin 3 to socket pin 27 (programmer address msb; A14), connect header pin 5 to socket pin 14 (gnd), connect header pin 2 to header pin 4. Attach the wires to just below the body of the socket. Bend up pin 27 (address 14) of the PROM. Install the PROM in the socket. Solder a wire between pin 27 of the PROM and pin 2 of the header. Use a jumper (shorting) block to select the PROM mode: Short header pins 1 & 2 = Use load @ address 0x4000 to 0x7FFF. Short header pins 4 & 5 = Use load @ address 0x0 to 0x3FFF. Short header pins 2 & 3 = Program PROM. Load both 16K PROM loads at the starting address indicated above (0x0 & 0x4000) in the PROM programmer memory before programming the 32K PROM. If a 27C512 PROM is used, A15 is the address msb & it is located at pin 1 of the 28 pin DIP. The PROM data sheets (pinouts) may be found at http://www.atmel.com/atmel/products/. Tim Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:15:30 -0000 From: "Richard M" Subject: Re: copy eproms Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it may not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and upper 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, irrespective of what state the most significant address bit is in. Regards Rich - ----- Original Message ----- From: Tom Cheung To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM Subject: copy eproms > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 16:24:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:24:56 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:24:56 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > I want to keep it simple, like Bruce is suggesting, that means 6 TB is > out of question. I do not have problems with idle or part throttle (mild > cam). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the > plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the > intake port. The butterfly is at the top of the runner. It's a forced-induction system. THe turbulence created is not necessarily bad. > A good point was to insulate the plenum from the heat of the head, I > will do this with CF runners or with short silicone hoses in the > runners. A thin heat shield and air gap underneath the plenum will also help. You have an integrated cooler, so any radiated heat cought by the body of the plenum will be largely removed by the IC. [snip] -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 16:26:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:26:25 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:26:25 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers TwoLnBlktp90@aol.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > In a message dated 12/4/01 11:48:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, > br@rnt.de writes: > > ). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the > > plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the > > intake port > Just a quick question, but why doesn't anyone build throttle > bodies like the dedenbear throttle stops, with a dissc that slides > out of the way instead of a butterfly? Because of sealing and sticking problems in the slide throttle. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 16:33:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:33:15 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:33:15 -0800 From: "Jurgen Hartwig" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit > Hmm. I guess the parts kits were shipped? I still hadn't received mine and > was wondering when I should expect it. > Not to be another "me too," but I'm wondering if Steve has been able to catch up. I purchased a few boards under the second group buy (Thanks a billion Bob R). The boards arrived yesterday, and I'm already itching to get it together. Does anyone feel that there needs to be a second 'parts' group buy for all the stragglers? I would be willing to donate the time and dollars to get such a group buy completed. Also, I am a decent solder man on the larger stuff and on copper plumbing in homes, but the breadboard looks intimidating. At one time, Steve said he would be selling a video tape with tips. Barring the availability of such tape, any recommendations of books or web sites for reference would be appreciated. I am willing to spend any dollar amount to buy the proper tools to do the job. Sorry for the bandwidth. jay ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 16:22:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:44:12 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:44:12 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Rausch, Bernd" Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > I have the information on intercooler size from > http://www.spearcointercoolers.com. The core is 2-171. > This is a road/track car, and I am going to use two big > radiators(12"x16") to cool the liquid. > The plenum will be made of aluminium, only the runners will be CF. > I do not want to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to > bend > immediately. This is with the stock plenum without intercooler. My > plenum will be straight, like on my ascii drawing below. For any one valve to be drawing air, the air will have to be bent to feed it from any area other then the I/C area directly above the port. > And I do not see flow in a turbocharged application very different from > a n/a. The air is even denser in a turbo application, so flow losses are > higher. Of course you can crank up the boost, but you are loosing > efficiency and going to have more backpressure this way. In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute when in boost. If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure differences between the two types of motors then Bruce > Best regards, > Bernd > > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > From: "Rausch, Bernd" > Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is > > really welcome. But I disagree in several points: > > I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), > > this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will > need > > about 800-850cfm for 650hp. > > With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC > > area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your > > intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to > > insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder > head. > > You going to use a total of 4.5x9x10 for cooling an engine of 650 HP?. > Is this a dragster, or just for really short bursts of speed?. > what are your plans for cooling the liquid?. > CF for a large ehough plenum to hold all this is going to need some > serious ribbing to prevent a sneeze from rupturing it. > > I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement > of the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to much. > Your going to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to > bend > immediately?. Ugh, OK, I don't see it happening that way, but it's your > decision. > > Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it > is the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup > > (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the > > intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to > the manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the > > plenum)! > Me thinks your toooo concerned about an elbow. Is it some really small > radius?. > Again, I think your thinking in N/A terms, not T/C > Bruce > > Best regards, > > Bernd > > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small > to be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be > losing the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum > > cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all > it mounts, and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the > manifold. > > For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to > draw against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to > **straighten** the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and > have this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather > turbulent chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as > > International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but > they are extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that > is about equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge > plenum for any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they > use coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. > > I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. > > For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. > > I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my > GN, and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the > 3" are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler > ultimate flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an > automatic trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque > since converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather > allowing the engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. > > Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be > > fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to > best use the above. At least that's the way I'm headed. > > Bruce > > From: "Rausch, Bernd" br@rnt.de > > Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > > > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > > > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > > > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of > > the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a > straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I > > will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup > will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > > > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > > > > > TB IC intake runners > > > |---------|------------| > > > | || |------------| > > > -------| || | > > > -> / || |------------| > > > -------| || |------------| > > > | || | > > > | || |------------| > > > |---------|------------| > > > > > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > > intercooler ? > > > Any help would be appreciated. > > > Bernd ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 16:48:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:48:53 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:48:53 -0800 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Motorola microcontroller identification > Rich M wrote: > > I am trying to get information about a Motorola Microcontroller used > in European Ford Escort Turbo around mid-80's vintage - the chip id is > ZC85269CP, 40 pin DIP and has internal OTP Eprom. How do you know it has the internal EPROM? If you are counting/following circuit connections, you might have overlooked an external ROM. The Ford EEC-IV uses an 11 wire bus to communicate with external ROM. This external ROM is in a 24 pin chip. Even though this chip has Motorola markings, it might be an Intel design. Ford used both Intel and Motorola to manufacture the chips that Intel designed for Ford. The Ford custom MPU is similar to the Intel 8096. Does your computer have a 30 pin edge card connector? This connector can be used to read out the ROM, or to attach a ROM emulator. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 16:49:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:49:03 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:49:03 -0800 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Seeking a little advice on EFI project "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." wrote: > > On Tuesday 27 November 2001 20:49, Sam Weatherby wrote: > > I am putting a 400 into a '65 f100. > > initially I am using a Tb from a "CFI" 5.0 HO. This has 20 ~50 lb\hr > > injectors and will be fine for awhile. > > > do you know what models/years vehicles to look in the junkyard for this TB? The HO CFI 5.0's seem to be rare. I think they were an option only on the Thunderbird. Until I found the engine I really wanted, I was checking the junkyards for HO CFI's. I think I found two such cars - one missing the whole engine, the other missing the injectors. The CFI's are found on RWD V8 passanger cars. I think CFI was standard equipment in 1984-85 except on cop cars. It was optional in earlier years, but that was with earlier electronics. > > Instead of reinventing the wheel, why not swap over the fuel injection > > from an EFI 302? You have three choices (and sub choices within those): > > is the stock ECU hackable enough?... I want to write my own code, not only > modify the data tables. The Ford EEC-IV isn't as hackable as GM. But it has been hacked, and there is a commercial product for tuning certain EECs. Check the EEC mailing list. I don't know the subscribe address, but here's a hint: To unsubscribe, e-mail: eec-unsubscribe@eelink.net For additional commands, e-mail: eec-help@eelink.net Also check out: http://www.eec-tuner.com/ > I guess that the idea of stripping the EFI components of a later 302 is > pretty good for the TB, sensors, gas lines and pump, but for the ECU I guess > it is more a "personal achievement" thing :) To change the code in an EEC requires some circuit construction - perhaps 20 TTL type chips or one CPLD. Plenty of personal achievement there. > The other thing is that maybe it's easier for me to put stuff from other, > more common engines in my efi project, because in my country, Ford 302s are > scarce as hen's teeth, so the search for a donor engine for a ready EFI will > be "the neverending story" :) What country is ".cl"? I guess that advice on what fuel tanks, fuel senders, fuel pumps, brackets, and etc. to use won't be useful. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 16:57:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:57:24 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 16:57:24 -0800 From: "Cosby, Melvin C. (GEL, MSX)" Subject: RE: Steve's Parts Kit David Gregory wrote: > > And, i remeber someone mentioning a Digikey-like company > which does not have > a minimum order. I'm looking to build the analog LED display > for the WB > unit, but need some parts (especially the LED banks). I think it was Mouser. See http://www.mouser.com/ Mel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Tue Dec 4 16:45:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:03:51 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:03:51 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers I want to keep it simple, like Bruce is suggesting, that means 6 TB is out of question. I do not have problems with idle or part throttle (mild cam). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the intake port. A good point was to insulate the plenum from the heat of the head, I will do this with CF runners or with short silicone hoses in the runners. Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 19:08 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > > the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will > > be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. > In that case, having separate throttles is even more attractive. Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts > > throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the > > throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so > > throttle response should become even better. > The plenum volume; that between the throttle valve and the intake > valve determines how quickly a pressure change can occur to change > airflow. If you just happen to be ignoring the turbo having to spool up or down as the case may be. > > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. > Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or > where there's no common plenum. Or when looking for complex answers to simple guestions. > I envisage a common throttle plate with separate butterflies on a > common shaft (per side in a Vee engine). It's simple machining to > bore some suitable holes through a sandwich of two long aluminium > plates, machine a shaft and to make some butterflies. The throttle > cable enters what is the post-IC distribution box and pulls on a > lever attached to the butterfly shaft. A spring counters the cable > to close the butterflies. Till you start worring about the drill wandering and wind up with the throttle shaft being offset too much, or worse yet, not at all. You'll want it offset so that if the throttle return spring breaks the throttles close rather then remain open. > If the runners leave at opposite sides of the air distribution box, > then a relay link can mirror the motion for an identical setup of > throttles on the opposite side. There are only two throttle bodies; > each with 3 butterflies on a common shaft. then you'll also want a by-pass adjustment for each butterfly to really balance out the air flow at idle. > A competent machinist can probably make all the throttle parts in > less than a day using a lathe and bench drill in addition to some > hand tools. A milling machine would be useful but not essential. > Especially useful for creating the lip against which the butterflies > close on each half of the throttle plate sandwich, and for chasing a > groove for the butterfly shaft and its bushes. (Don't skimp on the > bushes - the shaft has to be quite thin in places and could be bent > by a backfire, causing it to stick subsequently.) Now you want thinning of the butterfly shafts too?. Shall we chrome all the bearing surfaces, or run the shaft on ball bearings, and incorporate seals into all 12-14-16 throttle shaft bearings?. > Each throttle plate sandwich, complete with butterflies and spring > can be held together with screws through one plate tapped into the > other. > Don't let the price of commercial units fool you into thinking the > parts are hard to make. > If you want to, you can attach the spigots for the inlet runners > directly to the throttle plates and use the plates as a side of the > distribution box. Or use *mirrored* runners and have all 6 butterflies in a row. Simplicity is the key to design. I'll stick with my earlier statements. It's much more important to have the plenum so that each cylinder feeds freely from it and not having one runner wall at the end of a large column of air. The one good thing about the SDS refered to intake fabrication was that they continued the plenum past the last cylinder's runner wall. As soon as the machine shop is done with my manifold I'll get back with on what really works in the real world rather then just day dreaming or quoting theory Bruce > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From tcheung@associated-labels.com Tue Dec 4 16:43:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:13:58 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:13:58 -0300 From: "Tom Cheung" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re:copy eproms great stuff Tim, you have answered my next questions but as i am totally green at eproms addressing programming, etc... would it be too much to ask for specifics i can understand...?? i do have 2 programs that i want to put onto a 27c256 1) factory program on a 27c128 2) performance program ona 27c128 a little foggy about loading the 2 programs onto the burner software, I will be buying it next week (needhams pb10) and can i switch between the 2 programs while the car is running? if what you described i can accomplish...fitting both programs on a single 27c256 and able to switch between them as i wish...that would be just fantastic mucho gracias!! Tom Cheung tcheung@associated-labels.com www.associated-labels.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy J Burgess" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:40 AM Subject: Re:copy eproms > Or you may use the larger PROM to store two separate loads of code (or four > loads with a 27C512) & easily select between the two. Here's how I built > up the multiple load selection hardware: Attach a 5 x 1 header to a 28 pin > DIP socket near pin 28 - connect header pin 1 to socket pin 28 (+5 volts), > connect header pin 3 to socket pin 27 (programmer address msb; A14), > connect header pin 5 to socket pin 14 (gnd), connect header pin 2 to header > pin 4. Attach the wires to just below the body of the socket. Bend up > pin 27 (address 14) of the PROM. Install the PROM in the socket. Solder a > wire between pin 27 of the PROM and pin 2 of the header. Use a jumper > (shorting) block to select the PROM mode: Short header pins 1 & 2 = Use > load @ address 0x4000 to 0x7FFF. Short header pins 4 & 5 = Use load @ > address 0x0 to 0x3FFF. Short header pins 2 & 3 = Program PROM. Load both > 16K PROM loads at the starting address indicated above (0x0 & 0x4000) in > the PROM programmer memory before programming the 32K PROM. If a 27C512 > PROM is used, A15 is the address msb & it is located at pin 1 of the 28 pin > DIP. The PROM data sheets (pinouts) may be found at > http://www.atmel.com/atmel/products/. > > Tim > > > Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:15:30 -0000 > From: "Richard M" > Subject: Re: copy eproms > > Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it may > not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to > duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and > upper > 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, > irrespective > of what state the most significant address bit is in. > Regards > Rich > - ----- Original Message ----- > From: Tom Cheung > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM > Subject: copy eproms > > > > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Tue Dec 4 17:04:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:28:17 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:28:17 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers OK, I understand what you mean. The air going out of the core is bent to the intake runner with the open valve. Tis is why I want to have a rather big plenum. But when you have a normal intercooler, the air is bent going inwards and again going outwards. That is the same effect, even worse with intercooler with the piping 90deg to the airflow, like the most intercoolers. I did not mean meachanical stress when comparing na to turbocharged engines. I did mean airflow plays the same role with a turbocharged engine, maybe is even more important because the air is denser. It is right that the plenum pressure is helping to push the piston down, but this has nothing to do with airflow. At the exhaust stroke, backpressure is much higher that in a na engine. Best regards, Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Dienstag, 4. Dezember 2001 20:22 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Rausch, Bernd" Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > I have the information on intercooler size from > http://www.spearcointercoolers.com. The core is 2-171. > This is a road/track car, and I am going to use two big > radiators(12"x16") to cool the liquid. > The plenum will be made of aluminium, only the runners will be CF. > I do not want to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to > bend > immediately. This is with the stock plenum without intercooler. My > plenum will be straight, like on my ascii drawing below. For any one valve to be drawing air, the air will have to be bent to feed it from any area other then the I/C area directly above the port. > And I do not see flow in a turbocharged application very different from > a n/a. The air is even denser in a turbo application, so flow losses are > higher. Of course you can crank up the boost, but you are loosing > efficiency and going to have more backpressure this way. In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute when in boost. If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure differences between the two types of motors then Bruce > Best regards, > Bernd > > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > From: "Rausch, Bernd" > Subject: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > thanks for your response. Your input (and that of others, of course)is > > really welcome. But I disagree in several points: > > I want to use one Spearco air/liquid intercooler per side (V-engine), > > this IC is 4.5"x4.5"x10" and rated for 700cfm each. The engine will > need > > about 800-850cfm for 650hp. > > With the IC in the plenum, I will actually cool the plenum and gain IC > > area this way (normally with a hot plenum and runners you heat your > > intake charge). I thought about building carbon intake runners, to > > insulate the runners and the plenum from the heat of the cylinder > head. > > You going to use a total of 4.5x9x10 for cooling an engine of 650 HP?. > Is this a dragster, or just for really short bursts of speed?. > what are your plans for cooling the liquid?. > CF for a large ehough plenum to hold all this is going to need some > serious ribbing to prevent a sneeze from rupturing it. > > I want to make big plenums, about 1,5L *after* the core (displacement > of the engine is 3L total). So the core will not straighten the flow to much. > Your going to have the air going thru a 4.5 core and then want it to > bend > immediately?. Ugh, OK, I don't see it happening that way, but it's your > decision. > > Think of it this way: If I use the same IC (of which I assume that it > is the right size for the application) with a "classic" setup > > (IC->TB->plenum), all I am doing is to avoid the transition form the > > intercooler core to a 2,5" pipe and the transition from the pipe to > the manifold (and a 90deg bend, since my TB is mounted on the side of the > > plenum)! > Me thinks your toooo concerned about an elbow. Is it some really small > radius?. > Again, I think your thinking in N/A terms, not T/C > Bruce > > Best regards, > > Bernd > > Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > > Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Any intercooler that you use in the plenum, would either be too small > to be effective, or need fluids that are really cold. you'll also be > losing the surface area of the piping for heat transfer. With the in plenum > > cooler, you also be exposing it to the heat of the manifold, thru all > it mounts, and you libel to losing alot of cooling effect to cooling the > manifold. > > For a plenum to be effective the opening intake valve must be able to > draw against the plenum, having the finning in the plenum is going to > **straighten** the air flow, and so the opening valve is going to have to *try* and > have this air change direction, rather then drawing against a rather > turbulent chamber of waves, and air movement. BTW, this is the same set up as > > International Harvester uses on some of it's deisel applications, but > they are extremely low rpm motors. They also have an area above the I/C that > is about equal to the area below it. I think you'd have to have a really huge > plenum for any kind of free reving motor to really work, in the IH version they > use coolant in the I/C so as to just reduce the high peaks of air temp.. > > I think it's a stop gap measure, and limited in practical application. > > For a diesel tractor working in the fields it's OK. > > I had choices of 2.5 and 3.0" piping for the front mount I/C in my > GN, and after some investigation think my original thoughts of using the > 3" are best. Trading a little off idle / low rpm response for cooler > ultimate flow should be worth while. I'm lucky in so far as mine is an > automatic trannied car, so I can tolerate the lack of really down low torque > since converter slippage with be absorbing that loss anyway, or rather > allowing the engine to rev thru that zone in a lightly loaded state. > > Huge preturbo plumbing, large post turbo, as much I/C as can be > > fitted, and calibrate as necessary. then finalize the hardware to > best use the above. At least that's the way I'm headed. > > Bruce > > From: "Rausch, Bernd" br@rnt.de > > Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Thanks for the responses I got, I have some additional questions: > > > At the moment, I have an air/air intercooler per side (twinturbo V > > > engine). I have per side: three 90deg bends, about 2m piping, two > > > intercooler mandifolds with 90deg bends and four silicone hoses. > > > I am thinking of welding an air/liquid intercooler core from Spearco > > > directly in the intake plenum. The throttle body will be upstream of > > the intercooler. With this construction I can exit the turbo in a > straigt line, with an expanding pipe of about 0.4m to the throttle body. I > > will only need one hose (turbo has a flange at the outlet). This setup > will save me five 90deg bends, 1.6m piping, three silicone hoses and two > > > manifolds at the intercooler per side. > > > > > > TB IC intake runners > > > |---------|------------| > > > | || |------------| > > > -------| || | > > > -> / || |------------| > > > -------| || |------------| > > > | || | > > > | || |------------| > > > |---------|------------| > > > > > > -Is there any downside of this setup ? > > > -How do I calculate intake plenum volume ? Only the volume on the > > > downstream side of the intercooler or the complete plenum including > > > intercooler ? > > > Any help would be appreciated. > > > Bernd ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Tue Dec 4 17:17:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:33:44 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:33:44 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Non email DIY list??? Not sure who to address this to, but maybe Steve Ravet could chime in if he knows? Currently I receive my diyefi updates via individual emails (and I assume this is the same for all on list). 1) Is there a push to get this list on a bulletin board WWW site that has threaded topics. This way we can eliminate sorting out 100's of emails and deleting unwanted ones. We can just visit the site, look at the topics, and chime in when we want. 2) Or does this already exist for this news group and I am just not aware of it. 3) Will if ever happen? If not, what is the factors that prevent this from moving to that style forum. Email is not an efficient method for a news group with the vast amount of topics we discuss. Thanks, Steve F ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From TwoLnBlktp90@aol.com Tue Dec 4 17:04:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:33:45 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:33:45 -0300 From: TwoLnBlktp90@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers --part1_d6.fb90ec1.293e863e_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/4/01 11:48:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, br@rnt.de writes: > ). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the > plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the > intake port Just a quick question, but why doesn't anyone build throttle bodies like the dedenbear throttle stops, with a dissc that slides out of the way instead of a butterfly? Ricky --part1_d6.fb90ec1.293e863e_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In a message dated 12/4/01 11:48:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, br@rnt.de writes:


). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the
plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the
intake port
Just a quick question, but why doesn't anyone build throttle bodies like the dedenbear throttle stops, with a dissc that slides out of the way instead of a butterfly?

Ricky --part1_d6.fb90ec1.293e863e_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From f_wilk@hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 17:18:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:42:23 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:42:23 -0300 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re:copy eproms I have done this with a BOSCH Motronic. You tie the upper most address to a switch that switches from 0V to 5V. Bring the switch out so that it is accessed from the outside. A flip of the switch changes between the two programs (upper & lower 128 banks). FR Wilk _________________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tom Cheung" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:43 AM Subject: Re: Re:copy eproms > great stuff Tim, you have answered my next questions > but as i am totally green at eproms addressing programming, etc... > > would it be too much to ask for specifics i can understand...?? > > i do have 2 programs that i want to put onto a 27c256 > 1) factory program on a 27c128 > 2) performance program ona 27c128 > > a little foggy about loading the 2 programs onto the burner software, I will > be buying it next week (needhams pb10) > and can i switch between the 2 programs while the car is running? > > if what you described i can accomplish...fitting both programs on a single > 27c256 and able to switch between them > as i wish...that would be just fantastic > > mucho gracias!! > > > Tom Cheung > > tcheung@associated-labels.com > www.associated-labels.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Timothy J Burgess" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:40 AM > Subject: Re:copy eproms > > > > Or you may use the larger PROM to store two separate loads of code (or > four > > loads with a 27C512) & easily select between the two. Here's how I built > > up the multiple load selection hardware: Attach a 5 x 1 header to a 28 > pin > > DIP socket near pin 28 - connect header pin 1 to socket pin 28 (+5 volts), > > connect header pin 3 to socket pin 27 (programmer address msb; A14), > > connect header pin 5 to socket pin 14 (gnd), connect header pin 2 to > header > > pin 4. Attach the wires to just below the body of the socket. Bend up > > pin 27 (address 14) of the PROM. Install the PROM in the socket. Solder > a > > wire between pin 27 of the PROM and pin 2 of the header. Use a jumper > > (shorting) block to select the PROM mode: Short header pins 1 & 2 = Use > > load @ address 0x4000 to 0x7FFF. Short header pins 4 & 5 = Use load @ > > address 0x0 to 0x3FFF. Short header pins 2 & 3 = Program PROM. Load both > > 16K PROM loads at the starting address indicated above (0x0 & 0x4000) in > > the PROM programmer memory before programming the 32K PROM. If a 27C512 > > PROM is used, A15 is the address msb & it is located at pin 1 of the 28 > pin > > DIP. The PROM data sheets (pinouts) may be found at > > http://www.atmel.com/atmel/products/. > > > > Tim > > > > > > Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:15:30 -0000 > > From: "Richard M" > > Subject: Re: copy eproms > > > > Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it > may > > not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to > > duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and > > upper > > 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, > > irrespective > > of what state the most significant address bit is in. > > Regards > > Rich > > - ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Tom Cheung > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM > > Subject: copy eproms > > > > > > > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > > > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > > > > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sravet@arm.com Tue Dec 4 17:25:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:43:34 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:43:34 -0300 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Non email DIY list??? Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > Currently I receive my diyefi updates via individual emails (and I assume > this is the same for all on list). There is also a digest mode, sent once per day, with all of the days emails in it. > > 1) Is there a push to get this list on a bulletin board WWW site that has > threaded topics. This way we can eliminate sorting out 100's of emails and > deleting unwanted ones. We can just visit the site, look at the topics, and > chime in when we want. The DIY list will stay an email list, although if other people want to create a WWW based list they're certainly free to do so. Most email clients will sort by thread for you so you can skip threads that aren't of interest. The archives are available in html format sorted by thread, although since I have to create them by hand they may lag a month or so behind. These are read only, new posts must be emailed. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dcg1174@tntech.edu Tue Dec 4 17:40:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:47:32 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:47:32 -0300 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Steve's Parts Kit I had a couple of questions about the capacitors that came with steve's parts kits. Which component on the list (C1, C2,...) is the ceramic disk capictor? Also, what are the capacitances of the two largest film resistors (the red ones)? And, i remeber someone mentioning a Digikey-like company which does not have a minimum order. I'm looking to build the analog LED display for the WB unit, but need some parts (especially the LED banks). Thanks, David Gregory ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 17:30:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:47:42 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:47:42 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers If you're talking about an actual throttle control that slides rather then pivots, the problem can be sealing them, and / or them sticking. As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare and expensive. Bruce From: TwoLnBlktp90@aol.com Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the intake port Just a quick question, but why doesn't anyone build throttle bodies like the dedenbear throttle stops, with a dissc that slides out of the way instead of a butterfly? Ricky ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From f_wilk@hotmail.com Tue Dec 4 17:27:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:47:51 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:47:51 -0300 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU Unfortunately Jetronics are not computerized. They have no chip. It is all circuitry and no CPU. FR Wilk _____________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 3:19 PM Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU > My car has the Jetronic Turbo. > > Thanks for any help! > > -David > > -----Original Message----- > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? > > FR Wilk > ___________________________________ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Goldstein" > To: > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM > Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. I > > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware for > > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his Firebird. > > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess I'm > > looking for similar equipment. > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > -David > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 17:52:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:52:28 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 17:52:28 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will > > > be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. > > In that case, having separate throttles is even more attractive. > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing off the plenum as well as the runners? > > > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts > > > throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the > > > throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so > > > throttle response should become even better. > > The plenum volume; that between the throttle valve and the intake > > valve determines how quickly a pressure change can occur to change > > airflow. > If you just happen to be ignoring the turbo having to spool up or > down as the case may be. Not ignoring anything. The rate at which the turbo spools up is determined by the exhaust gas flow which depends directly on how quickly you can fill the cylinders in the first place. Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to fill that volume as well as that of the runners. OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure hasn't bled out through the turbo. Which system will have less lag? > > > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > > > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > > > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > > > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. > > Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or > > where there's no common plenum. > > Or when looking for complex answers to simple guestions. That may be the case. It could also be ricers using them for brag-value. A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical setups). > > I envisage a common throttle plate with separate butterflies on a > > common shaft (per side in a Vee engine). It's simple machining to > > bore some suitable holes through a sandwich of two long aluminium > > plates, machine a shaft and to make some butterflies. The throttle > > cable enters what is the post-IC distribution box and pulls on a > > lever attached to the butterfly shaft. A spring counters the cable > > to close the butterflies. > Till you start worring about the drill wandering and wind up with > the throttle shaft being offset too much, or worse yet, not at > all. You'll want it offset so that if the throttle return spring > breaks the throttles close rather then remain open. The spring is mainly required to keep the cable in tension. Cables aren't very useful for pushing things. > > If the runners leave at opposite sides of the air distribution box, > > then a relay link can mirror the motion for an identical setup of > > throttles on the opposite side. There are only two throttle bodies; > > each with 3 butterflies on a common shaft. > then you'll also want a by-pass adjustment for each butterfly to > really balance out the air flow at idle. Not required in this application; but simple enough to add by drilling bypass passages through the inner plate and throttling them with set-screws accessible from the outside. A PITA to adjust and probably a liability in this application. > > A competent machinist can probably make all the throttle parts in > > less than a day using a lathe and bench drill in addition to some > > hand tools. A milling machine would be useful but not essential. > > Especially useful for creating the lip against which the butterflies > > close on each half of the throttle plate sandwich, and for chasing a > > groove for the butterfly shaft and its bushes. (Don't skimp on the > > bushes - the shaft has to be quite thin in places and could be bent > > by a backfire, causing it to stick subsequently.) > > Now you want thinning of the butterfly shafts too?. The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. > Shall we chrome all the bearing surfaces, or run the shaft on ball > bearings, and incorporate seals into all 12-14-16 throttle shaft > bearings?. One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. > > Each throttle plate sandwich, complete with butterflies and spring > > can be held together with screws through one plate tapped into the > > other. > > Don't let the price of commercial units fool you into thinking the > > parts are hard to make. > > If you want to, you can attach the spigots for the inlet runners > > directly to the throttle plates and use the plates as a side of the > > distribution box. > Or use *mirrored* runners and have all 6 butterflies in a row. Que? Wouldn't that make for a very tall arrangement on a V engine? Suits an inline engine. > Simplicity is the key to design. You mean "Everything should be as simple as possible; but no simpler?" > I'll stick with my earlier statements. > It's much more important to have the plenum so that each cylinder > feeds freely from it and not having one runner wall at the end of > a large column of air. The one good thing about the SDS refered > to intake fabrication was that they continued the plenum past the > last cylinder's runner wall. A runner immediately at a _long_ wall benefits flow-wise from the Coander effect - the wall "guides" airflow reducing the pressure difference required for a given flow into the runner. If not all runners have the same entry geometry, then there will be an imbalance. This was one of the first flow-effects I encountered in practical engine design in 1978. > As soon as the machine shop is done with my manifold I'll get back > with on what really works in the real world rather then just day > dreaming or quoting theory Oh; it really works. It's nothing new; just old stuff applied in a new way. But don't let that stop you from doing things your way. If you're happy with the way your method works, there's no reason for you to change. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 18:00:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:00:49 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:00:49 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers -> Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? -> -> The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow into the Yeah. Just like the French Bollee cars about a hundred years ago. Which borrowed the concept from steam engines. - Dave "old fangle" Williams ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 18:07:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:07:50 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:07:50 -0800 From: "Sam Weatherby" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Seeking a little advice on EFI project LTD LX's and LTD cop cars also had the 5.0 HO CFI. Mine was from an '85 LTD cop car. (The little LTD). > > is the stock ECU hackable enough?... I want to write my own code, not only > > modify the data tables. If you use multiport and the computer use on the '89-93 Mustang 5.0 HO's it is pretty well known and hacked. -srw ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 18:15:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:15:56 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:15:56 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Dave Williams tapped away at the keyboard with: > -> Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? > -> The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow into the > Yeah. Just like the French Bollee cars about a hundred years ago. > Which borrowed the concept from steam engines. The BMW engineers responsible for bringing the system into volume production won the Porsche Prize this year; for innovation, IIRC. First BMW engines to use them were the 1.6 litre built at Hams Hall in the UK. > - Dave "old fangle" Williams Ever wonder how few new inventions there actually are? -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 17:53:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:19:44 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:19:44 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit From: "David Gregory" Subject: Steve's Parts Kit > I had a couple of questions about the capacitors that came with steve's > parts kits. > Which component on the list (C1, C2,...) is the ceramic disk capictor? C8 > Also, what are the capacitances of the two largest film resistors (the red > ones)? the larger of the two goes at C10 and the smaller at C7 > And, i remeber someone mentioning a Digikey-like company which does not have > a minimum order. I'm looking to build the analog LED display for the WB > unit, but need some parts (especially the LED banks). I can't help you on that one. Bruce Don't give any lil guys a smart coil. Right now their having a contest to see who they can get to *hold this* the most times. Bashful's developed a stutter now...... > David Gregory ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sfogg@attglobal.net Tue Dec 4 18:02:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:20:36 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:20:36 -0300 From: "Shawn Fogg" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce, "As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare and expensive." Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow into the engine so it doesn't need any throttle body. http://www.autospeed.com/A_1083/page1.html Shawn ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SWeatherby@winisp.net Tue Dec 4 16:51:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:21:52 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:21:52 -0300 From: "Sam Weatherby" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info Interesting... I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. Anyone know a source for that? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:58 PM Subject: eDist Info > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 18:22:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:22:24 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:22:24 -0800 From: LOW4SHOW@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: ECU Info I'm trying to determine what code a particular chip on a Honda ECU is written in so I can find a proper disassembler. One chip on the board is the OKI MSM80C154 which I have found information about on the www.okisemi.com. The chip that has the fuel and timing stored on is a OKI chip labeled M38256AP-92. My questions are? 1.) does anyone have experience with these or similar chips? 2.) If I find a disassembler that works on the MSM80C154 will that also work on the code on the second chip? Are they both written in the same code? 3.) Has anyone out there done any work on these or have any information on disassemblers? Thanks everybody, Please reply to me at Low4show@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From MarkRShirley@eaton.com Tue Dec 4 18:00:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:24:50 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:24:50 -0300 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers If in fact there is no throttle body, that would have a tremendous impact on idle and part throttle fuel economy. Probably approaching a diesel engine. > -----Original Message----- > From: Shawn Fogg [mailto:sfogg@attglobal.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 4:02 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Bruce, > > "As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare > and expensive." > > Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? > > The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow > into the engine so it doesn't need any throttle body. > > http://www.autospeed.com/A_1083/page1.html > > Shawn > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 18:18:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:37:54 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:37:54 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers They don't show one in the cut away, makes me wonder thou, have a worm gear driving the whole show thou. Bruce From: "Shirley, Mark R" Subject: RE: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > If in fact there is no throttle body, that would have a > tremendous impact on idle and part throttle fuel economy. > Probably approaching a diesel engine. > > From: Shawn Fogg [mailto:sfogg@attglobal.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 4:02 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Bruce, > > "As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare > > and expensive." > > Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? > > The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow > > into the engine so it doesn't need any throttle body. > > http://www.autospeed.com/A_1083/page1.html > > Shawn ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sfogg@attglobal.net Tue Dec 4 18:02:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:42:01 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:42:01 -0300 From: "Shawn Fogg" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce, "As far as I know actually, the iris style is best, but rare and expensive." Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow into the engine so it doesn't need any throttle body. http://www.autospeed.com/A_1083/page1.html Shawn ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From tcheung@associated-labels.com Tue Dec 4 16:43:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:42:04 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:42:04 -0300 From: "Tom Cheung" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re:copy eproms great stuff Tim, you have answered my next questions but as i am totally green at eproms addressing programming, etc... would it be too much to ask for specifics i can understand...?? i do have 2 programs that i want to put onto a 27c256 1) factory program on a 27c128 2) performance program ona 27c128 a little foggy about loading the 2 programs onto the burner software, I will be buying it next week (needhams pb10) and can i switch between the 2 programs while the car is running? if what you described i can accomplish...fitting both programs on a single 27c256 and able to switch between them as i wish...that would be just fantastic mucho gracias!! Tom Cheung tcheung@associated-labels.com www.associated-labels.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy J Burgess" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:40 AM Subject: Re:copy eproms > Or you may use the larger PROM to store two separate loads of code (or four > loads with a 27C512) & easily select between the two. Here's how I built > up the multiple load selection hardware: Attach a 5 x 1 header to a 28 pin > DIP socket near pin 28 - connect header pin 1 to socket pin 28 (+5 volts), > connect header pin 3 to socket pin 27 (programmer address msb; A14), > connect header pin 5 to socket pin 14 (gnd), connect header pin 2 to header > pin 4. Attach the wires to just below the body of the socket. Bend up > pin 27 (address 14) of the PROM. Install the PROM in the socket. Solder a > wire between pin 27 of the PROM and pin 2 of the header. Use a jumper > (shorting) block to select the PROM mode: Short header pins 1 & 2 = Use > load @ address 0x4000 to 0x7FFF. Short header pins 4 & 5 = Use load @ > address 0x0 to 0x3FFF. Short header pins 2 & 3 = Program PROM. Load both > 16K PROM loads at the starting address indicated above (0x0 & 0x4000) in > the PROM programmer memory before programming the 32K PROM. If a 27C512 > PROM is used, A15 is the address msb & it is located at pin 1 of the 28 pin > DIP. The PROM data sheets (pinouts) may be found at > http://www.atmel.com/atmel/products/. > > Tim > > > Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 09:15:30 -0000 > From: "Richard M" > Subject: Re: copy eproms > > Yes, but depending on what the ECU does with the extra address line, it may > not work if you only copy the bottom 128K into the larger eprom - best to > duplicate the 128K code onto the 256K part (same in the lower 128K and > upper > 128K), so the code will be the same from the ECU's perspective, > irrespective > of what state the most significant address bit is in. > Regards > Rich > - ----- Original Message ----- > From: Tom Cheung > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:49 AM > Subject: copy eproms > > > > can i copy data from a 27c128 eprom to a 27c256 eprom easily? > > i will purchase a needhams programmer to do this > > > > the 128k eprom is harder to get and may be more expensive > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 18:16:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:43:32 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 18:43:32 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info might try Electromotive (the one in WV), I think they use those and 60s Bruce From: "Sam Weatherby" Subject: Re: eDist Info > Interesting... > I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. > All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. > Anyone know a source for that? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: eDist Info > > Here's a URL for the eDist > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.asp?ListHistory > > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From thomas.renegar@nist.gov Tue Dec 4 19:12:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:41:05 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:41:05 -0300 From: Brian Renegar Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit >C8 Actually the schematics say C2. But I spoke with BobR and he said they are compatible. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 4 19:21:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:44:32 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:44:32 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit If you look at the lead spacing you'll understand my answer. Also, using the large one at C2 also gets the grouping there rather close. Bruce From: "Brian Renegar" Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit > >C8 > Actually the schematics say C2. But I spoke with BobR and he said they are > compatible. > Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From MarkRShirley@eaton.com Tue Dec 4 19:25:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:57:23 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 19:57:23 -0300 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: eDist Info Ford 2.5L engine from Ranger had 36-1 tooth wheel. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sam Weatherby [mailto:SWeatherby@winisp.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:52 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: eDist Info > > > Interesting... > I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. > All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. > Anyone know a source for that? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bruce" > To: > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:58 PM > Subject: eDist Info > > > > > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > > > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.a sp?ListHistory > ID=1810607119 > > Bruce > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From skulte@skulte.com Tue Dec 4 19:49:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:05:49 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:05:49 -0300 From: skulte MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit On Tue, 4 Dec 2001, David Gregory wrote: > I had a couple of questions about the capacitors that came with steve's > parts kits. Hmm. I guess the parts kits were shipped? I still hadn't received mine and was wondering when I should expect it. Andris Skulte Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SWeatherby@winisp.net Tue Dec 4 20:17:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:46:22 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:46:22 -0300 From: "Sam Weatherby" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDist Info Any idea how they are mounted? I have the balancer from a Explorer 5.0, but it has an integral pulley that does not line up with my existing pulleys. The crown vic unit looks like it slides on the crank behind the dampner. That is looking like my best bet, but I have only seen pictures of that... -srw ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shirley, Mark R" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:25 PM Subject: RE: eDist Info > Ford 2.5L engine from Ranger had 36-1 tooth wheel. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Sam Weatherby [mailto:SWeatherby@winisp.net] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:52 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: eDist Info > > > > > > Interesting... > > I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. > > All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. > > Anyone know a source for that? > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Bruce" > > To: > > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:58 PM > > Subject: eDist Info > > > > > > > > > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > > > > > > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.a > sp?ListHistory > > ID=1810607119 > > > > Bruce > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 20:52:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:52:50 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 20:52:50 -0800 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > >To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing >off the plenum as well as the runners? KART cars last year (and probably this year too) used an extra throttle that's on the plenum and electronically controlled to limit boost. I guess they found they could react faster there to limit a spike event than they could with controlling the wastegate. I'm guessing they also have a good spike wanting to naturally happen after <100ms shift (I don't know for sure what their shift times are). >Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to >fill that volume as well as that of the runners. If you do a throttle before all that volume like you were saying, its really going to have terrible throttle response. >OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already >filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners >sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, >the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening >of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure >hasn't bled out through the turbo. > >Which system will have less lag? The system with 6 throttle plates will have less lag. It should also have much, much better throttle response. You will have to make a plenum of air pressure from all 6 runners past the throttles though to get a MAP pressure. This can just be 6 lines tee'd together, just keep the lines as short as possible and use, probably, 1/8" or 3/16" diameter hoses. >A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate >throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. >In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little >advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical >setups). You can't use a slide throttle on a street car though. There is terribly inconsistent flow through them at part throttle. I liked the stratus touring car that had barrel throttles though, those were cool as hell! They split at the middle and rolled away (like double-doors opening) to make a completely smooth runner at WOT. Slide throttles are your best bet by far. >The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. >The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. >Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be >around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. 70mm??? For what, if you're going to have 100%VE at 12000 rpm? What rpm will the motor go to? I'm guessing you'd need somewhere in the low 50mm range. Smaller is better as long as its not a restriction because if you go too big the throttles just end up becoming an on/off switch. For a 2L NA engine going to 8500 rpm and making ~300hp, we found that 52mm was the smallest that we didn't lose any hp. Anything bigger than that didn't gain any hp at all and just made the engine more difficult to drive. >One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very >durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. >You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by >chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just >the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. > >No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air >distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that >requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. You'll have to be VERY careful about thermal expansion of the engine. This is without a doubt the most difficult part of this entire system. You need to make a setup that holds the butterflies aligned within the trumpets or else they will bind up. This seems trivial, but it really requires some attention. I would put a pair of ball bearings on each butterfly and join the butterflies from cylinder-to-cylinder with fittings that allow some axial growth. http://www.zeromax.com has some neat couplings that can get this job done well. I haven't used them, but they really look like the perfect part for this application. Just wondering though, but why don't you just make a normal-ish intake manifold and mount the intercooler away from the engine? This is normally much easier to do and you don't have to worry so much about heat soak from the engine getting the IC hot. You're also talking about mounting something big, heavy, and with very little thermal expansion (as long as you keep the water cool that is) on top of a somewhat high vibration environment that goes through wild temperature swings, expansions, and deflections. Its just a recipe for a part thats going to be difficult to make last very long. If you go through and make it, I'd love to see some pictures! Just curious also though, what rpm range, boost range, and displacement are you planning for this V6? I believe you mentioned a 650hp goal... Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 21:29:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:29:08 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:29:08 -0800 From: "Rob F" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: is this a WB02 sensor? Reading through my '00 Impreza RS shop manual, I found the description of the front O2 sensor (also called an A/F sensor in the book) very familiar... "The zirconium oxide has the property of generating electromotive force when contacting an oxygen ion, and the electromotive force generated varies depending on the amount of oxygen ion The front oxygen (A/F) sensor detects the amount of oxygen in exhaust gases in a linear form by making use of this property." There is also a graph of mixture vs mA (without units of course) that looks very similar to the one on the WB02 page. So, is this the same type of sensor that is used on the Honda Civic? Is this a big deal? I mean, I had the impression that the Honda was the rather rare to have this piece included from the factory. -Rob ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 21:41:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:41:46 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:41:46 -0800 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing > off the plenum as well as the runners? Um... I think he's making fun. > OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already > filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners > sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, > the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening > of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure > hasn't bled out through the turbo. > > Which system will have less lag? Relatively high-pressure - i.e., not at 15" vacuum but at atmospheric or just under on an N/A car or possibly much over on a turbo. Much quicker throttle response, possibly more turbulence at part throttle but the plates should keep everything in line at WOT, and the turbulence might be good for air/fuel mixing. > > > > > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > > > > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > > > > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > > > > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. > > > Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or > > > where there's no common plenum. > > > > Or when looking for complex answers to simple guestions. > > That may be the case. It could also be ricers using them for > brag-value. > > A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate > throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. > In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little > advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical > setups). The Euro-spec BMW M3 uses 6 throttles, doesn't it? Seems to work okay there ;-) > > You mean > "Everything should be as simple as possible; but no simpler?" LOL!!! > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 4 21:26:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:52:57 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:52:57 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers TwoLnBlktp90@aol.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > In a message dated 12/4/01 11:48:03 AM Pacific Standard Time, > br@rnt.de writes: > > ). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the > > plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the > > intake port > Just a quick question, but why doesn't anyone build throttle > bodies like the dedenbear throttle stops, with a dissc that slides > out of the way instead of a butterfly? Because of sealing and sticking problems in the slide throttle. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jhartwig@midsouth.rr.com Tue Dec 4 21:33:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:54:16 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:54:16 -0300 From: "Jurgen Hartwig" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit > Hmm. I guess the parts kits were shipped? I still hadn't received mine and > was wondering when I should expect it. > Not to be another "me too," but I'm wondering if Steve has been able to catch up. I purchased a few boards under the second group buy (Thanks a billion Bob R). The boards arrived yesterday, and I'm already itching to get it together. Does anyone feel that there needs to be a second 'parts' group buy for all the stragglers? I would be willing to donate the time and dollars to get such a group buy completed. Also, I am a decent solder man on the larger stuff and on copper plumbing in homes, but the breadboard looks intimidating. At one time, Steve said he would be selling a video tape with tips. Barring the availability of such tape, any recommendations of books or web sites for reference would be appreciated. I am willing to spend any dollar amount to buy the proper tools to do the job. Sorry for the bandwidth. jay ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 4 21:24:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:55:51 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 21:55:51 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > I want to keep it simple, like Bruce is suggesting, that means 6 TB is > out of question. I do not have problems with idle or part throttle (mild > cam). At WOT, a 6 butterfly system is worse then a butterfly at the > plenum because you have the shafts and plates directly in front of the > intake port. The butterfly is at the top of the runner. It's a forced-induction system. THe turbulence created is not necessarily bad. > A good point was to insulate the plenum from the heat of the head, I > will do this with CF runners or with short silicone hoses in the > runners. A thin heat shield and air gap underneath the plenum will also help. You have an integrated cooler, so any radiated heat cought by the body of the plenum will be largely removed by the IC. [snip] -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ludis@cruzers.com Tue Dec 4 21:17:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:06:32 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:06:32 -0300 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Seeking a little advice on EFI project "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." wrote: > > On Tuesday 27 November 2001 20:49, Sam Weatherby wrote: > > I am putting a 400 into a '65 f100. > > initially I am using a Tb from a "CFI" 5.0 HO. This has 20 ~50 lb\hr > > injectors and will be fine for awhile. > > > do you know what models/years vehicles to look in the junkyard for this TB? The HO CFI 5.0's seem to be rare. I think they were an option only on the Thunderbird. Until I found the engine I really wanted, I was checking the junkyards for HO CFI's. I think I found two such cars - one missing the whole engine, the other missing the injectors. The CFI's are found on RWD V8 passanger cars. I think CFI was standard equipment in 1984-85 except on cop cars. It was optional in earlier years, but that was with earlier electronics. > > Instead of reinventing the wheel, why not swap over the fuel injection > > from an EFI 302? You have three choices (and sub choices within those): > > is the stock ECU hackable enough?... I want to write my own code, not only > modify the data tables. The Ford EEC-IV isn't as hackable as GM. But it has been hacked, and there is a commercial product for tuning certain EECs. Check the EEC mailing list. I don't know the subscribe address, but here's a hint: To unsubscribe, e-mail: eec-unsubscribe@eelink.net For additional commands, e-mail: eec-help@eelink.net Also check out: http://www.eec-tuner.com/ > I guess that the idea of stripping the EFI components of a later 302 is > pretty good for the TB, sensors, gas lines and pump, but for the ECU I guess > it is more a "personal achievement" thing :) To change the code in an EEC requires some circuit construction - perhaps 20 TTL type chips or one CPLD. Plenty of personal achievement there. > The other thing is that maybe it's easier for me to put stuff from other, > more common engines in my efi project, because in my country, Ford 302s are > scarce as hen's teeth, so the search for a donor engine for a ready EFI will > be "the neverending story" :) What country is ".cl"? I guess that advice on what fuel tanks, fuel senders, fuel pumps, brackets, and etc. to use won't be useful. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ludis@cruzers.com Tue Dec 4 20:14:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:08:53 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:08:53 -0300 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Motorola microcontroller identification > Rich M wrote: > > I am trying to get information about a Motorola Microcontroller used > in European Ford Escort Turbo around mid-80's vintage - the chip id is > ZC85269CP, 40 pin DIP and has internal OTP Eprom. How do you know it has the internal EPROM? If you are counting/following circuit connections, you might have overlooked an external ROM. The Ford EEC-IV uses an 11 wire bus to communicate with external ROM. This external ROM is in a 24 pin chip. Even though this chip has Motorola markings, it might be an Intel design. Ford used both Intel and Motorola to manufacture the chips that Intel designed for Ford. The Ford custom MPU is similar to the Intel 8096. Does your computer have a 30 pin edge card connector? This connector can be used to read out the ROM, or to attach a ROM emulator. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Melvin.Cosby@Lighting.GE.com Tue Dec 4 21:56:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:10:25 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:10:25 -0300 From: "Cosby, Melvin C. (GEL, MSX)" Subject: RE: Steve's Parts Kit David Gregory wrote: > > And, i remeber someone mentioning a Digikey-like company > which does not have > a minimum order. I'm looking to build the analog LED display > for the WB > unit, but need some parts (especially the LED banks). I think it was Mouser. See http://www.mouser.com/ Mel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 4 22:46:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:46:58 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 22:46:58 -0800 From: GT40MkI@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit --part1_104.d58db3a.293f1cc9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm a newcomer, but the DIY WB02 kit that ??steve?? has put together caught my eye. What is the kit missing to complete the meter? How much do the kits sell for? Does it use the production honda wb02, or something else? Thanks in advance, -Sean --part1_104.d58db3a.293f1cc9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm a newcomer, but the DIY WB02 kit that ??steve?? has put together caught my eye.  What is the kit missing to complete the meter?  How much do the kits sell for?  Does it use the production honda wb02, or something else?

Thanks in advance,
-Sean --part1_104.d58db3a.293f1cc9_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sweatherby@winisp.net Tue Dec 4 23:04:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:17:42 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:17:42 -0300 From: "Sam Weatherby" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Seeking a little advice on EFI project LTD LX's and LTD cop cars also had the 5.0 HO CFI. Mine was from an '85 LTD cop car. (The little LTD). > > is the stock ECU hackable enough?... I want to write my own code, not only > > modify the data tables. If you use multiport and the computer use on the '89-93 Mustang 5.0 HO's it is pretty well known and hacked. -srw ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 4 22:52:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:19:47 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:19:47 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Rausch, Bernd tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > the complete intake manifold with plenum and intake runners will > > > be custom fabricated. So I am open for various suggestions. > > In that case, having separate throttles is even more attractive. > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing off the plenum as well as the runners? > > > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts > > > throttle response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the > > > throttle body, with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so > > > throttle response should become even better. > > The plenum volume; that between the throttle valve and the intake > > valve determines how quickly a pressure change can occur to change > > airflow. > If you just happen to be ignoring the turbo having to spool up or > down as the case may be. Not ignoring anything. The rate at which the turbo spools up is determined by the exhaust gas flow which depends directly on how quickly you can fill the cylinders in the first place. Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to fill that volume as well as that of the runners. OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure hasn't bled out through the turbo. Which system will have less lag? > > > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > > > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > > > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > > > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. > > Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or > > where there's no common plenum. > > Or when looking for complex answers to simple guestions. That may be the case. It could also be ricers using them for brag-value. A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical setups). > > I envisage a common throttle plate with separate butterflies on a > > common shaft (per side in a Vee engine). It's simple machining to > > bore some suitable holes through a sandwich of two long aluminium > > plates, machine a shaft and to make some butterflies. The throttle > > cable enters what is the post-IC distribution box and pulls on a > > lever attached to the butterfly shaft. A spring counters the cable > > to close the butterflies. > Till you start worring about the drill wandering and wind up with > the throttle shaft being offset too much, or worse yet, not at > all. You'll want it offset so that if the throttle return spring > breaks the throttles close rather then remain open. The spring is mainly required to keep the cable in tension. Cables aren't very useful for pushing things. > > If the runners leave at opposite sides of the air distribution box, > > then a relay link can mirror the motion for an identical setup of > > throttles on the opposite side. There are only two throttle bodies; > > each with 3 butterflies on a common shaft. > then you'll also want a by-pass adjustment for each butterfly to > really balance out the air flow at idle. Not required in this application; but simple enough to add by drilling bypass passages through the inner plate and throttling them with set-screws accessible from the outside. A PITA to adjust and probably a liability in this application. > > A competent machinist can probably make all the throttle parts in > > less than a day using a lathe and bench drill in addition to some > > hand tools. A milling machine would be useful but not essential. > > Especially useful for creating the lip against which the butterflies > > close on each half of the throttle plate sandwich, and for chasing a > > groove for the butterfly shaft and its bushes. (Don't skimp on the > > bushes - the shaft has to be quite thin in places and could be bent > > by a backfire, causing it to stick subsequently.) > > Now you want thinning of the butterfly shafts too?. The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. > Shall we chrome all the bearing surfaces, or run the shaft on ball > bearings, and incorporate seals into all 12-14-16 throttle shaft > bearings?. One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. > > Each throttle plate sandwich, complete with butterflies and spring > > can be held together with screws through one plate tapped into the > > other. > > Don't let the price of commercial units fool you into thinking the > > parts are hard to make. > > If you want to, you can attach the spigots for the inlet runners > > directly to the throttle plates and use the plates as a side of the > > distribution box. > Or use *mirrored* runners and have all 6 butterflies in a row. Que? Wouldn't that make for a very tall arrangement on a V engine? Suits an inline engine. > Simplicity is the key to design. You mean "Everything should be as simple as possible; but no simpler?" > I'll stick with my earlier statements. > It's much more important to have the plenum so that each cylinder > feeds freely from it and not having one runner wall at the end of > a large column of air. The one good thing about the SDS refered > to intake fabrication was that they continued the plenum past the > last cylinder's runner wall. A runner immediately at a _long_ wall benefits flow-wise from the Coander effect - the wall "guides" airflow reducing the pressure difference required for a given flow into the runner. If not all runners have the same entry geometry, then there will be an imbalance. This was one of the first flow-effects I encountered in practical engine design in 1978. > As soon as the machine shop is done with my manifold I'll get back > with on what really works in the real world rather then just day > dreaming or quoting theory Oh; it really works. It's nothing new; just old stuff applied in a new way. But don't let that stop you from doing things your way. If you're happy with the way your method works, there's no reason for you to change. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Tue Dec 4 19:45:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:22:33 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:22:33 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers -> Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? -> -> The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow into the Yeah. Just like the French Bollee cars about a hundred years ago. Which borrowed the concept from steam engines. - Dave "old fangle" Williams ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 4 23:15:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:33:48 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:33:48 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Dave Williams tapped away at the keyboard with: > -> Have you seen BMWs Valvetronic technology? > -> The system varies intake valve lift to control the airflow into the > Yeah. Just like the French Bollee cars about a hundred years ago. > Which borrowed the concept from steam engines. The BMW engineers responsible for bringing the system into volume production won the Porsche Prize this year; for innovation, IIRC. First BMW engines to use them were the 1.6 litre built at Hams Hall in the UK. > - Dave "old fangle" Williams Ever wonder how few new inventions there actually are? -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From LOW4SHOW@aol.com Tue Dec 4 23:21:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:35:25 -0300 Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 23:35:25 -0300 From: LOW4SHOW@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: ECU Info I'm trying to determine what code a particular chip on a Honda ECU is written in so I can find a proper disassembler. One chip on the board is the OKI MSM80C154 which I have found information about on the www.okisemi.com. The chip that has the fuel and timing stored on is a OKI chip labeled M38256AP-92. My questions are? 1.) does anyone have experience with these or similar chips? 2.) If I find a disassembler that works on the MSM80C154 will that also work on the code on the second chip? Are they both written in the same code? 3.) Has anyone out there done any work on these or have any information on disassemblers? Thanks everybody, Please reply to me at Low4show@aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From kiggly@hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 01:52:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 02:16:21 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 02:16:21 -0300 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > >To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing >off the plenum as well as the runners? KART cars last year (and probably this year too) used an extra throttle that's on the plenum and electronically controlled to limit boost. I guess they found they could react faster there to limit a spike event than they could with controlling the wastegate. I'm guessing they also have a good spike wanting to naturally happen after <100ms shift (I don't know for sure what their shift times are). >Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to >fill that volume as well as that of the runners. If you do a throttle before all that volume like you were saying, its really going to have terrible throttle response. >OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already >filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners >sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, >the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening >of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure >hasn't bled out through the turbo. > >Which system will have less lag? The system with 6 throttle plates will have less lag. It should also have much, much better throttle response. You will have to make a plenum of air pressure from all 6 runners past the throttles though to get a MAP pressure. This can just be 6 lines tee'd together, just keep the lines as short as possible and use, probably, 1/8" or 3/16" diameter hoses. >A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate >throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. >In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little >advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical >setups). You can't use a slide throttle on a street car though. There is terribly inconsistent flow through them at part throttle. I liked the stratus touring car that had barrel throttles though, those were cool as hell! They split at the middle and rolled away (like double-doors opening) to make a completely smooth runner at WOT. Slide throttles are your best bet by far. >The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. >The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. >Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be >around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. 70mm??? For what, if you're going to have 100%VE at 12000 rpm? What rpm will the motor go to? I'm guessing you'd need somewhere in the low 50mm range. Smaller is better as long as its not a restriction because if you go too big the throttles just end up becoming an on/off switch. For a 2L NA engine going to 8500 rpm and making ~300hp, we found that 52mm was the smallest that we didn't lose any hp. Anything bigger than that didn't gain any hp at all and just made the engine more difficult to drive. >One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very >durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. >You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by >chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just >the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. > >No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air >distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that >requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. You'll have to be VERY careful about thermal expansion of the engine. This is without a doubt the most difficult part of this entire system. You need to make a setup that holds the butterflies aligned within the trumpets or else they will bind up. This seems trivial, but it really requires some attention. I would put a pair of ball bearings on each butterfly and join the butterflies from cylinder-to-cylinder with fittings that allow some axial growth. http://www.zeromax.com has some neat couplings that can get this job done well. I haven't used them, but they really look like the perfect part for this application. Just wondering though, but why don't you just make a normal-ish intake manifold and mount the intercooler away from the engine? This is normally much easier to do and you don't have to worry so much about heat soak from the engine getting the IC hot. You're also talking about mounting something big, heavy, and with very little thermal expansion (as long as you keep the water cool that is) on top of a somewhat high vibration environment that goes through wild temperature swings, expansions, and deflections. Its just a recipe for a part thats going to be difficult to make last very long. If you go through and make it, I'd love to see some pictures! Just curious also though, what rpm range, boost range, and displacement are you planning for this V6? I believe you mentioned a 650hp goal... Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rncfiles@hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 02:23:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 02:51:39 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 02:51:39 -0300 From: "Rob F" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: is this a WB02 sensor? Reading through my '00 Impreza RS shop manual, I found the description of the front O2 sensor (also called an A/F sensor in the book) very familiar... "The zirconium oxide has the property of generating electromotive force when contacting an oxygen ion, and the electromotive force generated varies depending on the amount of oxygen ion The front oxygen (A/F) sensor detects the amount of oxygen in exhaust gases in a linear form by making use of this property." There is also a graph of mixture vs mA (without units of course) that looks very similar to the one on the WB02 page. So, is this the same type of sensor that is used on the Honda Civic? Is this a big deal? I mean, I had the impression that the Honda was the rather rare to have this piece included from the factory. -Rob ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dupuis10@telusplanet.net Wed Dec 5 02:40:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 02:54:19 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 02:54:19 -0300 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing > off the plenum as well as the runners? Um... I think he's making fun. > OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already > filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners > sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, > the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening > of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure > hasn't bled out through the turbo. > > Which system will have less lag? Relatively high-pressure - i.e., not at 15" vacuum but at atmospheric or just under on an N/A car or possibly much over on a turbo. Much quicker throttle response, possibly more turbulence at part throttle but the plates should keep everything in line at WOT, and the turbulence might be good for air/fuel mixing. > > > > > I thought individual throttle-bodies are normally used for engines > > > > with long duration cams to avoid cross-flow and get better > > > > idle/part throttle response ? I want to avoid the extra work (and > > > > money) integrating 6 TB´s and linkage. > > > Individual throttles are used where throttle response is required or > > > where there's no common plenum. > > > > Or when looking for complex answers to simple guestions. > > That may be the case. It could also be ricers using them for > brag-value. > > A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate > throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. > In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little > advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical > setups). The Euro-spec BMW M3 uses 6 throttles, doesn't it? Seems to work okay there ;-) > > You mean > "Everything should be as simple as possible; but no simpler?" LOL!!! > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From GT40MkI@aol.com Wed Dec 5 03:46:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 04:06:27 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 04:06:27 -0300 From: GT40MkI@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit --part1_104.d58db3a.293f1cc9_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm a newcomer, but the DIY WB02 kit that ??steve?? has put together caught my eye. What is the kit missing to complete the meter? How much do the kits sell for? Does it use the production honda wb02, or something else? Thanks in advance, -Sean --part1_104.d58db3a.293f1cc9_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm a newcomer, but the DIY WB02 kit that ??steve?? has put together caught my eye.  What is the kit missing to complete the meter?  How much do the kits sell for?  Does it use the production honda wb02, or something else?

Thanks in advance,
-Sean --part1_104.d58db3a.293f1cc9_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 04:27:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 04:27:40 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 04:27:40 -0800 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce, I agree with your comments about heat soaking intercoolers on Syclones, the biggest problem as I see it is that they heat soak in the staging line. With a proper heat exchanger the intake temperature will decrease with speed. My comment about high engine compartment temperatures and the need for isolation of intercooler plumbing and the water intercooler itself could have been about Syclones, but it really was about Audis. I think that you would look at insulation on an other way if your car lost 50-75hp after ten minutes in the staging line. Trust me, I agree that a air to air intercooler is the way to go, as I see it a water to air intercooler is for the dragstrip and only if it is filled with ice water. I am building a small secondary water to air intercooler for my car, that will only have a water volume in the boot and the pump will only run to cool the charge after during staging and the pass itself. During ordinary driving and on on road tracks the water intercooler will be cooled by the air from the air-air intercooler, it will cool the charge when in power and will heat the charge while not under boost. Having the water intercooler after the throttle body would probably help to cool the water when the throttle is closed or only opened a bit. After driving 200miles in a carburated car with a cold air intake yesterday I know all about how 5ºC air with high humidity responds to the pressure drop over the throttle blade... Jörgen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 04:45:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 04:45:09 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 04:45:09 -0800 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Steve's Parts Kit This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C17D58.FC8F7A60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit You can read all about DIY-WB here: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/ Steven Ciciora was so gracious as to buy about 500 units worth of parts for the DIY-WB. The parts steve has are just the eletronice components(resistors, caps, diodes, etc) plus some mounting hardware. Doesn't include a PCB, a box, sensor, hookup wire, etc. I'm fairly confident that Steve will have extra kits as only about 400 were spoken for originally. However, I think hes still trying to get them all packaged and mailed. Just stick around, he'll speak up when hes ready to sell the extras. david -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of GT40MkI@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 12:47 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit I'm a newcomer, but the DIY WB02 kit that ??steve?? has put together caught my eye. What is the kit missing to complete the meter? How much do the kits sell for? Does it use the production honda wb02, or something else? Thanks in advance, -Sean ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C17D58.FC8F7A60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

You can=20 read all about DIY-WB here: http://www.diy-e= fi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/

Steven = Ciciora was so gracious as to buy about 500 units = worth of=20 parts for the DIY-WB.  The parts steve has are just the eletronice=20 components(resistors, caps, diodes, etc) plus some mounting = hardware. =20 Doesn't include a PCB, a box, sensor, hookup wire, etc.   I'm = fairly=20 confident that Steve will have extra kits as only about 400 were spoken = for=20 originally.  However, I think hes still trying to get them all = packaged and=20 mailed.  Just stick around, he'll speak up when hes ready to sell = the=20 extras.

david

-----Original Message-----
From: = owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org=20 [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of=20 GT40MkI@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 12:47=20 AM
To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: Steve's = Parts=20 Kit

I'm a newcomer, = but the=20 DIY WB02 kit that ??steve?? has put together caught my eye.  What = is the=20 kit missing to complete the meter?  How much do the kits sell = for?=20  Does it use the production honda wb02, or something else? =

Thanks=20 in advance,
-Sean
------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C17D58.FC8F7A60-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 05:20:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 05:20:29 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 05:20:29 -0800 From: GT40MkI@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit --part1_176.3cd708.293f78f0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'll be sitting here with my ears on...thanks guys. -Sean --part1_176.3cd708.293f78f0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'll be sitting here with my ears on...thanks guys.

-Sean --part1_176.3cd708.293f78f0_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 05:23:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 05:23:19 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 05:23:19 -0800 From: Acetone1@aol.com Subject: Re: is this a WB02 sensor? Hi, Im new but have been silent...but my friend is putting a turbo on a 2001 RS, and he said that the front o2 does appear to be wideband; it has 6? wires. (it also cost 150 dollars) -rich p ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 05:35:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 05:35:08 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 05:35:08 -0800 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: eDist Info The Ranger reluctor ring is a press fit on the damper. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sam Weatherby [mailto:SWeatherby@winisp.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:18 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: eDist Info > > > Any idea how they are mounted? > I have the balancer from a Explorer 5.0, but it has an > integral pulley that > does not line up with my existing pulleys. > The crown vic unit looks like it slides on the crank behind > the dampner. > That is looking like my best bet, but I have only seen > pictures of that... > -srw > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Shirley, Mark R" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:25 PM > Subject: RE: eDist Info > > > > Ford 2.5L engine from Ranger had 36-1 tooth wheel. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Sam Weatherby [mailto:SWeatherby@winisp.net] > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:52 PM > > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > > Subject: Re: eDist Info > > > > > > > > > Interesting... > > > I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. > > > All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. > > > Anyone know a source for that? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Bruce" > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:58 PM > > > Subject: eDist Info > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.a > > sp?ListHistory > > > ID=1810607119 > > > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > > -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the > > quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 05:53:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 05:53:03 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 05:53:03 -0800 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: is this a WB02 sensor? Wait a minute - linear? How do EGT variations affect the output? I'm used to the "0 volts means lean, 0.5 volts means good part throttle, and depending on how long I've been boosting in this gear and how hot I think the exhaust temperature might be 0.85 might be okay and I really hope I'm not melting something..." of a normal O2 sensor. I've never heard about the wideband O2 sensors, so I hate to re-open old discussions about them but: How "wide" are they? How linear are they? And the obvious one - can they be made to work with an existing O2-based A/F meter or custom controller (like the Megasquirt)? Can they be used for full-throttle closed loop tuning? What Hondas have them (OBD II)? If nobody minds, I'd like to open the floor on this. Matt > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Rob F > Sent: December 4, 2001 10:23 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: is this a WB02 sensor? > > > Reading through my '00 Impreza RS shop manual, I found the description of > the front O2 sensor (also called an A/F sensor in the book) very > familiar... > > "The zirconium oxide has the property of generating electromotive > force when > contacting an oxygen ion, and the electromotive force generated varies > depending on the amount of oxygen ion The front oxygen (A/F) > sensor detects > the amount of oxygen in exhaust gases in a linear form by making > use of this > property." > > There is also a graph of mixture vs mA (without units of course) > that looks > very similar to the one on the WB02 page. > > So, is this the same type of sensor that is used on the Honda Civic? Is > this a big deal? I mean, I had the impression that the Honda was > the rather > rare to have this piece included from the factory. > > -Rob > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 06:01:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 06:01:22 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 06:01:22 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Vibration is a point I did not think about before. Does anyone on the list run an air/liquid intercooler and can confirm the sizing information from Spearco ? I thought that an a/l coolder is more effective and smaller in size than an air/air cooler. The engine is a Renault/Peugeot V6 3L 24V, with Garrett GT twin ballbearing turbos (GT25 Turbine, T3-60 compressor). max RPM is 7200, boost will be about 1.2-1.5bar. The ECU is a Pectel T6M. Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Kevin _ [mailto:kiggly@hotmail.com] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2001 05:52 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > >To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing >off the plenum as well as the runners? KART cars last year (and probably this year too) used an extra throttle that's on the plenum and electronically controlled to limit boost. I guess they found they could react faster there to limit a spike event than they could with controlling the wastegate. I'm guessing they also have a good spike wanting to naturally happen after <100ms shift (I don't know for sure what their shift times are). >Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to >fill that volume as well as that of the runners. If you do a throttle before all that volume like you were saying, its really going to have terrible throttle response. >OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already >filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners >sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, >the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening >of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure >hasn't bled out through the turbo. > >Which system will have less lag? The system with 6 throttle plates will have less lag. It should also have much, much better throttle response. You will have to make a plenum of air pressure from all 6 runners past the throttles though to get a MAP pressure. This can just be 6 lines tee'd together, just keep the lines as short as possible and use, probably, 1/8" or 3/16" diameter hoses. >A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate >throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. >In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little >advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical >setups). You can't use a slide throttle on a street car though. There is terribly inconsistent flow through them at part throttle. I liked the stratus touring car that had barrel throttles though, those were cool as hell! They split at the middle and rolled away (like double-doors opening) to make a completely smooth runner at WOT. Slide throttles are your best bet by far. >The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. >The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. >Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be >around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. 70mm??? For what, if you're going to have 100%VE at 12000 rpm? What rpm will the motor go to? I'm guessing you'd need somewhere in the low 50mm range. Smaller is better as long as its not a restriction because if you go too big the throttles just end up becoming an on/off switch. For a 2L NA engine going to 8500 rpm and making ~300hp, we found that 52mm was the smallest that we didn't lose any hp. Anything bigger than that didn't gain any hp at all and just made the engine more difficult to drive. >One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very >durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. >You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by >chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just >the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. > >No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air >distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that >requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. You'll have to be VERY careful about thermal expansion of the engine. This is without a doubt the most difficult part of this entire system. You need to make a setup that holds the butterflies aligned within the trumpets or else they will bind up. This seems trivial, but it really requires some attention. I would put a pair of ball bearings on each butterfly and join the butterflies from cylinder-to-cylinder with fittings that allow some axial growth. http://www.zeromax.com has some neat couplings that can get this job done well. I haven't used them, but they really look like the perfect part for this application. Just wondering though, but why don't you just make a normal-ish intake manifold and mount the intercooler away from the engine? This is normally much easier to do and you don't have to worry so much about heat soak from the engine getting the IC hot. You're also talking about mounting something big, heavy, and with very little thermal expansion (as long as you keep the water cool that is) on top of a somewhat high vibration environment that goes through wild temperature swings, expansions, and deflections. Its just a recipe for a part thats going to be difficult to make last very long. If you go through and make it, I'd love to see some pictures! Just curious also though, what rpm range, boost range, and displacement are you planning for this V6? I believe you mentioned a 650hp goal... Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 06:06:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 06:06:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 06:06:14 -0800 From: "Richard M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Motorola microcontroller identification Ludis, The ECU is fairly simple by today's standards (only controls ignition and overboost protection), way less complicated and earlier than EEC4. There are a only few analog IC's apart from the processor, definitely internal EPROM (probably mask ROM from the factory). I think it's 68HC05 family.. Motorola have agreed by email that it is one of theirs, but unable to give any information. There is no edge connector. Regards Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: Ludis Langens To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:14 PM Subject: Re: Motorola microcontroller identification > > Rich M wrote: > > > > I am trying to get information about a Motorola Microcontroller used > > in European Ford Escort Turbo around mid-80's vintage - the chip id is > > ZC85269CP, 40 pin DIP and has internal OTP Eprom. > > How do you know it has the internal EPROM? If you are > counting/following circuit connections, you might have overlooked an > external ROM. The Ford EEC-IV uses an 11 wire bus to communicate with > external ROM. This external ROM is in a 24 pin chip. > > Even though this chip has Motorola markings, it might be an Intel > design. Ford used both Intel and Motorola to manufacture the chips that > Intel designed for Ford. The Ford custom MPU is similar to the Intel 8096. > > Does your computer have a 30 pin edge card connector? This connector > can be used to read out the ROM, or to attach a ROM emulator. > > -- > Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com > Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 06:57:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 06:57:15 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 06:57:15 -0800 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the > piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to > push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave > activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute > when in boost. > If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure > differences between the two types of motors then > Bruce I agree here, and I also agree with Bruce's earlier opinion that you are thinking in NA rather than turbo terms. When you tune an intake manifold for an NA car, you're trying to take advantage of the acoustics generated inside the manifold when you have flow into the cylinders. The most you can get out of such tuning is maybe a handful of pascals.....not even kPa...at the right times that help exhaust scavenging and cylinder filling at the beginning and end of the intake valve opening. Bruce is right, typically at frequencies between the resonances you actually get a few Pa drop at the beginning and end of the intake valve opening that tend to empty the cylinder more than fill it. In a turbo car, particularly one with 1.5 bar (150 kPa) boost that will likely never see pressures below atmospheric, a handful of Pa basically amounts to jack and you're killing yourself for nothing. The last Formula SAE car my school built with a turbo had approx 30mm diameter runners to each cylinder and the "plenum" consisted of about a 50mm diameter "log" connecting the runners...and this is on a 600cc 4 cyl engine. I don't know what boost levels were, but I doubt they were as high as 1.5 bar. There was absolutely zero thought into "tuning" the intake, it was the absolute minimum necessary to deliver the pressurized air to the cylinders. Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in the head with the runner as well as possible. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 07:41:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 07:41:11 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 07:41:11 -0800 From: "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Seeking a little advice on EFI project On Tuesday 04 December 2001 21:17, Ludis Langens wrote: > > is the stock ECU hackable enough?... I want to write my own code, not > > only modify the data tables. > > The Ford EEC-IV isn't as hackable as GM. But it has been hacked, and > there is a commercial product for tuning certain EECs. hmm... and what about using the TB, sensors & fuel stuff from a GM engine, is there an engine model suited well for stripping this things? Is there a GM TB which is plug'n play to bolt on the Ford manifold? > > What country is ".cl"? Chile (pretty southern, huh? :-) . Here Ford was very absent from our vehicle market for many years (like from 70-mid 90s) GM is MUCH easier to find and the new parts are cheaper than Ford's. Thanks! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 08:09:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:09:45 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:09:45 -0800 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: is this a WB02 sensor? Have a look at the diy-efi archives for WB, EGOR... All this and more is in there. Also there's a page about WBO2 on the diy_efi page under projects. --steve The Dupuis wrote: > full-throttle closed loop tuning? What Hondas have them (OBD II)? If > nobody minds, I'd like to open the floor on this. > > Matt > -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 08:30:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:30:46 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:30:46 -0800 From: "Axel Rietschin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high lift cams just as their NA counterparts? If tomorrow the atmosphere pressure changes from 101kPa to 202kPa, will this change something to what happens inside an engine intake manifold? --Axel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Dotson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 3:56 PM Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the > > piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to > > push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave > > activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute > > when in boost. > > If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure > > differences between the two types of motors then > > Bruce > > I agree here, and I also agree with Bruce's earlier opinion that you are > thinking in NA rather than turbo terms. > > When you tune an intake manifold for an NA car, you're trying to take > advantage of the acoustics generated inside the manifold when you have flow > into the cylinders. The most you can get out of such tuning is maybe a > handful of pascals.....not even kPa...at the right times that help exhaust > scavenging and cylinder filling at the beginning and end of the intake valve > opening. Bruce is right, typically at frequencies between the resonances > you actually get a few Pa drop at the beginning and end of the intake valve > opening that tend to empty the cylinder more than fill it. In a turbo car, > particularly one with 1.5 bar (150 kPa) boost that will likely never see > pressures below atmospheric, a handful of Pa basically amounts to jack and > you're killing yourself for nothing. > > The last Formula SAE car my school built with a turbo had approx 30mm > diameter runners to each cylinder and the "plenum" consisted of about a 50mm > diameter "log" connecting the runners...and this is on a 600cc 4 cyl engine. > I don't know what boost levels were, but I doubt they were as high as 1.5 > bar. There was absolutely zero thought into "tuning" the intake, it was the > absolute minimum necessary to deliver the pressurized air to the cylinders. > > Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing > twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct > means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in > the head with the runner as well as possible. > > Craig Dotson > crdotson@vt.edu > 2002 VT FormulaSAE > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 08:33:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:33:55 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 08:33:55 -0800 From: Brian Renegar Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit >If you look at the lead spacing you'll understand my answer. Also, using >the large one at C2 also gets the grouping there rather close. >Bruce Lead spacing?? Are you talking about how far apart the leads are? Because on the PCB the holes for C2 and C8 are identically spaced. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jorgen.m.karlsson@home.se Wed Dec 5 09:27:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:49:04 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 09:49:04 -0300 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce, I agree with your comments about heat soaking intercoolers on Syclones, the biggest problem as I see it is that they heat soak in the staging line. With a proper heat exchanger the intake temperature will decrease with speed. My comment about high engine compartment temperatures and the need for isolation of intercooler plumbing and the water intercooler itself could have been about Syclones, but it really was about Audis. I think that you would look at insulation on an other way if your car lost 50-75hp after ten minutes in the staging line. Trust me, I agree that a air to air intercooler is the way to go, as I see it a water to air intercooler is for the dragstrip and only if it is filled with ice water. I am building a small secondary water to air intercooler for my car, that will only have a water volume in the boot and the pump will only run to cool the charge after during staging and the pass itself. During ordinary driving and on on road tracks the water intercooler will be cooled by the air from the air-air intercooler, it will cool the charge when in power and will heat the charge while not under boost. Having the water intercooler after the throttle body would probably help to cool the water when the throttle is closed or only opened a bit. After driving 200miles in a carburated car with a cold air intake yesterday I know all about how 5ºC air with high humidity responds to the pressure drop over the throttle blade... Jörgen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dcg1174@tntech.edu Wed Dec 5 09:49:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:00:12 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:00:12 -0300 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Steve's Parts Kit This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C17D58.FC8F7A60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit You can read all about DIY-WB here: http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/ Steven Ciciora was so gracious as to buy about 500 units worth of parts for the DIY-WB. The parts steve has are just the eletronice components(resistors, caps, diodes, etc) plus some mounting hardware. Doesn't include a PCB, a box, sensor, hookup wire, etc. I'm fairly confident that Steve will have extra kits as only about 400 were spoken for originally. However, I think hes still trying to get them all packaged and mailed. Just stick around, he'll speak up when hes ready to sell the extras. david -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of GT40MkI@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 12:47 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit I'm a newcomer, but the DIY WB02 kit that ??steve?? has put together caught my eye. What is the kit missing to complete the meter? How much do the kits sell for? Does it use the production honda wb02, or something else? Thanks in advance, -Sean ------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C17D58.FC8F7A60 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

You can=20 read all about DIY-WB here: http://www.diy-e= fi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/

Steven = Ciciora was so gracious as to buy about 500 units = worth of=20 parts for the DIY-WB.  The parts steve has are just the eletronice=20 components(resistors, caps, diodes, etc) plus some mounting = hardware. =20 Doesn't include a PCB, a box, sensor, hookup wire, etc.   I'm = fairly=20 confident that Steve will have extra kits as only about 400 were spoken = for=20 originally.  However, I think hes still trying to get them all = packaged and=20 mailed.  Just stick around, he'll speak up when hes ready to sell = the=20 extras.

david

-----Original Message-----
From: = owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org=20 [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of=20 GT40MkI@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 12:47=20 AM
To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org
Subject: Re: Steve's = Parts=20 Kit

I'm a newcomer, = but the=20 DIY WB02 kit that ??steve?? has put together caught my eye.  What = is the=20 kit missing to complete the meter?  How much do the kits sell = for?=20  Does it use the production honda wb02, or something else? =

Thanks=20 in advance,
-Sean
------=_NextPart_000_0002_01C17D58.FC8F7A60-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 10:25:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:25:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:25:26 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Marketing. The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an OHV engine. Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing it's displacement. Bruce Extrememly proud owner of a low performance turbo'd motored car. BTW, ask a certain Porsche Turbo Carrera owner, and 308 (whined like 6 DCOEs) at Indy about the old Black Sedan, the Monday after the US PG. > Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high lift > cams just as their NA counterparts? > --Axel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 10:30:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:30:57 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:30:57 -0800 From: jester@westfailure.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WTB: wideband o2 kit or board hello, I am looking to buy a DIY wideband 02 kit or board. please let me know if you have one to sell. thanks, Steve *************************************************************************** Fashion Twins, activate! form of: a lemming. http://westfailure.org *************************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Acetone1@aol.com Wed Dec 5 10:22:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:41:43 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:41:43 -0300 From: Acetone1@aol.com Subject: Re: is this a WB02 sensor? Hi, Im new but have been silent...but my friend is putting a turbo on a 2001 RS, and he said that the front o2 does appear to be wideband; it has 6? wires. (it also cost 150 dollars) -rich p ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From MarkRShirley@eaton.com Wed Dec 5 10:29:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:45:58 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:45:58 -0300 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: eDist Info The Ranger reluctor ring is a press fit on the damper. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sam Weatherby [mailto:SWeatherby@winisp.net] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 6:18 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: eDist Info > > > Any idea how they are mounted? > I have the balancer from a Explorer 5.0, but it has an > integral pulley that > does not line up with my existing pulleys. > The crown vic unit looks like it slides on the crank behind > the dampner. > That is looking like my best bet, but I have only seen > pictures of that... > -srw > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Shirley, Mark R" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:25 PM > Subject: RE: eDist Info > > > > Ford 2.5L engine from Ranger had 36-1 tooth wheel. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Sam Weatherby [mailto:SWeatherby@winisp.net] > > > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 2:52 PM > > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > > Subject: Re: eDist Info > > > > > > > > > Interesting... > > > I am adapting a Ford EDIS8 setup to my EEC-IV A9L processor. > > > All I need now is a 36-1 wheel for the crank. > > > Anyone know a source for that? > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Bruce" > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 4:58 PM > > > Subject: eDist Info > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here's a URL for the eDist > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.fuelairspark.com/information/whatsnew/NewsDetails.a > > sp?ListHistory > > > ID=1810607119 > > > > > > Bruce > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > > -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the > > quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > ------------ > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From GT40MkI@aol.com Wed Dec 5 10:19:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:55:29 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 10:55:29 -0300 From: GT40MkI@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit --part1_176.3cd708.293f78f0_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'll be sitting here with my ears on...thanks guys. -Sean --part1_176.3cd708.293f78f0_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'll be sitting here with my ears on...thanks guys.

-Sean --part1_176.3cd708.293f78f0_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From richm@ntlworld.com Wed Dec 5 11:05:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:17:48 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:17:48 -0300 From: "Richard M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Motorola microcontroller identification Ludis, The ECU is fairly simple by today's standards (only controls ignition and overboost protection), way less complicated and earlier than EEC4. There are a only few analog IC's apart from the processor, definitely internal EPROM (probably mask ROM from the factory). I think it's 68HC05 family.. Motorola have agreed by email that it is one of theirs, but unable to give any information. There is no edge connector. Regards Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: Ludis Langens To: Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:14 PM Subject: Re: Motorola microcontroller identification > > Rich M wrote: > > > > I am trying to get information about a Motorola Microcontroller used > > in European Ford Escort Turbo around mid-80's vintage - the chip id is > > ZC85269CP, 40 pin DIP and has internal OTP Eprom. > > How do you know it has the internal EPROM? If you are > counting/following circuit connections, you might have overlooked an > external ROM. The Ford EEC-IV uses an 11 wire bus to communicate with > external ROM. This external ROM is in a 24 pin chip. > > Even though this chip has Motorola markings, it might be an Intel > design. Ford used both Intel and Motorola to manufacture the chips that > Intel designed for Ford. The Ford custom MPU is similar to the Intel 8096. > > Does your computer have a 30 pin edge card connector? This connector > can be used to read out the ROM, or to attach a ROM emulator. > > -- > Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com > Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dupuis10@telusplanet.net Wed Dec 5 10:52:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:20:19 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:20:19 -0300 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: is this a WB02 sensor? Wait a minute - linear? How do EGT variations affect the output? I'm used to the "0 volts means lean, 0.5 volts means good part throttle, and depending on how long I've been boosting in this gear and how hot I think the exhaust temperature might be 0.85 might be okay and I really hope I'm not melting something..." of a normal O2 sensor. I've never heard about the wideband O2 sensors, so I hate to re-open old discussions about them but: How "wide" are they? How linear are they? And the obvious one - can they be made to work with an existing O2-based A/F meter or custom controller (like the Megasquirt)? Can they be used for full-throttle closed loop tuning? What Hondas have them (OBD II)? If nobody minds, I'd like to open the floor on this. Matt > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Rob F > Sent: December 4, 2001 10:23 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: is this a WB02 sensor? > > > Reading through my '00 Impreza RS shop manual, I found the description of > the front O2 sensor (also called an A/F sensor in the book) very > familiar... > > "The zirconium oxide has the property of generating electromotive > force when > contacting an oxygen ion, and the electromotive force generated varies > depending on the amount of oxygen ion The front oxygen (A/F) > sensor detects > the amount of oxygen in exhaust gases in a linear form by making > use of this > property." > > There is also a graph of mixture vs mA (without units of course) > that looks > very similar to the one on the WB02 page. > > So, is this the same type of sensor that is used on the Honda Civic? Is > this a big deal? I mean, I had the impression that the Honda was > the rather > rare to have this piece included from the factory. > > -Rob > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Wed Dec 5 11:00:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:21:45 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:21:45 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Vibration is a point I did not think about before. Does anyone on the list run an air/liquid intercooler and can confirm the sizing information from Spearco ? I thought that an a/l coolder is more effective and smaller in size than an air/air cooler. The engine is a Renault/Peugeot V6 3L 24V, with Garrett GT twin ballbearing turbos (GT25 Turbine, T3-60 compressor). max RPM is 7200, boost will be about 1.2-1.5bar. The ECU is a Pectel T6M. Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Kevin _ [mailto:kiggly@hotmail.com] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2001 05:52 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > >To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing >off the plenum as well as the runners? KART cars last year (and probably this year too) used an extra throttle that's on the plenum and electronically controlled to limit boost. I guess they found they could react faster there to limit a spike event than they could with controlling the wastegate. I'm guessing they also have a good spike wanting to naturally happen after <100ms shift (I don't know for sure what their shift times are). >Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to >fill that volume as well as that of the runners. If you do a throttle before all that volume like you were saying, its really going to have terrible throttle response. >OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already >filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners >sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, >the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening >of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure >hasn't bled out through the turbo. > >Which system will have less lag? The system with 6 throttle plates will have less lag. It should also have much, much better throttle response. You will have to make a plenum of air pressure from all 6 runners past the throttles though to get a MAP pressure. This can just be 6 lines tee'd together, just keep the lines as short as possible and use, probably, 1/8" or 3/16" diameter hoses. >A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate >throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. >In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little >advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical >setups). You can't use a slide throttle on a street car though. There is terribly inconsistent flow through them at part throttle. I liked the stratus touring car that had barrel throttles though, those were cool as hell! They split at the middle and rolled away (like double-doors opening) to make a completely smooth runner at WOT. Slide throttles are your best bet by far. >The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. >The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. >Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be >around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. 70mm??? For what, if you're going to have 100%VE at 12000 rpm? What rpm will the motor go to? I'm guessing you'd need somewhere in the low 50mm range. Smaller is better as long as its not a restriction because if you go too big the throttles just end up becoming an on/off switch. For a 2L NA engine going to 8500 rpm and making ~300hp, we found that 52mm was the smallest that we didn't lose any hp. Anything bigger than that didn't gain any hp at all and just made the engine more difficult to drive. >One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very >durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. >You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by >chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just >the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. > >No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air >distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that >requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. You'll have to be VERY careful about thermal expansion of the engine. This is without a doubt the most difficult part of this entire system. You need to make a setup that holds the butterflies aligned within the trumpets or else they will bind up. This seems trivial, but it really requires some attention. I would put a pair of ball bearings on each butterfly and join the butterflies from cylinder-to-cylinder with fittings that allow some axial growth. http://www.zeromax.com has some neat couplings that can get this job done well. I haven't used them, but they really look like the perfect part for this application. Just wondering though, but why don't you just make a normal-ish intake manifold and mount the intercooler away from the engine? This is normally much easier to do and you don't have to worry so much about heat soak from the engine getting the IC hot. You're also talking about mounting something big, heavy, and with very little thermal expansion (as long as you keep the water cool that is) on top of a somewhat high vibration environment that goes through wild temperature swings, expansions, and deflections. Its just a recipe for a part thats going to be difficult to make last very long. If you go through and make it, I'd love to see some pictures! Just curious also though, what rpm range, boost range, and displacement are you planning for this V6? I believe you mentioned a 650hp goal... Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 11:33:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:33:56 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:33:56 -0800 From: "Jens Knickmeyer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #909 Hi everyone, up to now, I thought I knew how an EGO works. But now I am not so sure.... I just took a look at my data logged on today's drive to France (took about 1 hour). I set up my data logger to log rpm, injection time, engine temp and lambda voltage. Note that all data is not measured by seperate measurement equipment but I receive data directly from the ECU by using K-Line communication. Looking at lambda voltage, I recognized that the ECU sometimes tells a value of 1.85V. AFAIK, lambda voltage is limited by approx. [0.1V, 0.85V]. I tried to recognize any correlation between lambda voltage and any other signal, but I couldn't. The 1.85V occurr instead of the 0.85V I would have expected. The "lean" voltage of 0.1V is reached in every cycle, no problem there. My questions: Is there any chance that an EGO produces such a high voltage (which would indicate "ultramegahyperrich" mixture)? Can anyone imagine a defect which results in such a high lambda voltage? Can an interference with other substances/gases produce such a high voltage? Regards, Jens Knickmeyer '92 Volkswagen Polo G40 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 11:40:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:40:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:40:14 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers I was trying to find it, but there is a net site where they get into Hemholtz and manifolding. On the V6s they contend that two groups of 3 are the best answer. Needless to say, I'm of the single plenum thought pattern. The closer the runners face an volume of air approaching atmospheric, the better they will flow. Of all the manifolding available which generates both the best torque and HP numbers?. The lowly Independent Runner. There are several jillion theories as to why, but IMO, it's just a matter of the air not having to snake around at all to get to the intake valve. I got to work with alot of IR manifolds, and engines, and have yet to see anything approach them. Now, they use individual butterflies, but the answer to why is that they have too. Now how would one try to approximate an IR with Simplicity in mind? (No Correction Needed). Use your runners and tie them to a big arsed plenum, and single butterfly. the large plenum will approximate the atmosphere, or in this case, be the atmosphere, and with the single butterfly the entering air will have the least inertia, and so will be able to bend around to best fill the plenum. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. This Warning is included as part of to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. > Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing > twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct > means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in > the head with the runner as well as possible. > Craig Dotson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 11:50:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:50:27 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:50:27 -0800 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: (911 Technologist) Need Info On Programming ECU There are a number of companies out there selling chips for the 1990 760 turbo LH Jetronic 2.4 EFI. I don't know how they do it but I'll believe it when I see it. Your help is much appreciated! -David -----Original Message----- From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:28 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU Unfortunately Jetronics are not computerized. They have no chip. It is all circuitry and no CPU. FR Wilk _____________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 3:19 PM Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU > My car has the Jetronic Turbo. > > Thanks for any help! > > -David > > -----Original Message----- > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? > > FR Wilk > ___________________________________ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Goldstein" > To: > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM > Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. I > > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware for > > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his Firebird. > > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess I'm > > looking for similar equipment. > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > -David > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 11:55:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:55:19 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 11:55:19 -0800 From: Brian Renegar Subject: Wideband sensor connector FYI, I found two connectors for the wideband O2 on a 92 Honda Civic yesterday. This was a plain old Civic (no VTech). One connector was right next to this engine's O2 sensor connector. It used a 3 or 4 wire (NB sensor probably) O2, but the wideband connector (or one like it) was on the harnesses also. I found the other connector on the driver's side shock tower, near the firewall. I think it was somewhere near the master cylinder. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 12:14:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:14:22 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:14:22 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: The Parts Bin - International Order help needed. I'm after someone (in the US) to ring The Parts Bin's free (in the US) number and hassle them for information about an order I have with them I placed over 5 weeks ago. Email me off-list if you can help. DIY-EFI content? I have modified the KC-5300 (aka FMD or fuel mixture display that can be used with the DIY-WB) to provide an RS232 (ie. serial) output for logging purposes - this requires just three resistors and a transistor (and a connector). I'll provide full details of the simple changes, and make the HEX file freely available ASAP, hopefully by this weekend. Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 12:24:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:24:59 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:24:59 -0800 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high lift > cams just as their NA counterparts? If tomorrow the atmosphere pressure > changes from 101kPa to 202kPa, will this change something to what happens > inside an engine intake manifold? Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area. The same benefits go for a turbo'd car as an NA car in this area...more volume into the cylinder at a given pressure loss, or the same volume into the cylinder at a lower pressure loss...at the price of less turbulence. With more valves and/or more valve lift you increase the flow area, reducing pressure loss at a given flow rate. With more valve duration, the intake valve is open for a longer percentage of the compression stroke. If boost pressure is high enough, more air can be packed into the cylinder even as it starts the compression stroke, further improving volumetric efficiency. If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a small number of pascals. This helps the engine because the intake pressure becomes slightly higher than exhaust pressure due to acoustic pressure, helping flow into the cylinder during the overlap period. If atmospheric pressure doubled you'd still need to do this, as exhaust pressure will double accordingly, but with turbocharging the exhaust pressure increase (it's all absolute pressure here of course) is small compared to the intake pressure increase. Tuning the manifold to gain a small number of pascals pressure will have an insignificant impact when combined with the already large pressure differential between boost pressure and exhaust pressure. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From crdotson@vt.edu Wed Dec 5 11:56:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:26:42 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:26:42 -0300 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the > piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to > push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave > activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute > when in boost. > If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure > differences between the two types of motors then > Bruce I agree here, and I also agree with Bruce's earlier opinion that you are thinking in NA rather than turbo terms. When you tune an intake manifold for an NA car, you're trying to take advantage of the acoustics generated inside the manifold when you have flow into the cylinders. The most you can get out of such tuning is maybe a handful of pascals.....not even kPa...at the right times that help exhaust scavenging and cylinder filling at the beginning and end of the intake valve opening. Bruce is right, typically at frequencies between the resonances you actually get a few Pa drop at the beginning and end of the intake valve opening that tend to empty the cylinder more than fill it. In a turbo car, particularly one with 1.5 bar (150 kPa) boost that will likely never see pressures below atmospheric, a handful of Pa basically amounts to jack and you're killing yourself for nothing. The last Formula SAE car my school built with a turbo had approx 30mm diameter runners to each cylinder and the "plenum" consisted of about a 50mm diameter "log" connecting the runners...and this is on a 600cc 4 cyl engine. I don't know what boost levels were, but I doubt they were as high as 1.5 bar. There was absolutely zero thought into "tuning" the intake, it was the absolute minimum necessary to deliver the pressurized air to the cylinders. Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in the head with the runner as well as possible. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 12:30:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:30:13 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:30:13 -0800 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor > How about using one of the valve rockers for a reference and the > crank for intermediate? If their motorcycle engine is anything like the one I'm working with, it lacks "valve rockers." The DOHC directly drives the valve as the cam follower is a cap installed on top of the valve stem. The engine we just acquired is a CBR600 F4i. It has a factory magnetic reluctor cam sensor. I haven't pulled the valve cover to see how it works yet, but it is located on the non-driven side of the cam and the wires exit through a rubber grommet between the head and the valve cover. Engines the team used prior to the F4i (the F4, F3, and at one time I believe an F2) all used a Haltech with phase-sequential injection and waste-spark ignition using two coils. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 12:49:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:49:12 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:49:12 -0800 From: James Montebello MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers This is true, but with one big caveat, already mentioned several times: throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum and one throttle will be pretty awful. The entire volume must change before each intake valve "sees" the change being demanded by the driver. An IR setup with a throttle per cylinder, however, will have excellent throttle response, simply because the volume between the throttle and the valve(s) will be small. However, a multi-throttle setup is more complicated to put together and keep operating than one with only one or two throttles. So, the compromise is two plenums, each relatively small, and two throttle bodies. Reasonably good throttle response, and reasonably good flow. Not as good as an IR setup, but a lot less complicated. james montebello On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > I was trying to find it, but there is a net site where they get into > Hemholtz and manifolding. On the V6s they contend that two groups of 3 are > the best answer. > Needless to say, I'm of the single plenum thought pattern. > The closer the runners face an volume of air approaching atmospheric, the > better they will flow. Of all the manifolding available which generates > both the best torque and HP numbers?. The lowly Independent Runner. > There are several jillion theories as to why, but IMO, it's just a matter of > the air not having to snake around at all to get to the intake valve. I got > to work with alot of IR manifolds, and engines, and have yet to see anything > approach them. Now, they use individual butterflies, but the answer to why > is that they have too. Now how would one try to approximate an IR with > Simplicity in mind? (No Correction Needed). Use your runners and tie them > to a big arsed plenum, and single butterfly. the large plenum will > approximate the atmosphere, or in this case, be the atmosphere, and with the > single butterfly the entering air will have the least inertia, and so will > be able to bend around to best fill the plenum. > Bruce > > Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof > in the contents of this posting. This Warning is included as part of to > ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or > disadvantaged. > > > > > Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing > > twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct > > means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in > > the head with the runner as well as possible. > > Craig Dotson > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 12:57:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:57:09 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:57:09 -0800 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU I thought you had a L-Jetronic. The LH Jetronic does have a CPU. FR Wilk ____________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 11:49 AM Subject: RE: (911 Technologist) Need Info On Programming ECU > There are a number of companies out there selling chips for the 1990 760 > turbo LH Jetronic 2.4 EFI. I don't know how they do it but I'll believe it > when I see it. Your help is much appreciated! -David > > -----Original Message----- > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:28 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > Unfortunately Jetronics are not computerized. They have no chip. It is all > circuitry and no CPU. > > FR Wilk > _____________________________________________ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Goldstein" > To: > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 3:19 PM > Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > My car has the Jetronic Turbo. > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > -David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? > > > > FR Wilk > > ___________________________________ > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Goldstein" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM > > Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > > > > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. > I > > > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware > for > > > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his > Firebird. > > > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess > I'm > > > looking for similar equipment. > > > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > > > -David > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > > quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From tsokorai@xperts.cl Wed Dec 5 12:37:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:58:31 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 12:58:31 -0300 From: "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Seeking a little advice on EFI project On Tuesday 04 December 2001 21:17, Ludis Langens wrote: > > is the stock ECU hackable enough?... I want to write my own code, not > > only modify the data tables. > > The Ford EEC-IV isn't as hackable as GM. But it has been hacked, and > there is a commercial product for tuning certain EECs. hmm... and what about using the TB, sensors & fuel stuff from a GM engine, is there an engine model suited well for stripping this things? Is there a GM TB which is plug'n play to bolt on the Ford manifold? > > What country is ".cl"? Chile (pretty southern, huh? :-) . Here Ford was very absent from our vehicle market for many years (like from 70-mid 90s) GM is MUCH easier to find and the new parts are cheaper than Ford's. Thanks! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 13:14:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:14:39 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:14:39 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers But, like everything else there are upsides and downsides. Them fancy *new* things really look great on paper, and in some ways are a good thing. But let us also remember your port(s) sure take a hit on surface area. Then we get into boundary layers and other complications, like the pockets become smaller and so the air has to do even more *bending* to snake around the valve stem/guide to get to the camber. Just to play devils advocate here: Is it really an advantage at normal operating conditions?. Theory would say so, but in actual practice with all the glump and carbon deposits that accumulate, what is the real truth?. Is it even a matter of flow?, can it be the increased exposure of the pre intake valve pocket area to more/better back flow from the exhaust valve opening, better atomizing things, that is what the real advantage is?. If so then a 3 valve arrangement might as well be as good as a 4. Seems like there are some 3 valve designs that work raher well, and the 5 valve version Ferrari uses sounds good in that reguard. But, again we're drifting away from the turbo issue. With the increased heat of the EGT (as referrenced to the events at valve overlap) is this even a true factor?. With the turbo, it's acting a huge capacitor on the exhuast gases, and so it might be generating some more effective back flow at the overlap events. Bottom line is everything is a matter of compromises, it's just which ones you want to make. Bruce Sleepy yawned as he was reading this and Doc thought he said *which cake do you want to make*, so now they have the floor and eggs out, geesh, another cooking adventure. Brutal snippage > Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area > Craig Dotson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sravet@arm.com Wed Dec 5 13:03:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:26:16 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:26:16 -0300 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: is this a WB02 sensor? Have a look at the diy-efi archives for WB, EGOR... All this and more is in there. Also there's a page about WBO2 on the diy_efi page under projects. --steve The Dupuis wrote: > full-throttle closed loop tuning? What Hondas have them (OBD II)? If > nobody minds, I'd like to open the floor on this. > > Matt > -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 13:37:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:37:59 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:37:59 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Speaking from experience or from theory?. While you can ignore other issues, when you're discussing an individual item, when you do put it into practice thou, what happens?. There is alot more going on, when you crack the gas then the intake valve looking at the manifold. Your multi butterfly set up *might* have better transistional stuff. But, if you compromise it's plenum area then you'll fall down *big time* on WOT. Then we get into air calculations. If we're using any plenums, then we're going to have a *choke point* somewhere anyway. For either a MAF or MAP system. the MAP spikes are so serious that you need averaging of them to make a worth while signal out of them anyway. The MAF is self explainatory. Then comes into issue are the matters of AE. With a longer column of air the lesser the need for AE. That can be a good thing, since we get more to give the engine what it needs, rather then a calculaton based on TPS. But that leads to fly by wire throttles which have to be a better answer anyway. With them you can keep the airflow optimised per rpm, per rate of accleration. Hmmm, maybe a (3-4", pre turbo) slide like an old SU has isn't such a bad idea after all............ Then we have to figure in the various drivetrain issues. Autos being alot more forgiving then manuals. With the converter to act as a huge dampner, we can get the slippage to work for us. Given enough slippage to get us to peak torque, where would all this lag even be an issue. Bruce Still cruising in 80s (and earlier) technology...... Still looking for this *new* stuff everyone's talking about. From: "James Montebello" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > This is true, but with one big caveat, already mentioned several times: > throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum and one throttle will be > pretty awful. > james montebello > On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > I was trying to find it, but there is a net site where they get into > > Hemholtz and manifolding. On the V6s they contend that two groups of 3 are > > the best answer. > > Needless to say, I'm of the single plenum thought pattern. > > The closer the runners face an volume of air approaching atmospheric, the > > better they will flow. Of all the manifolding available which generates > > both the best torque and HP numbers?. The lowly Independent Runner. > > There are several jillion theories as to why, but IMO, it's just a matter of > > the air not having to snake around at all to get to the intake valve. I got > > to work with alot of IR manifolds, and engines, and have yet to see anything > > approach them. Now, they use individual butterflies, but the answer to why > > is that they have too. Now how would one try to approximate an IR with > > Simplicity in mind? (No Correction Needed). Use your runners and tie them > > to a big arsed plenum, and single butterfly. the large plenum will > > approximate the atmosphere, or in this case, be the atmosphere, and with the > > single butterfly the entering air will have the least inertia, and so will > > be able to bend around to best fill the plenum. > > Bruce > > > > Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof > > in the contents of this posting. This Warning is included as part of to > > ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or > > disadvantaged. > > > > > > > > > Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing > > > twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct > > > means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in > > > the head with the runner as well as possible. > > > Craig Dotson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From axel_rietschin@compuserve.com Wed Dec 5 13:29:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:48:22 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:48:22 -0300 From: "Axel Rietschin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high lift cams just as their NA counterparts? If tomorrow the atmosphere pressure changes from 101kPa to 202kPa, will this change something to what happens inside an engine intake manifold? --Axel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Dotson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 3:56 PM Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the > > piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to > > push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave > > activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute > > when in boost. > > If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure > > differences between the two types of motors then > > Bruce > > I agree here, and I also agree with Bruce's earlier opinion that you are > thinking in NA rather than turbo terms. > > When you tune an intake manifold for an NA car, you're trying to take > advantage of the acoustics generated inside the manifold when you have flow > into the cylinders. The most you can get out of such tuning is maybe a > handful of pascals.....not even kPa...at the right times that help exhaust > scavenging and cylinder filling at the beginning and end of the intake valve > opening. Bruce is right, typically at frequencies between the resonances > you actually get a few Pa drop at the beginning and end of the intake valve > opening that tend to empty the cylinder more than fill it. In a turbo car, > particularly one with 1.5 bar (150 kPa) boost that will likely never see > pressures below atmospheric, a handful of Pa basically amounts to jack and > you're killing yourself for nothing. > > The last Formula SAE car my school built with a turbo had approx 30mm > diameter runners to each cylinder and the "plenum" consisted of about a 50mm > diameter "log" connecting the runners...and this is on a 600cc 4 cyl engine. > I don't know what boost levels were, but I doubt they were as high as 1.5 > bar. There was absolutely zero thought into "tuning" the intake, it was the > absolute minimum necessary to deliver the pressurized air to the cylinders. > > Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing > twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct > means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in > the head with the runner as well as possible. > > Craig Dotson > crdotson@vt.edu > 2002 VT FormulaSAE > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From thomas.renegar@nist.gov Wed Dec 5 13:34:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:52:08 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:52:08 -0300 From: Brian Renegar Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit >If you look at the lead spacing you'll understand my answer. Also, using >the large one at C2 also gets the grouping there rather close. >Bruce Lead spacing?? Are you talking about how far apart the leads are? Because on the PCB the holes for C2 and C8 are identically spaced. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 13:53:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:53:35 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 13:53:35 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: The Parts Bin - International Order help needed. Golly, and you were so anti-buy anything from them Yanks when it came to the boards. EFI content, you'd mentioned buying the KC-3500s and were selling them commercially, so your mention of them, is violating list policy, IMO. Bruce From: "Peter Gargano" Subject: The Parts Bin - International Order help needed. > I'm after someone (in the US) to ring The Parts Bin's free (in the US) > number and hassle them for information about an order I have with them I > placed over 5 weeks ago. Email me off-list if you can help. > DIY-EFI content? I have modified the KC-5300 (aka FMD or fuel mixture display > that can be used with the DIY-WB) to provide an RS232 (ie. serial) output for > logging purposes - this requires just three resistors and a transistor (and > a connector). I'll provide full details of the simple changes, and make the > HEX file freely available ASAP, hopefully by this weekend. > Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 14:48:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:48:12 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 14:48:12 -0800 From: James Montebello MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Thanks for completely omitting the section of my post where I discussed the other compromises, Bruce. :-) Yes, all things include compromises. My point was, ONE tradeoff in the "one big plenum" approach v. an IR setup is simplicity v. throttle response. There are other tradeoffs. One big plenum not only makes the throttle construction easier, but it also allows you to use MAP without heavy filtering (or a MAP plenum). It allows you to use MAF if you desire, unless you make another plenum "above" the throttles in the IR setup, where you get the nice airflow without the compromise of losing throttle response. None of this is new. IR setups were around decades ago. I've driven cars that were swapped between single plenum/single-throttle setups and IR setups. Throttle response is most definitely improved, so it's not just theory. However, the IR setup is more complicated in many ways. Whether its all worth the effort is up to the guy spending the money. And while you're blathering about drivetrain theory, you should mention CVT, where you can tune for a very high but narrow torque peak using 30-50 year old knowlege to get >150hp/liter out of a two-valve setup, and let the CVT hold it on that torque peak. Nice, once someone figures out how to deliver 500+lb/ft through a CVT. Audi seems to have figured out 250lb/ft. Of course, now we've traded off a simple engine for a complicated transmission. james montebello On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > Speaking from experience or from theory?. > While you can ignore other issues, when you're discussing an individual > item, when you do put it into practice thou, what happens?. There is alot > more going on, when you crack the gas then the intake valve looking at the > manifold. > Your multi butterfly set up *might* have better transistional stuff. > But, if you compromise it's plenum area then you'll fall down *big time* > on WOT. > > Then we get into air calculations. > If we're using any plenums, then we're going to have a *choke point* > somewhere anyway. For either a MAF or MAP system. the MAP spikes are so > serious that you need averaging of them to make a worth while signal out of > them anyway. The MAF is self explainatory. > Then comes into issue are the matters of AE. With a longer column of air > the lesser the need for AE. That can be a good thing, since we get more > to give the engine what it needs, rather then a calculaton based on TPS. > But that leads to fly by wire throttles which have to be a better answer > anyway. With them you can keep the airflow optimised per rpm, per rate of > accleration. Hmmm, maybe a (3-4", pre turbo) slide like an old SU has isn't > such a bad idea after all............ > > Then we have to figure in the various drivetrain issues. Autos being alot > more forgiving then manuals. With the converter to act as a huge dampner, > we can get the slippage to work for us. Given enough slippage to get us to > peak torque, where would all this lag even be an issue. > Bruce > Still cruising in 80s (and earlier) technology...... > Still looking for this *new* stuff everyone's talking about. > > > > From: "James Montebello" > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > This is true, but with one big caveat, already mentioned several times: > > throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum and one throttle will be > > pretty awful. > > james montebello ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 15:05:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:05:04 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:05:04 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "James Montebello" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Thanks for completely omitting the section of my post where I discussed > the other compromises, Bruce. :-) Was just trying to tighen up what I wanted to blather about. Hmm, I thought I had included a brutal snippage comment, but in double checking, it's not there, that was an error. > Yes, all things include compromises. My point was, ONE tradeoff in the > "one big plenum" approach v. an IR setup is simplicity v. throttle > response. There are other tradeoffs. One big plenum not only makes the > throttle construction easier, but it also allows you to use MAP without > heavy filtering (or a MAP plenum). It allows you to use MAF if you > desire, unless you make another plenum "above" the throttles in the IR > setup, where you get the nice airflow without the compromise of losing > throttle response. > None of this is new. IR setups were around decades ago. I've driven cars > that were swapped between single plenum/single-throttle setups and IR > setups. Throttle response is most definitely improved, so it's not just > theory. However, the IR setup is more complicated in many ways. Whether > its all worth the effort is up to the guy spending the money. But, when worded like this it apprears you stating it as a universal truth. I have no doubt that in some applications there perferred compromises. > And while you're blathering about drivetrain theory, you should mention > CVT, where you can tune for a very high but narrow torque peak using 30-50 > year old knowlege to get >150hp/liter out of a two-valve setup, and let > the CVT hold it on that torque peak. Nice, once someone figures out how > to deliver 500+lb/ft through a CVT. Audi seems to have figured out > 250lb/ft. Of course, now we've traded off a simple engine for a > complicated transmission. I just find myself limited to what's actually available. Life's just complicated enough handling what we have already without further complicating things with what ifs. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. > james montebello > On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > Speaking from experience or from theory?. > > While you can ignore other issues, when you're discussing an individual > > item, when you do put it into practice thou, what happens?. There is alot > > more going on, when you crack the gas then the intake valve looking at the > > manifold. > > Your multi butterfly set up *might* have better transistional stuff. > > But, if you compromise it's plenum area then you'll fall down *big time* > > on WOT. > > Then we get into air calculations. > > If we're using any plenums, then we're going to have a *choke point* > > somewhere anyway. For either a MAF or MAP system. the MAP spikes are so > > serious that you need averaging of them to make a worth while signal out of > > them anyway. The MAF is self explainatory. > > Then comes into issue are the matters of AE. With a longer column of air > > the lesser the need for AE. That can be a good thing, since we get more > > to give the engine what it needs, rather then a calculaton based on TPS. > > But that leads to fly by wire throttles which have to be a better answer > > anyway. With them you can keep the airflow optimised per rpm, per rate of > > accleration. Hmmm, maybe a (3-4", pre turbo) slide like an old SU has isn't > > such a bad idea after all............ > > > > Then we have to figure in the various drivetrain issues. Autos being alot > > more forgiving then manuals. With the converter to act as a huge dampner, > > we can get the slippage to work for us. Given enough slippage to get us to > > peak torque, where would all this lag even be an issue. > > Bruce > > Still cruising in 80s (and earlier) technology...... > > Still looking for this *new* stuff everyone's talking about. > > > > > > > > From: "James Montebello" > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > This is true, but with one big caveat, already mentioned several times: > > > throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum and one throttle will be > > > pretty awful. > > > james montebello ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 15:42:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:42:12 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:42:12 -0800 From: Kelly McCrystle MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Yes, openings in the intake system after the Air Flow Meter will allow un-metered air to enter the system and will cause among other things High Idle or a hunting idle. Therefore it is likely that the hose was cracked previously and that led to the high idle. Kelly M '91 FJ80 --- Bruce wrote: > > From: "James Montebello" > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, > intercoolers > > Thanks for completely omitting the section of my > post where I discussed > > the other compromises, Bruce. :-) > > Was just trying to tighen up what I wanted to > blather about. > Hmm, I thought I had included a brutal snippage > comment, but in double > checking, it's not there, that was an error. > > > Yes, all things include compromises. My point > was, ONE tradeoff in the > > "one big plenum" approach v. an IR setup is > simplicity v. throttle > > response. There are other tradeoffs. One big > plenum not only makes the > > throttle construction easier, but it also allows > you to use MAP without > > heavy filtering (or a MAP plenum). It allows you > to use MAF if you > > desire, unless you make another plenum "above" the > throttles in the IR > > setup, where you get the nice airflow without the > compromise of losing > > throttle response. > > None of this is new. IR setups were around > decades ago. I've driven cars > > that were swapped between single > plenum/single-throttle setups and IR > > setups. Throttle response is most definitely > improved, so it's not just > > theory. However, the IR setup is more complicated > in many ways. Whether > > its all worth the effort is up to the guy spending > the money. > > But, when worded like this it apprears you stating > it as a universal truth. > I have no doubt that in some applications there > perferred compromises. > > > And while you're blathering about drivetrain > theory, you should mention > > CVT, where you can tune for a very high but narrow > torque peak using 30-50 > > year old knowlege to get >150hp/liter out of a > two-valve setup, and let > > the CVT hold it on that torque peak. Nice, once > someone figures out how > > to deliver 500+lb/ft through a CVT. Audi seems to > have figured out > > 250lb/ft. Of course, now we've traded off a > simple engine for a > > complicated transmission. > > I just find myself limited to what's actually > available. Life's just > complicated enough handling what we have already > without further > complicating things with what ifs. > Bruce > > Note: The sender is not responsible for your > interest or lack thereof in > the contents of this posting. The Warning is > included in part to ensure > that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way > offended or disadvantaged. > > > > james montebello > > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > > Speaking from experience or from theory?. > > > While you can ignore other issues, when you're > discussing an individual > > > item, when you do put it into practice thou, > what happens?. There is > alot > > > more going on, when you crack the gas then the > intake valve looking at > the > > > manifold. > > > Your multi butterfly set up *might* have > better transistional stuff. > > > But, if you compromise it's plenum area then > you'll fall down *big > time* > > > on WOT. > > > Then we get into air calculations. > > > If we're using any plenums, then we're going > to have a *choke point* > > > somewhere anyway. For either a MAF or MAP > system. the MAP spikes are > so > > > serious that you need averaging of them to make > a worth while signal out > of > > > them anyway. The MAF is self explainatory. > > > Then comes into issue are the matters of AE. > With a longer column of > air > > > the lesser the need for AE. That can be a > good thing, since we get > more > > > to give the engine what it needs, rather then a > calculaton based on TPS. > > > But that leads to fly by wire throttles which > have to be a better answer > > > anyway. With them you can keep the airflow > optimised per rpm, per rate > of > > > accleration. Hmmm, maybe a (3-4", pre turbo) > slide like an old SU has > isn't > > > such a bad idea after all............ > > > > > > Then we have to figure in the various drivetrain > issues. Autos being > alot > > > more forgiving then manuals. With the converter > to act as a huge > dampner, > > > we can get the slippage to work for us. Given > enough slippage to get us > to > > > peak torque, where would all this lag even be an > issue. > > > Bruce > > > Still cruising in 80s (and earlier) > technology...... > > > Still looking for this *new* stuff > everyone's talking about. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: "James Montebello" > > > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, > intercoolers > > > > This is true, but with one big caveat, already > mentioned several > times: > > > > throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum > and one throttle will be > > > > pretty awful. > > > > james montebello > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 5 15:25:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:52:40 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:52:40 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Marketing. The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an OHV engine. Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing it's displacement. Bruce Extrememly proud owner of a low performance turbo'd motored car. BTW, ask a certain Porsche Turbo Carrera owner, and 308 (whined like 6 DCOEs) at Indy about the old Black Sedan, the Monday after the US PG. > Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high lift > cams just as their NA counterparts? > --Axel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jester@westfailure.net Wed Dec 5 03:48:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:56:17 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 15:56:17 -0300 From: jester@westfailure.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WTB: wideband o2 kit or board hello, I am looking to buy a DIY wideband 02 kit or board. please let me know if you have one to sell. thanks, Steve *************************************************************************** Fashion Twins, activate! form of: a lemming. http://westfailure.org *************************************************************************** ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 16:36:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:36:13 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 16:36:13 -0800 From: "Dan Zorde" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: New cam for TPI 350 Hi all, Does anyone have any experiences with the CraneCams H-278-2 cam in a TPI 350 ? The application is roughly 1700kg car with 5speed manual, 3.08 diff, Sportsman 2 heads (circuit work, hill climbs, autokhanas, NO drag racing). TPI is controlled by aftermarket MAP system with no closed loop control. Really just want to settly my worries that the cam may loose too much vacuum at idle, hence resulting in idle problems (also have no idle control motor, system just relies on a fixed size bypass hole for idle air). Also, I'm told the standard throttle body is good for around 650cfm, can anyone tell me if I'm starting to get close to that limit with this setup and if I need to look at going to a larger size ? rgds Dan dzorde@erggroup.com ---------------------------- ERG Group -------------------------- The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may only be read by the intended recipient. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 17:00:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:00:36 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:00:36 -0800 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) Thanks in advance Peter Florance 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 5 16:40:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:02:00 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:02:00 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers I was trying to find it, but there is a net site where they get into Hemholtz and manifolding. On the V6s they contend that two groups of 3 are the best answer. Needless to say, I'm of the single plenum thought pattern. The closer the runners face an volume of air approaching atmospheric, the better they will flow. Of all the manifolding available which generates both the best torque and HP numbers?. The lowly Independent Runner. There are several jillion theories as to why, but IMO, it's just a matter of the air not having to snake around at all to get to the intake valve. I got to work with alot of IR manifolds, and engines, and have yet to see anything approach them. Now, they use individual butterflies, but the answer to why is that they have too. Now how would one try to approximate an IR with Simplicity in mind? (No Correction Needed). Use your runners and tie them to a big arsed plenum, and single butterfly. the large plenum will approximate the atmosphere, or in this case, be the atmosphere, and with the single butterfly the entering air will have the least inertia, and so will be able to bend around to best fill the plenum. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. This Warning is included as part of to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. > Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing > twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct > means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in > the head with the runner as well as possible. > Craig Dotson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From thomas.renegar@nist.gov Wed Dec 5 16:55:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:09:12 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:09:12 -0300 From: Brian Renegar Subject: Wideband sensor connector FYI, I found two connectors for the wideband O2 on a 92 Honda Civic yesterday. This was a plain old Civic (no VTech). One connector was right next to this engine's O2 sensor connector. It used a 3 or 4 wire (NB sensor probably) O2, but the wideband connector (or one like it) was on the harnesses also. I found the other connector on the driver's side shock tower, near the firewall. I think it was somewhere near the master cylinder. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From knickm@gmx.net Wed Dec 5 16:31:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:10:18 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:10:18 -0300 From: "Jens Knickmeyer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #909 Hi everyone, up to now, I thought I knew how an EGO works. But now I am not so sure.... I just took a look at my data logged on today's drive to France (took about 1 hour). I set up my data logger to log rpm, injection time, engine temp and lambda voltage. Note that all data is not measured by seperate measurement equipment but I receive data directly from the ECU by using K-Line communication. Looking at lambda voltage, I recognized that the ECU sometimes tells a value of 1.85V. AFAIK, lambda voltage is limited by approx. [0.1V, 0.85V]. I tried to recognize any correlation between lambda voltage and any other signal, but I couldn't. The 1.85V occurr instead of the 0.85V I would have expected. The "lean" voltage of 0.1V is reached in every cycle, no problem there. My questions: Is there any chance that an EGO produces such a high voltage (which would indicate "ultramegahyperrich" mixture)? Can anyone imagine a defect which results in such a high lambda voltage? Can an interference with other substances/gases produce such a high voltage? Regards, Jens Knickmeyer '92 Volkswagen Polo G40 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From davidmga@netzero.net Wed Dec 5 16:49:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:12:07 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:12:07 -0300 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: (911 Technologist) Need Info On Programming ECU There are a number of companies out there selling chips for the 1990 760 turbo LH Jetronic 2.4 EFI. I don't know how they do it but I'll believe it when I see it. Your help is much appreciated! -David -----Original Message----- From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:28 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU Unfortunately Jetronics are not computerized. They have no chip. It is all circuitry and no CPU. FR Wilk _____________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 3:19 PM Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU > My car has the Jetronic Turbo. > > Thanks for any help! > > -David > > -----Original Message----- > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? > > FR Wilk > ___________________________________ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Goldstein" > To: > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM > Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. I > > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware for > > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his Firebird. > > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess I'm > > looking for similar equipment. > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > -David > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 17:16:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:16:18 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:16:18 -0800 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Peter Florance wrote: > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors > for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > buffers. > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual > exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) The National Semiconductor "lambda sensor interface amplifier" specs imply about 1.2M ohms to 0.45 volts. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 17:16:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:16:41 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:16:41 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and sustained operation. > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 17:20:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:20:52 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:20:52 -0800 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high >lift > > cams just as their NA counterparts? If tomorrow the atmosphere pressure > > changes from 101kPa to 202kPa, will this change something to what >happens > > inside an engine intake manifold? > >Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area. The same >benefits go for a turbo'd car as an NA car in this area...more volume into >the cylinder at a given pressure loss, or the same volume into the cylinder >at a lower pressure loss...at the price of less turbulence. With more >valves and/or more valve lift you increase the flow area, reducing pressure >loss at a given flow rate. With more valve duration, the intake valve is >open for a longer percentage of the compression stroke. If boost pressure >is high enough, more air can be packed into the cylinder even as it starts >the compression stroke, further improving volumetric efficiency. And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. >If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an appreciable >difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The whole question still >seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning an intake you are trying to >increase intake air pressure by a small number of pascals. Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. >This helps the >engine because the intake pressure becomes slightly higher than exhaust >pressure due to acoustic pressure, helping flow into the cylinder during >the >overlap period. If atmospheric pressure doubled you'd still need to do >this, as exhaust pressure will double accordingly, but with turbocharging >the exhaust pressure increase (it's all absolute pressure here of course) >is >small compared to the intake pressure increase. Tuning the manifold to >gain >a small number of pascals pressure will have an insignificant impact when >combined with the already large pressure differential between boost >pressure >and exhaust pressure. Proper flow during overlap is very important. Have you ever seen an exhaust pulse's pressure trace? AVL boost's website has an example. There is a good 2:1 or better variance in exhaust pressure at the valve during a single engine cycle. Time exhaust valve closing/overlap during the low side and it scavenges the cylinder very well. I have to completely disagree on the turbo issue here. Normally with a turbo setup you have a huge pressure swing from before spoolup, during spoolup, then maintain a good pressure differential for ~3000 rpm, then HUGE PRESSURE INCREASES IN THE EXHAUST. You will see drastic increases in exhaust pressure, I've measured as much as 60psi for 23psi in the intake. That means I've taken the turbo WAY out of its good operating range. In this situation, you have TONS of exhaust pressure during overlap and toss all kinds of exhaust back up the intake and run crazy natural EGR, can't spark it, and make very little power. This is also where its by far the most important to have a properly tuned exhuast on the low side of its pulse during overlap, you can then extend your rpm range (granted with some pretty bad pumping losses) by keeping some VE at rpm's when the turbo is making a lot of backpressure. In an SAE car there is probably a very real balance of exhaust to intake pressure. If you have too low of exhaust pressure I bet you lose power since you're limited on intake flow by the restrictor. If you are scavenging really, really well, then you'll have a considerable amount of wasted air/fuel exiting the exhaust. A properly tuned intake is also vital or else you'll have dead pressure times at the restrictor. Have you ever measured and logged pressure at the orifice? You'd probably have to log at 5KHz to get a good trace at high rpm's. Just my $0.02, Kevin BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm isn't trivial. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 17:30:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:30:54 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:30:54 -0800 From: "powermaxx" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Intro,,,, Street Outlaw (NHRA) looking for Megasquirt EFI This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C17D05.56272900 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am doing an EFI project for my 73 Challenger currently Kinsler = mechanical injection, 528cuin, 14-71 Mooneyham, ETHANOL, full chassis, = etc....... I'm making the move over to EFI, something I can tune myself = vs this mechanical system. This car will make about 1500hp (+) and will = see a variety of tracks (and altitudes). I'm serious about this sport as = I've campaigned this car for 9 years in various stages of "Street = Legal" trim in Club races to King Street in Denver CO and surrounding = areas. This current combo has given me fits this year sorting out the = fuel system at the cost of a motor. I have started to purchase injectors = and came across this group and like what I see in the Megasquirt. Some = of the posts had a group buy (closed, but......) would be interested if = anyone drops out. From what I can see this system will do what I need. = Anyone else running a supercharged setup? Ethanol? I have helped setup a Speed Pro system on a 69 Road Runner 6-71 (very = nice car) so am familiar with EFI and performance applications.=20 Back to the archives so I can catch up with you guys. I'm in digest mode = for now and the archive site has been sporadic to access lately (is that = normal??) Looking forward to this..... Steve St"RACE"ner (and toys...) 73 Challenger "Street Outlaw" 87 GLHS Shelby ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C17D05.56272900 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am doing an EFI project for = my 73=20 Challenger currently Kinsler mechanical injection, 528cuin, 14-71 = Mooneyham,=20 ETHANOL, full chassis, etc....... I'm making the move over to EFI, = something I=20 can tune myself vs this mechanical system. This car will make about = 1500hp (+)=20 and will see a variety of tracks (and altitudes). I'm serious about this = sport=20 as I've campaigned this car  for 9 years in various stages of = "Street=20 Legal" trim in Club races to King Street in Denver CO and = surrounding=20 areas. This current combo has given me fits this year sorting out the = fuel=20 system at the cost of a motor. I have started to purchase injectors and = came=20 across this group and like what I see in the Megasquirt. Some of the = posts had a=20 group buy (closed, but......) would be interested if anyone drops out. = >From what=20 I can see this system will do what I need. Anyone else running a = supercharged=20 setup? Ethanol?
 
I have helped setup a Speed Pro system = on a 69 Road=20 Runner 6-71 (very nice car) so am familiar with EFI and performance=20 applications.
 
Back to the archives so I can catch up = with you=20 guys. I'm in digest mode for now and the archive site has been sporadic = to=20 access lately (is that normal??)
 
Looking forward to = this.....
 
Steve St"RACE"ner (and = toys...)
73 Challenger "Street = Outlaw"
87 GLHS = Shelby
------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C17D05.56272900-- ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Wed Dec 5 17:17:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:33:54 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:33:54 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: The Parts Bin - International Order help needed. I'm after someone (in the US) to ring The Parts Bin's free (in the US) number and hassle them for information about an order I have with them I placed over 5 weeks ago. Email me off-list if you can help. DIY-EFI content? I have modified the KC-5300 (aka FMD or fuel mixture display that can be used with the DIY-WB) to provide an RS232 (ie. serial) output for logging purposes - this requires just three resistors and a transistor (and a connector). I'll provide full details of the simple changes, and make the HEX file freely available ASAP, hopefully by this weekend. Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 17:35:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:35:19 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:35:19 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: EGO voltages Jens Knickmeyer tapped away at the keyboard with: > up to now, I thought I knew how an EGO works. But now > I am not so sure.... > > I just took a look at my data logged on today's drive to France > (took about 1 hour). I set up my data logger to log rpm, injection > time, engine temp and lambda voltage. Note that all data is not > measured by seperate measurement equipment but I receive data > directly from the ECU by using K-Line communication. Looking at > lambda voltage, I recognized that the ECU sometimes tells a value > of 1.85V. AFAIK, lambda voltage is limited by approx. [0.1V, > 0.85V]. I tried to recognize any correlation between lambda > voltage and any other signal, but I couldn't. The 1.85V occurr > instead of the 0.85V I would have expected. The "lean" voltage of > 0.1V is reached in every cycle, no problem there. 1.1V is about the maximum lambda voltage. 1.85 is way off-scale. > My questions: > Is there any chance that an EGO produces such a high voltage (which > would indicate "ultramegahyperrich" mixture)? > Can anyone imagine a defect which results in such a high lambda voltage? > Can an interference with other substances/gases produce such a high > voltage? The high voltage could be because of a bad chassis connection at the lambda probe. Single- and three-wire sensors are susceptible as they don't carry a signal ground in the loom to the sensor, relying instead on electrical contact of the exhaust manifold. Check this by starting the engine and measuring the voltage from battery negative to manifold. You should see only a few millivolts from noise. Anything more than 100mV as a baseline and you need to investigate. See if the voltages get to be more sensible after you add a ground strap from the exhaust manifold to the engine. (Use a jumper cable and clamp it firmly.) Also, make sure that the engine has a secure connection to battery negative. Give each of the wires a tug to make sure it doesn't just _look_ OK. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 17:40:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:40:55 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:40:55 -0800 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Thanks for the reply On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that provides .45 volts at the sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it disconnected. I've read that's how they sense whether the sensor is working or not. How do they accomplish that? Peter Florance 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:16 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and > sustained operation. > > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the > response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to > see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. > > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 17:43:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:43:12 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:43:12 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) James Montebello tapped away at the keyboard with: > And while you're blathering about drivetrain theory, you should > mention CVT, where you can tune for a very high but narrow torque > peak using 30-50 year old knowlege to get >150hp/liter out of a > two-valve setup, and let the CVT hold it on that torque peak. > Nice, once someone figures out how to deliver 500+lb/ft through a > CVT. Audi seems to have figured out 250lb/ft. Of course, now > we've traded off a simple engine for a complicated transmission. You can get CVTs to transmit that amount of troque, but not in a car you'd want to put on the road. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From crdotson@vt.edu Wed Dec 5 17:24:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:48:58 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:48:58 -0300 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high lift > cams just as their NA counterparts? If tomorrow the atmosphere pressure > changes from 101kPa to 202kPa, will this change something to what happens > inside an engine intake manifold? Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area. The same benefits go for a turbo'd car as an NA car in this area...more volume into the cylinder at a given pressure loss, or the same volume into the cylinder at a lower pressure loss...at the price of less turbulence. With more valves and/or more valve lift you increase the flow area, reducing pressure loss at a given flow rate. With more valve duration, the intake valve is open for a longer percentage of the compression stroke. If boost pressure is high enough, more air can be packed into the cylinder even as it starts the compression stroke, further improving volumetric efficiency. If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a small number of pascals. This helps the engine because the intake pressure becomes slightly higher than exhaust pressure due to acoustic pressure, helping flow into the cylinder during the overlap period. If atmospheric pressure doubled you'd still need to do this, as exhaust pressure will double accordingly, but with turbocharging the exhaust pressure increase (it's all absolute pressure here of course) is small compared to the intake pressure increase. Tuning the manifold to gain a small number of pascals pressure will have an insignificant impact when combined with the already large pressure differential between boost pressure and exhaust pressure. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From crdotson@vt.edu Wed Dec 5 17:29:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:50:59 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 17:50:59 -0300 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor > How about using one of the valve rockers for a reference and the > crank for intermediate? If their motorcycle engine is anything like the one I'm working with, it lacks "valve rockers." The DOHC directly drives the valve as the cam follower is a cap installed on top of the valve stem. The engine we just acquired is a CBR600 F4i. It has a factory magnetic reluctor cam sensor. I haven't pulled the valve cover to see how it works yet, but it is located on the non-driven side of the cam and the wires exit through a rubber grommet between the head and the valve cover. Engines the team used prior to the F4i (the F4, F3, and at one time I believe an F2) all used a Haltech with phase-sequential injection and waste-spark ignition using two coils. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 18:01:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:01:46 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:01:46 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Craig Dotson tapped away at the keyboard with: > > In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the > > piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to > > push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave > > activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute > > when in boost. > > If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure > > differences between the two types of motors then > I agree here, and I also agree with Bruce's earlier opinion that you are > thinking in NA rather than turbo terms. > When you tune an intake manifold for an NA car, you're trying to take > advantage of the acoustics generated inside the manifold when you have flow > into the cylinders. The most you can get out of such tuning is maybe a > handful of pascals.....not even kPa...at the right times that help exhaust You're quite mistaken there. 20% dynamic supercharge is achieved in many small engines with tuned manifolds over a limited rev range. Some engines claim about 60% dynamic supercharge over certain rev ranges at valve opening using tuned and variable manifolds on NA engines. You're looking at nett VE in excess of 100%. The dynamic supercharge is more useful in a NA engine as the valve opens because a vacuum hasn't yet been established to move the air. If there were no tangible benefit, car manufacturers wouldn't put all those trick manifolds on their cars; to make their V6's feel like V8's and the V8's feel like steam engines. Adding the dynamic supercharge to the forced induction can benefit cylinder filling if tuned appropriately. It can also _reduce_ the effective boost due to dynamic rarification at certain engine speeds, in the very same way as in a NA engine. It's only the baseline pressure (and temperature) that's higher in a forced-induction engine. The effect is the same; magnitudes are somewhat different. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jamesm@undeadminion.bom.conru.com Wed Dec 5 17:47:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:09:51 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:09:51 -0300 From: James Montebello MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers This is true, but with one big caveat, already mentioned several times: throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum and one throttle will be pretty awful. The entire volume must change before each intake valve "sees" the change being demanded by the driver. An IR setup with a throttle per cylinder, however, will have excellent throttle response, simply because the volume between the throttle and the valve(s) will be small. However, a multi-throttle setup is more complicated to put together and keep operating than one with only one or two throttles. So, the compromise is two plenums, each relatively small, and two throttle bodies. Reasonably good throttle response, and reasonably good flow. Not as good as an IR setup, but a lot less complicated. james montebello On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > I was trying to find it, but there is a net site where they get into > Hemholtz and manifolding. On the V6s they contend that two groups of 3 are > the best answer. > Needless to say, I'm of the single plenum thought pattern. > The closer the runners face an volume of air approaching atmospheric, the > better they will flow. Of all the manifolding available which generates > both the best torque and HP numbers?. The lowly Independent Runner. > There are several jillion theories as to why, but IMO, it's just a matter of > the air not having to snake around at all to get to the intake valve. I got > to work with alot of IR manifolds, and engines, and have yet to see anything > approach them. Now, they use individual butterflies, but the answer to why > is that they have too. Now how would one try to approximate an IR with > Simplicity in mind? (No Correction Needed). Use your runners and tie them > to a big arsed plenum, and single butterfly. the large plenum will > approximate the atmosphere, or in this case, be the atmosphere, and with the > single butterfly the entering air will have the least inertia, and so will > be able to bend around to best fill the plenum. > Bruce > > Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof > in the contents of this posting. This Warning is included as part of to > ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or > disadvantaged. > > > > > Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing > > twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct > > means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in > > the head with the runner as well as possible. > > Craig Dotson > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 18:12:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:12:40 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:12:40 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Marketing. > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > uses an OHV engine. Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still driveable around town? > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the > manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves > etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing > it's displacement. Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From f_wilk@hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 17:51:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:13:01 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:13:01 -0300 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU I thought you had a L-Jetronic. The LH Jetronic does have a CPU. FR Wilk ____________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 11:49 AM Subject: RE: (911 Technologist) Need Info On Programming ECU > There are a number of companies out there selling chips for the 1990 760 > turbo LH Jetronic 2.4 EFI. I don't know how they do it but I'll believe it > when I see it. Your help is much appreciated! -David > > -----Original Message----- > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:28 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > Unfortunately Jetronics are not computerized. They have no chip. It is all > circuitry and no CPU. > > FR Wilk > _____________________________________________ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Goldstein" > To: > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 3:19 PM > Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > My car has the Jetronic Turbo. > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > -David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? > > > > FR Wilk > > ___________________________________ > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Goldstein" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM > > Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > > > > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. > I > > > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware > for > > > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his > Firebird. > > > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess > I'm > > > looking for similar equipment. > > > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > > > -David > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > > quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 5 18:14:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:43:55 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 18:43:55 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers But, like everything else there are upsides and downsides. Them fancy *new* things really look great on paper, and in some ways are a good thing. But let us also remember your port(s) sure take a hit on surface area. Then we get into boundary layers and other complications, like the pockets become smaller and so the air has to do even more *bending* to snake around the valve stem/guide to get to the camber. Just to play devils advocate here: Is it really an advantage at normal operating conditions?. Theory would say so, but in actual practice with all the glump and carbon deposits that accumulate, what is the real truth?. Is it even a matter of flow?, can it be the increased exposure of the pre intake valve pocket area to more/better back flow from the exhaust valve opening, better atomizing things, that is what the real advantage is?. If so then a 3 valve arrangement might as well be as good as a 4. Seems like there are some 3 valve designs that work raher well, and the 5 valve version Ferrari uses sounds good in that reguard. But, again we're drifting away from the turbo issue. With the increased heat of the EGT (as referrenced to the events at valve overlap) is this even a true factor?. With the turbo, it's acting a huge capacitor on the exhuast gases, and so it might be generating some more effective back flow at the overlap events. Bottom line is everything is a matter of compromises, it's just which ones you want to make. Bruce Sleepy yawned as he was reading this and Doc thought he said *which cake do you want to make*, so now they have the floor and eggs out, geesh, another cooking adventure. Brutal snippage > Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area > Craig Dotson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 5 18:37:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:05:36 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:05:36 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Speaking from experience or from theory?. While you can ignore other issues, when you're discussing an individual item, when you do put it into practice thou, what happens?. There is alot more going on, when you crack the gas then the intake valve looking at the manifold. Your multi butterfly set up *might* have better transistional stuff. But, if you compromise it's plenum area then you'll fall down *big time* on WOT. Then we get into air calculations. If we're using any plenums, then we're going to have a *choke point* somewhere anyway. For either a MAF or MAP system. the MAP spikes are so serious that you need averaging of them to make a worth while signal out of them anyway. The MAF is self explainatory. Then comes into issue are the matters of AE. With a longer column of air the lesser the need for AE. That can be a good thing, since we get more to give the engine what it needs, rather then a calculaton based on TPS. But that leads to fly by wire throttles which have to be a better answer anyway. With them you can keep the airflow optimised per rpm, per rate of accleration. Hmmm, maybe a (3-4", pre turbo) slide like an old SU has isn't such a bad idea after all............ Then we have to figure in the various drivetrain issues. Autos being alot more forgiving then manuals. With the converter to act as a huge dampner, we can get the slippage to work for us. Given enough slippage to get us to peak torque, where would all this lag even be an issue. Bruce Still cruising in 80s (and earlier) technology...... Still looking for this *new* stuff everyone's talking about. From: "James Montebello" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > This is true, but with one big caveat, already mentioned several times: > throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum and one throttle will be > pretty awful. > james montebello > On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > I was trying to find it, but there is a net site where they get into > > Hemholtz and manifolding. On the V6s they contend that two groups of 3 are > > the best answer. > > Needless to say, I'm of the single plenum thought pattern. > > The closer the runners face an volume of air approaching atmospheric, the > > better they will flow. Of all the manifolding available which generates > > both the best torque and HP numbers?. The lowly Independent Runner. > > There are several jillion theories as to why, but IMO, it's just a matter of > > the air not having to snake around at all to get to the intake valve. I got > > to work with alot of IR manifolds, and engines, and have yet to see anything > > approach them. Now, they use individual butterflies, but the answer to why > > is that they have too. Now how would one try to approximate an IR with > > Simplicity in mind? (No Correction Needed). Use your runners and tie them > > to a big arsed plenum, and single butterfly. the large plenum will > > approximate the atmosphere, or in this case, be the atmosphere, and with the > > single butterfly the entering air will have the least inertia, and so will > > be able to bend around to best fill the plenum. > > Bruce > > > > Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof > > in the contents of this posting. This Warning is included as part of to > > ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or > > disadvantaged. > > > > > > > > > Additionally, why two plenums and two TBs? I can see it if you're doing > > > twin turbo but otherwise I don't see it. I'd just go for the most direct > > > means of delivering the air to the cylinder, trying to line up the port in > > > the head with the runner as well as possible. > > > Craig Dotson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 5 18:53:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:14:48 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:14:48 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: The Parts Bin - International Order help needed. Golly, and you were so anti-buy anything from them Yanks when it came to the boards. EFI content, you'd mentioned buying the KC-3500s and were selling them commercially, so your mention of them, is violating list policy, IMO. Bruce From: "Peter Gargano" Subject: The Parts Bin - International Order help needed. > I'm after someone (in the US) to ring The Parts Bin's free (in the US) > number and hassle them for information about an order I have with them I > placed over 5 weeks ago. Email me off-list if you can help. > DIY-EFI content? I have modified the KC-5300 (aka FMD or fuel mixture display > that can be used with the DIY-WB) to provide an RS232 (ie. serial) output for > logging purposes - this requires just three resistors and a transistor (and > a connector). I'll provide full details of the simple changes, and make the > HEX file freely available ASAP, hopefully by this weekend. > Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 19:19:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:19:17 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:19:17 -0800 From: Jeffrey Engel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? If the voltage is a steady .45v, the sensor is not active or is dead. How they determine whether the signal transitions enough to call the sensor readings good, I don't know. HTH, Jeffrey Engel --- Peter Florance wrote: > Thanks for the reply > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that > provides .45 volts at the > sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it > disconnected. I've read > that's how they sense whether the sensor is working > or not. > How do they accomplish that? > > > > > Peter Florance > 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org > [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:16 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > > > > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup > resistor (to ~ .45V) > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make > a analog circuit > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would > like to > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The > sensor is a voltage > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias > the sensor can cause > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift > or add/average two > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op > amps to perform the > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum > current draw and > > sustained operation. > > > > > Also interested in any comments regarding > averaging O2 sensors for > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in > line 6 engine) > > > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit > however, look at the > > response curves and the consequences of what will > happen if one is > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The > ECU needs then to > > see a constant switching between the levels for > correct operation. > > > > -- > > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, > Western Australia > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ---------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without > > the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 19:39:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:39:57 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:39:57 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > -----Original Message----- > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and > > sustained operation. > > > > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the > > response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to > > see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that provides .45 > volts at the sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it > disconnected. I've read that's how they sense whether the sensor > is working or not. How do they accomplish that? Probably on the output of the buffer amplifier, internal to the box. The sensor's output voltage rises from 0V when it heats up; that transition may be used to switch off the bias. You can check this by measuring the open-circuit voltage at the ECU connector, with the lambda disconnected. The sensor can only source a few microamps. Trying to run a sizeable current through it, which is essential to bias the output directly, will destroy the sensor. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 19:42:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:42:22 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:42:22 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: is this a WB02 sensor? Rather than start up a big rally, the Diy-efi server has lots on this, including the output of the sensor. http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/ You need a modified display to get 10:1 to 20:1 performance, but the mods are discussed there. Megasquirt will happily handle WB02 as you tell it what the curve is its working to. -----Original Message----- From: ext The Dupuis [mailto:dupuis10@telusplanet.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 1:52 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: is this a WB02 sensor? Wait a minute - linear? How do EGT variations affect the output? I'm used . I've never heard about the wideband O2 sensors, so I hate to re-open old discussions about them but: How "wide" are they? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 19:55:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:55:20 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:55:20 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: KC-5300 kit - Batch 7474 -- WARNING A WARNING to anyone who has this kit (this is the Jaycar Fuel Mixture Display) - The 7474 Batch MAY have been supplied with common cathode LED 7 segment displays, rather than the common ANODE displays required. The correct part is a PARA LIGHT A-521H (or FND507 or LTS542R or S506RWB). The INCORRECT part is a PARA LIGHT C-521H Jaycar will provide new 7 segment displays. Peter. (I have no affiliation with Jaycar and am not associated with the KC-5300 kit in any capacity other than being an at-cost supplier of the KC-5300 kit and someone who has modified it for use with the DIY-WB setup). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 20:03:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:03:35 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:03:35 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Marketing. > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > uses an OHV engine. > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > driveable around town? 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. Try not rewording the question and the answer is rather obvious. > > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the > > manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves > > etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing > > it's displacement. > Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? So far the legislating branches of the above set the standards for fuel, so you question is mute. Bruce > > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jamesm@undeadminion.bom.conru.com Wed Dec 5 19:46:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:17:56 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:17:56 -0300 From: James Montebello MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Thanks for completely omitting the section of my post where I discussed the other compromises, Bruce. :-) Yes, all things include compromises. My point was, ONE tradeoff in the "one big plenum" approach v. an IR setup is simplicity v. throttle response. There are other tradeoffs. One big plenum not only makes the throttle construction easier, but it also allows you to use MAP without heavy filtering (or a MAP plenum). It allows you to use MAF if you desire, unless you make another plenum "above" the throttles in the IR setup, where you get the nice airflow without the compromise of losing throttle response. None of this is new. IR setups were around decades ago. I've driven cars that were swapped between single plenum/single-throttle setups and IR setups. Throttle response is most definitely improved, so it's not just theory. However, the IR setup is more complicated in many ways. Whether its all worth the effort is up to the guy spending the money. And while you're blathering about drivetrain theory, you should mention CVT, where you can tune for a very high but narrow torque peak using 30-50 year old knowlege to get >150hp/liter out of a two-valve setup, and let the CVT hold it on that torque peak. Nice, once someone figures out how to deliver 500+lb/ft through a CVT. Audi seems to have figured out 250lb/ft. Of course, now we've traded off a simple engine for a complicated transmission. james montebello On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > Speaking from experience or from theory?. > While you can ignore other issues, when you're discussing an individual > item, when you do put it into practice thou, what happens?. There is alot > more going on, when you crack the gas then the intake valve looking at the > manifold. > Your multi butterfly set up *might* have better transistional stuff. > But, if you compromise it's plenum area then you'll fall down *big time* > on WOT. > > Then we get into air calculations. > If we're using any plenums, then we're going to have a *choke point* > somewhere anyway. For either a MAF or MAP system. the MAP spikes are so > serious that you need averaging of them to make a worth while signal out of > them anyway. The MAF is self explainatory. > Then comes into issue are the matters of AE. With a longer column of air > the lesser the need for AE. That can be a good thing, since we get more > to give the engine what it needs, rather then a calculaton based on TPS. > But that leads to fly by wire throttles which have to be a better answer > anyway. With them you can keep the airflow optimised per rpm, per rate of > accleration. Hmmm, maybe a (3-4", pre turbo) slide like an old SU has isn't > such a bad idea after all............ > > Then we have to figure in the various drivetrain issues. Autos being alot > more forgiving then manuals. With the converter to act as a huge dampner, > we can get the slippage to work for us. Given enough slippage to get us to > peak torque, where would all this lag even be an issue. > Bruce > Still cruising in 80s (and earlier) technology...... > Still looking for this *new* stuff everyone's talking about. > > > > From: "James Montebello" > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > This is true, but with one big caveat, already mentioned several times: > > throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum and one throttle will be > > pretty awful. > > james montebello ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 20:19:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:19:19 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:19:19 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? GM ecms, pcms, generally have a min, and max value that the O2 has to transistion thru to considered awake Bruce From: "Jeffrey Engel" Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > If the voltage is a steady .45v, the sensor is not > active or is dead. How they determine whether the > signal transitions enough to call the sensor readings > good, I don't know. > HTH, > Jeffrey Engel > --- Peter Florance wrote: > > Thanks for the reply > > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that > > provides .45 volts at the > > sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it > > disconnected. I've read > > that's how they sense whether the sensor is working > > or not. > > How do they accomplish that? > > Peter Florance > > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:16 PM > > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup > > resistor (to ~ .45V) > > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make > > a analog circuit > > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would > > like to > > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > > > > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The > > sensor is a voltage > > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias > > the sensor can cause > > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift > > or add/average two > > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op > > amps to perform the > > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum > > current draw and > > > sustained operation. > > > > > > > Also interested in any comments regarding > > averaging O2 sensors for > > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in > > line 6 engine) > > > > > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit > > however, look at the > > > response curves and the consequences of what will > > happen if one is > > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The > > ECU needs then to > > > see a constant switching between the levels for > > correct operation. > > > > > > -- > > > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, > > Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 5 20:04:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:21:46 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:21:46 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "James Montebello" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Thanks for completely omitting the section of my post where I discussed > the other compromises, Bruce. :-) Was just trying to tighen up what I wanted to blather about. Hmm, I thought I had included a brutal snippage comment, but in double checking, it's not there, that was an error. > Yes, all things include compromises. My point was, ONE tradeoff in the > "one big plenum" approach v. an IR setup is simplicity v. throttle > response. There are other tradeoffs. One big plenum not only makes the > throttle construction easier, but it also allows you to use MAP without > heavy filtering (or a MAP plenum). It allows you to use MAF if you > desire, unless you make another plenum "above" the throttles in the IR > setup, where you get the nice airflow without the compromise of losing > throttle response. > None of this is new. IR setups were around decades ago. I've driven cars > that were swapped between single plenum/single-throttle setups and IR > setups. Throttle response is most definitely improved, so it's not just > theory. However, the IR setup is more complicated in many ways. Whether > its all worth the effort is up to the guy spending the money. But, when worded like this it apprears you stating it as a universal truth. I have no doubt that in some applications there perferred compromises. > And while you're blathering about drivetrain theory, you should mention > CVT, where you can tune for a very high but narrow torque peak using 30-50 > year old knowlege to get >150hp/liter out of a two-valve setup, and let > the CVT hold it on that torque peak. Nice, once someone figures out how > to deliver 500+lb/ft through a CVT. Audi seems to have figured out > 250lb/ft. Of course, now we've traded off a simple engine for a > complicated transmission. I just find myself limited to what's actually available. Life's just complicated enough handling what we have already without further complicating things with what ifs. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. > james montebello > On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > Speaking from experience or from theory?. > > While you can ignore other issues, when you're discussing an individual > > item, when you do put it into practice thou, what happens?. There is alot > > more going on, when you crack the gas then the intake valve looking at the > > manifold. > > Your multi butterfly set up *might* have better transistional stuff. > > But, if you compromise it's plenum area then you'll fall down *big time* > > on WOT. > > Then we get into air calculations. > > If we're using any plenums, then we're going to have a *choke point* > > somewhere anyway. For either a MAF or MAP system. the MAP spikes are so > > serious that you need averaging of them to make a worth while signal out of > > them anyway. The MAF is self explainatory. > > Then comes into issue are the matters of AE. With a longer column of air > > the lesser the need for AE. That can be a good thing, since we get more > > to give the engine what it needs, rather then a calculaton based on TPS. > > But that leads to fly by wire throttles which have to be a better answer > > anyway. With them you can keep the airflow optimised per rpm, per rate of > > accleration. Hmmm, maybe a (3-4", pre turbo) slide like an old SU has isn't > > such a bad idea after all............ > > > > Then we have to figure in the various drivetrain issues. Autos being alot > > more forgiving then manuals. With the converter to act as a huge dampner, > > we can get the slippage to work for us. Given enough slippage to get us to > > peak torque, where would all this lag even be an issue. > > Bruce > > Still cruising in 80s (and earlier) technology...... > > Still looking for this *new* stuff everyone's talking about. > > > > > > > > From: "James Montebello" > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > This is true, but with one big caveat, already mentioned several times: > > > throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum and one throttle will be > > > pretty awful. > > > james montebello ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 20:31:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:31:47 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:31:47 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: New cam for TPI 350 From: "Dan Zorde" Subject: New cam for TPI 350 > Does anyone have any experiences with the CraneCams H-278-2 cam in a TPI > 350 ? > The application is roughly 1700kg car with 5speed manual, 3.08 diff, > Sportsman 2 heads (circuit work, hill climbs, autokhanas, NO drag > racing). TPI is controlled by aftermarket MAP system with no closed > loop control. > Really just want to settly my worries that the cam may loose too much > vacuum at idle, hence resulting in idle problems (also have no idle > control motor, system just relies on a fixed size bypass hole for idle > air). My 270 was border line grief for daily use. General driving was fine prolonged stop and go would start to load up. I had min the off idle timing to keep it from lighting the tires so much. Other then under a major traffic jam, was fun > Also, I'm told the standard throttle body is good for around 650cfm, can > anyone tell me if I'm starting to get close to that limit with this > setup and if I need to look at going to a larger size ? Dual 2" butterflies are about 670, as claimed my Holley in some of their lit, and it follows with some of what I've seen. The dual 2s were a delite for mild 320ish HP set up. But just enough, using 5K ish shift point. More cam and buzzing it higher I'd want more air Bruce > > rgds > > Dan dzorde@erggroup.com > > ---------------------------- ERG Group -------------------------- > The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential > and may only be read by the intended recipient. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 20:40:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:40:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:40:14 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Marketing. > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > > uses an OHV engine. > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > driveable around town? > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. Two or three at certain times. > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of that price. > Try not rewording the question and the answer is rather obvious. > > > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on > > > bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for > > > multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's > > > the EPA, in racing it's displacement. > > Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? > So far the legislating branches of the above set the standards for > fuel, so you question is mute. You mean "moot", don't you? The more fuel you use, the more you have to carry, or stop more frequently to refuel. Both of those are penalties. Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range of engine speeds. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 20:43:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:43:09 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 20:43:09 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high > >lift cams just as their NA counterparts? If tomorrow the atmosphere pressure > > > changes from 101kPa to 202kPa, will this change something to what > >happens inside an engine intake manifold? > >Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area. The same > >benefits go for a turbo'd car as an NA car in this area...more volume into > >the cylinder at a given pressure loss, or the same volume into the cylinder > >at a lower pressure loss...at the price of less turbulence. With more > >valves and/or more valve lift you increase the flow area, reducing pressure > >loss at a given flow rate. With more valve duration, the intake valve is > >open for a longer percentage of the compression stroke. If boost pressure > >is high enough, more air can be packed into the cylinder even as it starts > >the compression stroke, further improving volumetric efficiency. > And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves unseated for > over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to 260 degrees for 0.050" > valve lift or more. The more/less air being packed at a certain time during > the intake stroke is no different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. > The only thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed of > sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a turbo > application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for the same Helmholtz > rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread started with street cars, are you still working the street or moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a street engine. > >If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an appreciable > >difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The whole question still > >seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning an intake you are trying to > >increase intake air pressure by a small number of pascals. > Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of a valve? > When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners it can be over 20% > beyond atmospheric pressure during valve closing. We're certainly not > talking single Pascals here. At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you move back from there? > >This helps the > >engine because the intake pressure becomes slightly higher than exhaust > >pressure due to acoustic pressure, helping flow into the cylinder during > >the overlap period. If atmospheric pressure doubled you'd still need to do > >this, as exhaust pressure will double accordingly, but with turbocharging > >the exhaust pressure increase (it's all absolute pressure here of course) > >is small compared to the intake pressure increase. Tuning the manifold to > >gain a small number of pascals pressure will have an insignificant impact when > >combined with the already large pressure differential between boost > >pressure and exhaust pressure. > Proper flow during overlap is very important. Have you ever seen an exhaust > pulse's pressure trace? AVL boost's website has an example. There is a > good 2:1 or better variance in exhaust pressure at the valve during a single > engine cycle. Time exhaust valve closing/overlap during the low side and it > scavenges the cylinder very well. > I have to completely disagree on the turbo issue here. Normally with a > turbo setup you have a huge pressure swing from before spoolup, during > spoolup, then maintain a good pressure differential for ~3000 rpm, then HUGE > PRESSURE INCREASES IN THE EXHAUST. You will see drastic increases in > exhaust pressure, I've measured as much as 60psi for 23psi in the intake. That has to be about the worlds worst matching of turbo to engine. > That means I've taken the turbo WAY out of its good operating range. In > this situation, you have TONS of exhaust pressure during overlap and toss > all kinds of exhaust back up the intake and run crazy natural EGR, can't > spark it, and make very little power. This is also where its by far the > most important to have a properly tuned exhuast on the low side of its pulse > during overlap, you can then extend your rpm range (granted with some pretty > bad pumping losses) by keeping some VE at rpm's when the turbo is making a > lot of backpressure. Well, ya, but your talking at the extreme. > In an SAE car there is probably a very real balance of exhaust to intake > pressure. If you have too low of exhaust pressure I bet you lose power > since you're limited on intake flow by the restrictor. If you are > scavenging really, really well, then you'll have a considerable amount of > wasted air/fuel exiting the exhaust. A properly tuned intake is also vital > or else you'll have dead pressure times at the restrictor. Have you ever > measured and logged pressure at the orifice? You'd probably have to log at > 5KHz to get a good trace at high rpm's. > Just my $0.02, > Kevin > BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. Check out F1 > stuff before you call everything old and pushrods good. Approximately > 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline (yes, I do use that term > loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm isn't trivial. To whom? I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of performance that can't be done with engines that would have transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can win. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 21:09:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:09:09 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:09:09 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bernd Felsche tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > Marketing. > > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > > > uses an OHV engine. > > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > driveable around town? > > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > > Two or three at certain times. > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) engine. Its W-16 engine consists of two very narrow eight-cylinder banks. With four turbochargers, this 7993cc gasoline direct injection engine has a maximum torque of 1250 Nm between 2200 and 5500 rpm. Top speed is 404 kmh (251 mph). The technology is very similar to that proven at Le Mans by Audi. Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and 500 of them a year. A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From patpend2000@yahoo.com Wed Dec 5 20:42:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:09:32 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:09:32 -0300 From: Kelly McCrystle MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Yes, openings in the intake system after the Air Flow Meter will allow un-metered air to enter the system and will cause among other things High Idle or a hunting idle. Therefore it is likely that the hose was cracked previously and that led to the high idle. Kelly M '91 FJ80 --- Bruce wrote: > > From: "James Montebello" > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, > intercoolers > > Thanks for completely omitting the section of my > post where I discussed > > the other compromises, Bruce. :-) > > Was just trying to tighen up what I wanted to > blather about. > Hmm, I thought I had included a brutal snippage > comment, but in double > checking, it's not there, that was an error. > > > Yes, all things include compromises. My point > was, ONE tradeoff in the > > "one big plenum" approach v. an IR setup is > simplicity v. throttle > > response. There are other tradeoffs. One big > plenum not only makes the > > throttle construction easier, but it also allows > you to use MAP without > > heavy filtering (or a MAP plenum). It allows you > to use MAF if you > > desire, unless you make another plenum "above" the > throttles in the IR > > setup, where you get the nice airflow without the > compromise of losing > > throttle response. > > None of this is new. IR setups were around > decades ago. I've driven cars > > that were swapped between single > plenum/single-throttle setups and IR > > setups. Throttle response is most definitely > improved, so it's not just > > theory. However, the IR setup is more complicated > in many ways. Whether > > its all worth the effort is up to the guy spending > the money. > > But, when worded like this it apprears you stating > it as a universal truth. > I have no doubt that in some applications there > perferred compromises. > > > And while you're blathering about drivetrain > theory, you should mention > > CVT, where you can tune for a very high but narrow > torque peak using 30-50 > > year old knowlege to get >150hp/liter out of a > two-valve setup, and let > > the CVT hold it on that torque peak. Nice, once > someone figures out how > > to deliver 500+lb/ft through a CVT. Audi seems to > have figured out > > 250lb/ft. Of course, now we've traded off a > simple engine for a > > complicated transmission. > > I just find myself limited to what's actually > available. Life's just > complicated enough handling what we have already > without further > complicating things with what ifs. > Bruce > > Note: The sender is not responsible for your > interest or lack thereof in > the contents of this posting. The Warning is > included in part to ensure > that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way > offended or disadvantaged. > > > > james montebello > > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > > Speaking from experience or from theory?. > > > While you can ignore other issues, when you're > discussing an individual > > > item, when you do put it into practice thou, > what happens?. There is > alot > > > more going on, when you crack the gas then the > intake valve looking at > the > > > manifold. > > > Your multi butterfly set up *might* have > better transistional stuff. > > > But, if you compromise it's plenum area then > you'll fall down *big > time* > > > on WOT. > > > Then we get into air calculations. > > > If we're using any plenums, then we're going > to have a *choke point* > > > somewhere anyway. For either a MAF or MAP > system. the MAP spikes are > so > > > serious that you need averaging of them to make > a worth while signal out > of > > > them anyway. The MAF is self explainatory. > > > Then comes into issue are the matters of AE. > With a longer column of > air > > > the lesser the need for AE. That can be a > good thing, since we get > more > > > to give the engine what it needs, rather then a > calculaton based on TPS. > > > But that leads to fly by wire throttles which > have to be a better answer > > > anyway. With them you can keep the airflow > optimised per rpm, per rate > of > > > accleration. Hmmm, maybe a (3-4", pre turbo) > slide like an old SU has > isn't > > > such a bad idea after all............ > > > > > > Then we have to figure in the various drivetrain > issues. Autos being > alot > > > more forgiving then manuals. With the converter > to act as a huge > dampner, > > > we can get the slippage to work for us. Given > enough slippage to get us > to > > > peak torque, where would all this lag even be an > issue. > > > Bruce > > > Still cruising in 80s (and earlier) > technology...... > > > Still looking for this *new* stuff > everyone's talking about. > > > > > > > > > > > > From: "James Montebello" > > > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, > intercoolers > > > > This is true, but with one big caveat, already > mentioned several > times: > > > > throttle response with one "big-arsed" plenum > and one throttle will be > > > > pretty awful. > > > > james montebello > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 21:18:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:18:30 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:18:30 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? A couple of op amp voltage followers could drive a pair of resistors to a summing point. But I wonder what you want to do with the result? A narrow band sensor is not operating in the linear region, and summing 2 nonlinear signals is not that meaningful. The result would mean a lot more from a Wide Band sensor. An ECU would not be set up to process a summed signal. Putting a pair of WB bar graph displays side by side could be useful, I plan to do this soon. Bruce Roe On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:55:12 -0500 "Peter Florance" writes: > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > values for > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog > circuit to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and > would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > buffers. > Also interested in any comments regarding > averaging O2 sensors for dual exhaust systems > and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > Thanks in advance > > Peter Florance ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 21:26:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:26:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:26:26 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Kevin _" >> And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves >> unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to >> 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air >> being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no >> different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only >> thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed >> of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a >> turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for >> the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. > Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread > started with street cars, are you still working the street or > moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a > street engine. Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. It's only a bit lumpy at idle. >>>If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an >>>appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The >>>whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning >>>an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a >>>small number of pascals. >> Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of >> a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners >> it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve >> closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. > At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you > move back from there? Doesn't matter. It's the pressure at the back of the valve that acts to fill the cylinder. >> BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. >> Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods >> good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline >> (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm >> isn't trivial. > To whom? > I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to > anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of > performance that can't be done with engines that would have > transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a > game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can > win. Same in all motorsports. If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive Engineering magazine occasionally. Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 21:30:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:30:50 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:30:50 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > Marketing. > > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > > > uses an OHV engine. > > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > driveable around town? > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > Two or three at certain times. > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. Again your so far out on a limb as to be talking in abstracts. > High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of > that price. > > Try not rewording the question and the answer is rather obvious. > > > > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on > > > > bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for > > > > multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's > > > > the EPA, in racing it's displacement. > > > Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? Unlimited as in what you can buy at the pump (remember STREET CAR) > > So far the legislating branches of the above set the standards for > > fuel, so you question is mute. > You mean "moot", don't you? No. > The more fuel you use, the more you have to carry, or stop > more frequently to refuel. Both of those are penalties. > Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? Do you realize LeMans Audi cars aren't street cars!. > Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their > direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range > of engine speeds. And we'll all run over to an Audi dealership and buy these exact bits to be able to use on the street cars were working with. By the way how close to 400 KmH does your car run?. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 21:38:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:38:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:38:14 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bernd Felsche tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > > Marketing. > > > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > > > > uses an OHV engine. > > > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > > driveable around town? > > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > > Two or three at certain times. > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was > thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced > to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) > engine. > Its W-16 engine consists of two very narrow eight-cylinder banks. > With four turbochargers, this 7993cc gasoline direct injection > engine has a maximum torque of 1250 Nm between 2200 and 5500 rpm. > Top speed is 404 kmh (251 mph). > The technology is very similar to that proven at Le Mans by Audi. > Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and > 500 of them a year. So how many of these are you or your frineds buying. 300-500 is what, an afternoons work load for a major manufacturer of STREET cars > A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. Pre-announced = commerical maybeware?. Yep, I firmly stuck on reality, Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 21:46:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:46:32 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:46:32 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Kevin _" > >> And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves > >> unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to > >> 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air > >> being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no > >> different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only > >> thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed > >> of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a > >> turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for > >> the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. > > Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread > > started with street cars, are you still working the street or > > moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a > > street engine. > Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. > My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. > It's only a bit lumpy at idle. 270d @ .050 clearance? 270 @ .005 maybe. > >>>If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an > >>>appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The > >>>whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning > >>>an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a > >>>small number of pascals. > >> Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of > >> a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners > >> it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve > >> closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. > > At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you > > move back from there? > Doesn't matter. It's the pressure at the back of the valve that acts > to fill the cylinder. > >> BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. > >> Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods > >> good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline > >> (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm > >> isn't trivial. > > To whom? > > I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to > > anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of > > performance that can't be done with engines that would have > > transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a > > game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can > > win. > Same in all motorsports. So we're again going off on tangents. > If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down > into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive > Engineering magazine occasionally. > Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi > Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers > Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi > Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. > Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) We were talking engine technology. F1 didn't discover multi valves. Direct injection has been used for years in IH tractors, and the 300SL did also. 2 models of one manufacurer, OK, but big deal Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 21:59:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:59:19 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:59:19 -0800 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? (longish) Yes as I tried to say below, I found that my Ljet ecu supplies .45 volts at the input when the sensor is disconnected or cold. I guess I could reverse engineer it by loading the ECU input with resistors to determine the value (I'll start with 1.2 meg - thanks Ludis) to see what the resistance works out to. That seems pretty safe as the bias would be a max of .375 uA. I opened an extra box but the trace from the pin lead to a hybrid with a cover riveted to the board. I didn't need to know that badly..... AFA averaging, I'm fighting a poor mixture control at idle. I have a sensor in each down pipe which connect to 3 of in-line cylinders. This a euro car I converted to lambda and then added a Bosch heated sensor last weekend which works no better than the un heated (either which can only sample 3 cylinders currently). The US cars have 6 into 1 manifold (BMW 528i) with single unheated sensor. My feeling after watching with a scope was there was some problem with out fast the lambda worked at idle vs. the frequency of the exhaust pulses of only 3 cylinders. The idle is rough and smells rich. My thought was to average the sensor with simple linear circuit but I realize I may be limiting the swing of the output. Eventually it will be a Megasquirt but I'll still have to solve the problem (or maybe the MS will work better as it may sample faster at idle if that's the problem). Peter Florance > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 10:39 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > > > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit > > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to > > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > > > > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage > > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause > > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two > > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the > > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and > > > sustained operation. > > > > > > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for > > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > > > > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the > > > response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is > > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to > > > see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. > > > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that provides .45 > > volts at the sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it > > disconnected. I've read that's how they sense whether the sensor > > is working or not. How do they accomplish that? > > Probably on the output of the buffer amplifier, internal to the box. > The sensor's output voltage rises from 0V when it heats up; that > transition may be used to switch off the bias. > > You can check this by measuring the open-circuit voltage at the > ECU connector, with the lambda disconnected. > > The sensor can only source a few micro amps. Trying to run a sizeable > current through it, which is essential to bias the output directly, > will destroy the sensor. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 21:59:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:59:20 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 21:59:20 -0800 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? I guess I wanted to simulate sampling front and rear cylinder as if I had a single sensor on all 6 cylinders instead of one sensor on 3 cylinders. Crazy? Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of bcroe@juno.com > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:40 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > > A couple of op amp voltage followers could drive a > pair of resistors to a summing point. But I wonder > what you want to do with the result? A narrow band > sensor is not operating in the linear region, and > summing 2 nonlinear signals is not that meaningful. > > The result would mean a lot more from a Wide Band > sensor. An ECU would not be set up to process a > summed signal. Putting a pair of WB bar graph > displays side by side could be useful, I plan to do > this soon. > > Bruce Roe > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:55:12 -0500 "Peter Florance" > writes: > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > > values for > > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog > > circuit to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and > > would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > > buffers. > > Also interested in any comments regarding > > averaging O2 sensors for dual exhaust systems > > and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > Thanks in advance > > > > Peter Florance > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dzorde@erggroup.com Wed Dec 5 21:35:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:02:25 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:02:25 -0300 From: "Dan Zorde" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: New cam for TPI 350 Hi all, Does anyone have any experiences with the CraneCams H-278-2 cam in a TPI 350 ? The application is roughly 1700kg car with 5speed manual, 3.08 diff, Sportsman 2 heads (circuit work, hill climbs, autokhanas, NO drag racing). TPI is controlled by aftermarket MAP system with no closed loop control. Really just want to settly my worries that the cam may loose too much vacuum at idle, hence resulting in idle problems (also have no idle control motor, system just relies on a fixed size bypass hole for idle air). Also, I'm told the standard throttle body is good for around 650cfm, can anyone tell me if I'm starting to get close to that limit with this setup and if I need to look at going to a larger size ? rgds Dan dzorde@erggroup.com ---------------------------- ERG Group -------------------------- The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may only be read by the intended recipient. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 22:11:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:11:57 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:11:57 -0800 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. Fuck that, the only car I know that would even come close is the McLaren F1. A crappy twin turbo or well designed supercharged home built C5 Corvette could prob get there too. But you would need at least a 383 stroker and some crazy boost. And would have to change the gear ratios. Any large displacement modern automobile could be tweaked into coming at least near 240 MPH. Of course it would take some serious cash and lots stupidity. Why would anyone want to go 240 fucking MPH. Fucking death wish? -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From audserv@exis.net Wed Dec 5 21:55:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:18:09 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:18:09 -0300 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) Thanks in advance Peter Florance 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Dec 5 22:16:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:32:07 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:32:07 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and sustained operation. > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ludis@cruzers.com Wed Dec 5 22:16:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:35:59 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:35:59 -0300 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Peter Florance wrote: > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors > for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > buffers. > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual > exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) The National Semiconductor "lambda sensor interface amplifier" specs imply about 1.2M ohms to 0.45 volts. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From kiggly@hotmail.com Wed Dec 5 22:20:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:37:30 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:37:30 -0300 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high >lift > > cams just as their NA counterparts? If tomorrow the atmosphere pressure > > changes from 101kPa to 202kPa, will this change something to what >happens > > inside an engine intake manifold? > >Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area. The same >benefits go for a turbo'd car as an NA car in this area...more volume into >the cylinder at a given pressure loss, or the same volume into the cylinder >at a lower pressure loss...at the price of less turbulence. With more >valves and/or more valve lift you increase the flow area, reducing pressure >loss at a given flow rate. With more valve duration, the intake valve is >open for a longer percentage of the compression stroke. If boost pressure >is high enough, more air can be packed into the cylinder even as it starts >the compression stroke, further improving volumetric efficiency. And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. >If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an appreciable >difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The whole question still >seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning an intake you are trying to >increase intake air pressure by a small number of pascals. Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. >This helps the >engine because the intake pressure becomes slightly higher than exhaust >pressure due to acoustic pressure, helping flow into the cylinder during >the >overlap period. If atmospheric pressure doubled you'd still need to do >this, as exhaust pressure will double accordingly, but with turbocharging >the exhaust pressure increase (it's all absolute pressure here of course) >is >small compared to the intake pressure increase. Tuning the manifold to >gain >a small number of pascals pressure will have an insignificant impact when >combined with the already large pressure differential between boost >pressure >and exhaust pressure. Proper flow during overlap is very important. Have you ever seen an exhaust pulse's pressure trace? AVL boost's website has an example. There is a good 2:1 or better variance in exhaust pressure at the valve during a single engine cycle. Time exhaust valve closing/overlap during the low side and it scavenges the cylinder very well. I have to completely disagree on the turbo issue here. Normally with a turbo setup you have a huge pressure swing from before spoolup, during spoolup, then maintain a good pressure differential for ~3000 rpm, then HUGE PRESSURE INCREASES IN THE EXHAUST. You will see drastic increases in exhaust pressure, I've measured as much as 60psi for 23psi in the intake. That means I've taken the turbo WAY out of its good operating range. In this situation, you have TONS of exhaust pressure during overlap and toss all kinds of exhaust back up the intake and run crazy natural EGR, can't spark it, and make very little power. This is also where its by far the most important to have a properly tuned exhuast on the low side of its pulse during overlap, you can then extend your rpm range (granted with some pretty bad pumping losses) by keeping some VE at rpm's when the turbo is making a lot of backpressure. In an SAE car there is probably a very real balance of exhaust to intake pressure. If you have too low of exhaust pressure I bet you lose power since you're limited on intake flow by the restrictor. If you are scavenging really, really well, then you'll have a considerable amount of wasted air/fuel exiting the exhaust. A properly tuned intake is also vital or else you'll have dead pressure times at the restrictor. Have you ever measured and logged pressure at the orifice? You'd probably have to log at 5KHz to get a good trace at high rpm's. Just my $0.02, Kevin BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm isn't trivial. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Dec 5 22:34:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:51:43 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:51:43 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: EGO voltages Jens Knickmeyer tapped away at the keyboard with: > up to now, I thought I knew how an EGO works. But now > I am not so sure.... > > I just took a look at my data logged on today's drive to France > (took about 1 hour). I set up my data logger to log rpm, injection > time, engine temp and lambda voltage. Note that all data is not > measured by seperate measurement equipment but I receive data > directly from the ECU by using K-Line communication. Looking at > lambda voltage, I recognized that the ECU sometimes tells a value > of 1.85V. AFAIK, lambda voltage is limited by approx. [0.1V, > 0.85V]. I tried to recognize any correlation between lambda > voltage and any other signal, but I couldn't. The 1.85V occurr > instead of the 0.85V I would have expected. The "lean" voltage of > 0.1V is reached in every cycle, no problem there. 1.1V is about the maximum lambda voltage. 1.85 is way off-scale. > My questions: > Is there any chance that an EGO produces such a high voltage (which > would indicate "ultramegahyperrich" mixture)? > Can anyone imagine a defect which results in such a high lambda voltage? > Can an interference with other substances/gases produce such a high > voltage? The high voltage could be because of a bad chassis connection at the lambda probe. Single- and three-wire sensors are susceptible as they don't carry a signal ground in the loom to the sensor, relying instead on electrical contact of the exhaust manifold. Check this by starting the engine and measuring the voltage from battery negative to manifold. You should see only a few millivolts from noise. Anything more than 100mV as a baseline and you need to investigate. See if the voltages get to be more sensible after you add a ground strap from the exhaust manifold to the engine. (Use a jumper cable and clamp it firmly.) Also, make sure that the engine has a secure connection to battery negative. Give each of the wires a tug to make sure it doesn't just _look_ OK. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From powermaxx@netzero.net Wed Dec 5 00:50:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:52:51 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:52:51 -0300 From: "powermaxx" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Intro,,,, Street Outlaw (NHRA) looking for Megasquirt EFI This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C17D05.56272900 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am doing an EFI project for my 73 Challenger currently Kinsler = mechanical injection, 528cuin, 14-71 Mooneyham, ETHANOL, full chassis, = etc....... I'm making the move over to EFI, something I can tune myself = vs this mechanical system. This car will make about 1500hp (+) and will = see a variety of tracks (and altitudes). I'm serious about this sport as = I've campaigned this car for 9 years in various stages of "Street = Legal" trim in Club races to King Street in Denver CO and surrounding = areas. This current combo has given me fits this year sorting out the = fuel system at the cost of a motor. I have started to purchase injectors = and came across this group and like what I see in the Megasquirt. Some = of the posts had a group buy (closed, but......) would be interested if = anyone drops out. From what I can see this system will do what I need. = Anyone else running a supercharged setup? Ethanol? I have helped setup a Speed Pro system on a 69 Road Runner 6-71 (very = nice car) so am familiar with EFI and performance applications.=20 Back to the archives so I can catch up with you guys. I'm in digest mode = for now and the archive site has been sporadic to access lately (is that = normal??) Looking forward to this..... Steve St"RACE"ner (and toys...) 73 Challenger "Street Outlaw" 87 GLHS Shelby ------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C17D05.56272900 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I am doing an EFI project for = my 73=20 Challenger currently Kinsler mechanical injection, 528cuin, 14-71 = Mooneyham,=20 ETHANOL, full chassis, etc....... I'm making the move over to EFI, = something I=20 can tune myself vs this mechanical system. This car will make about = 1500hp (+)=20 and will see a variety of tracks (and altitudes). I'm serious about this = sport=20 as I've campaigned this car  for 9 years in various stages of = "Street=20 Legal" trim in Club races to King Street in Denver CO and = surrounding=20 areas. This current combo has given me fits this year sorting out the = fuel=20 system at the cost of a motor. I have started to purchase injectors and = came=20 across this group and like what I see in the Megasquirt. Some of the = posts had a=20 group buy (closed, but......) would be interested if anyone drops out. = >From what=20 I can see this system will do what I need. Anyone else running a = supercharged=20 setup? Ethanol?
 
I have helped setup a Speed Pro system = on a 69 Road=20 Runner 6-71 (very nice car) so am familiar with EFI and performance=20 applications.
 
Back to the archives so I can catch up = with you=20 guys. I'm in digest mode for now and the archive site has been sporadic = to=20 access lately (is that normal??)
 
Looking forward to = this.....
 
Steve St"RACE"ner (and = toys...)
73 Challenger "Street = Outlaw"
87 GLHS = Shelby
------=_NextPart_000_000F_01C17D05.56272900-- ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From audserv@exis.net Wed Dec 5 22:35:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:56:07 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:56:07 -0300 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Thanks for the reply On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that provides .45 volts at the sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it disconnected. I've read that's how they sense whether the sensor is working or not. How do they accomplish that? Peter Florance 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:16 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and > sustained operation. > > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the > response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to > see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. > > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Dec 5 22:42:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:59:38 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 22:59:38 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) James Montebello tapped away at the keyboard with: > And while you're blathering about drivetrain theory, you should > mention CVT, where you can tune for a very high but narrow torque > peak using 30-50 year old knowlege to get >150hp/liter out of a > two-valve setup, and let the CVT hold it on that torque peak. > Nice, once someone figures out how to deliver 500+lb/ft through a > CVT. Audi seems to have figured out 250lb/ft. Of course, now > we've traded off a simple engine for a complicated transmission. You can get CVTs to transmit that amount of troque, but not in a car you'd want to put on the road. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Dec 5 23:01:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:19:28 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:19:28 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Craig Dotson tapped away at the keyboard with: > > In a N/A your waiting for atmospheric pressure to fill the void as the > > piston moves down. In a boosted motor, the plenum pressure is helping to > > push the piston down. In a N/A engine, there are all sorts of wave > > activities, that can help or HURT cylinder filling, and that is about mute > > when in boost. > > If you think these issues are minor then look at the rod failure > > differences between the two types of motors then > I agree here, and I also agree with Bruce's earlier opinion that you are > thinking in NA rather than turbo terms. > When you tune an intake manifold for an NA car, you're trying to take > advantage of the acoustics generated inside the manifold when you have flow > into the cylinders. The most you can get out of such tuning is maybe a > handful of pascals.....not even kPa...at the right times that help exhaust You're quite mistaken there. 20% dynamic supercharge is achieved in many small engines with tuned manifolds over a limited rev range. Some engines claim about 60% dynamic supercharge over certain rev ranges at valve opening using tuned and variable manifolds on NA engines. You're looking at nett VE in excess of 100%. The dynamic supercharge is more useful in a NA engine as the valve opens because a vacuum hasn't yet been established to move the air. If there were no tangible benefit, car manufacturers wouldn't put all those trick manifolds on their cars; to make their V6's feel like V8's and the V8's feel like steam engines. Adding the dynamic supercharge to the forced induction can benefit cylinder filling if tuned appropriately. It can also _reduce_ the effective boost due to dynamic rarification at certain engine speeds, in the very same way as in a NA engine. It's only the baseline pressure (and temperature) that's higher in a forced-induction engine. The effect is the same; magnitudes are somewhat different. -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Dec 5 23:11:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:29:30 -0300 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:29:30 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Marketing. > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > uses an OHV engine. Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still driveable around town? > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the > manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves > etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing > it's displacement. Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? -- Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 23:29:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:29:44 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:29:44 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > > High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of > that price. What are you, on freaking drugs? For that kind of money, damn near anybody could build a car willing to do that speed. Go ahead and stretch the definitions beyond reasonable. Street car my arse. Ok, 200mph, no problem. Last year's nascar cars are for sale. Check out the silver state classic, that's where the average joe gets to run 'em. So it's on a street, and it's a car, so makes it a street car? Ya, ok. And compared to the Porch it's cheap enough that we can buy a case of beer and a small motel for the after race celebration. Send those happy pills over here. I'd like to see what color the sky really is in your world. > Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and > 500 of them a year. At 300 models per year, the Bugatti hardly qualifies as a production vehicle, let alone a street car. Bicycle factories produce more units than that. > A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. Yes, and I read about that car 3 years ago. It was a promised item then. > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > Two or three at certain times. OMG! LMAO! So... kinda pointless, no? > > What's a reasonable > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > driveable around town? $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. They'll never drive that fast anyway. Shannen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 5 23:54:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:54:47 -0800 Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2001 23:54:47 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Audi R8 I think the fact that they didn't have to stop for a new gearbox also had a part to play. Reliability wins Le Mans, not fuel consumption, hence the reason Panoz always start well and then fall out. Shame, as a mad looking car. Bill ---- Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range of engine speeds. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 00:04:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:04:33 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:04:33 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Because you can. In germany there is the recorded case of a McLaren owner regularly exceeding 200 on the way to work. Also the proliferation of track days in Europe now means that there are many venues where you can go and take your toy for a good thrashing. Sheesh, a petrol head forum where someone is complaining about too much power and speed -----Original Message----- From: ext Alvaro Gil [mailto:242Turbo@alvarogil.com] Of course it would take some serious cash and lots stupidity. Why would anyone want to go 240 f*****g MPH. F*****g death wish? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 00:16:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:16:08 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:16:08 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Flame on Bruce, you did that on purpose didn't you. I mean the fact that noone could ever agree what consitutes good performance or reasonable price anyway. Anyway it's not Lotus fault that they designed a lovely modern multicam etc engine for said car and then noone could cast it in great enough numbers to make it viable in production ;-) Personally I am more cynical. The reason that a lot of the modern dodads have not been fitted to cars is because the car makers didn't need to. Whilst legislation doesn't force it, and cars do the gas milage that meets expectations, why change. Of course now in Europe there is this 'average' economy across the model range which will force a lot of these ideas out of the lab and onto the street. My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from 14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they can get that to be reliable. Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Marketing. The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an OHV engine. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jengeltx@yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 00:19:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:48:41 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:48:41 -0300 From: Jeffrey Engel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? If the voltage is a steady .45v, the sensor is not active or is dead. How they determine whether the signal transitions enough to call the sensor readings good, I don't know. HTH, Jeffrey Engel --- Peter Florance wrote: > Thanks for the reply > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that > provides .45 volts at the > sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it > disconnected. I've read > that's how they sense whether the sensor is working > or not. > How do they accomplish that? > > > > > Peter Florance > 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org > [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:16 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > > > > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup > resistor (to ~ .45V) > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make > a analog circuit > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would > like to > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The > sensor is a voltage > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias > the sensor can cause > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift > or add/average two > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op > amps to perform the > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum > current draw and > > sustained operation. > > > > > Also interested in any comments regarding > averaging O2 sensors for > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in > line 6 engine) > > > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit > however, look at the > > response curves and the consequences of what will > happen if one is > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The > ECU needs then to > > see a constant switching between the levels for > correct operation. > > > > -- > > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, > Western Australia > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ---------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without > > the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 00:39:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:52:07 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:52:07 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > -----Original Message----- > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and > > sustained operation. > > > > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the > > response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to > > see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that provides .45 > volts at the sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it > disconnected. I've read that's how they sense whether the sensor > is working or not. How do they accomplish that? Probably on the output of the buffer amplifier, internal to the box. The sensor's output voltage rises from 0V when it heats up; that transition may be used to switch off the bias. You can check this by measuring the open-circuit voltage at the ECU connector, with the lambda disconnected. The sensor can only source a few microamps. Trying to run a sizeable current through it, which is essential to bias the output directly, will destroy the sensor. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Wed Dec 5 11:07:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:55:51 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:55:51 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: is this a WB02 sensor? Rather than start up a big rally, the Diy-efi server has lots on this, including the output of the sensor. http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/ You need a modified display to get 10:1 to 20:1 performance, but the mods are discussed there. Megasquirt will happily handle WB02 as you tell it what the curve is its working to. -----Original Message----- From: ext The Dupuis [mailto:dupuis10@telusplanet.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 1:52 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: is this a WB02 sensor? Wait a minute - linear? How do EGT variations affect the output? I'm used . I've never heard about the wideband O2 sensors, so I hate to re-open old discussions about them but: How "wide" are they? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 01:03:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:03:39 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:03:39 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Audi DI FWIW: VWAudi have announced 2 direct injection petrol engines for launch next year, a 1.4 and 2.0. Nothing to set the performance world alight, but at least a dribble back from their motorsports programme. Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 01:12:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:12:47 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:12:47 -0800 From: "Blake Anghilante" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: MC68HC908GP32 programmer This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C17DF3.4A3FBAA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Anybody know how to make a programmer for a MC68HC908GP32? Or possably a cheep programmer out there? -Blake ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C17DF3.4A3FBAA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Anybody know how to make a programmer = for a=20 MC68HC908GP32?
Or possably a cheep programmer out=20 there?
-Blake
------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C17DF3.4A3FBAA0-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Thu Dec 6 00:59:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:14:53 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:14:53 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: KC-5300 kit - Batch 7474 -- WARNING A WARNING to anyone who has this kit (this is the Jaycar Fuel Mixture Display) - The 7474 Batch MAY have been supplied with common cathode LED 7 segment displays, rather than the common ANODE displays required. The correct part is a PARA LIGHT A-521H (or FND507 or LTS542R or S506RWB). The INCORRECT part is a PARA LIGHT C-521H Jaycar will provide new 7 segment displays. Peter. (I have no affiliation with Jaycar and am not associated with the KC-5300 kit in any capacity other than being an at-cost supplier of the KC-5300 kit and someone who has modified it for use with the DIY-WB setup). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 01:03:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:22:26 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:22:26 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Marketing. > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > uses an OHV engine. > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > driveable around town? 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. Try not rewording the question and the answer is rather obvious. > > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the > > manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves > > etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing > > it's displacement. > Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? So far the legislating branches of the above set the standards for fuel, so you question is mute. Bruce > > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 01:19:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:36:44 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:36:44 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? GM ecms, pcms, generally have a min, and max value that the O2 has to transistion thru to considered awake Bruce From: "Jeffrey Engel" Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > If the voltage is a steady .45v, the sensor is not > active or is dead. How they determine whether the > signal transitions enough to call the sensor readings > good, I don't know. > HTH, > Jeffrey Engel > --- Peter Florance wrote: > > Thanks for the reply > > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that > > provides .45 volts at the > > sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it > > disconnected. I've read > > that's how they sense whether the sensor is working > > or not. > > How do they accomplish that? > > Peter Florance > > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 8:16 PM > > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup > > resistor (to ~ .45V) > > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make > > a analog circuit > > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would > > like to > > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > > > > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The > > sensor is a voltage > > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias > > the sensor can cause > > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift > > or add/average two > > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op > > amps to perform the > > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum > > current draw and > > > sustained operation. > > > > > > > Also interested in any comments regarding > > averaging O2 sensors for > > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in > > line 6 engine) > > > > > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit > > however, look at the > > > response curves and the consequences of what will > > happen if one is > > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The > > ECU needs then to > > > see a constant switching between the levels for > > correct operation. > > > > > > -- > > > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, > > Western Australia ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 01:31:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:46:16 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:46:16 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: New cam for TPI 350 From: "Dan Zorde" Subject: New cam for TPI 350 > Does anyone have any experiences with the CraneCams H-278-2 cam in a TPI > 350 ? > The application is roughly 1700kg car with 5speed manual, 3.08 diff, > Sportsman 2 heads (circuit work, hill climbs, autokhanas, NO drag > racing). TPI is controlled by aftermarket MAP system with no closed > loop control. > Really just want to settly my worries that the cam may loose too much > vacuum at idle, hence resulting in idle problems (also have no idle > control motor, system just relies on a fixed size bypass hole for idle > air). My 270 was border line grief for daily use. General driving was fine prolonged stop and go would start to load up. I had min the off idle timing to keep it from lighting the tires so much. Other then under a major traffic jam, was fun > Also, I'm told the standard throttle body is good for around 650cfm, can > anyone tell me if I'm starting to get close to that limit with this > setup and if I need to look at going to a larger size ? Dual 2" butterflies are about 670, as claimed my Holley in some of their lit, and it follows with some of what I've seen. The dual 2s were a delite for mild 320ish HP set up. But just enough, using 5K ish shift point. More cam and buzzing it higher I'd want more air Bruce > > rgds > > Dan dzorde@erggroup.com > > ---------------------------- ERG Group -------------------------- > The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential > and may only be read by the intended recipient. > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 01:39:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:01:47 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:01:47 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Marketing. > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > > uses an OHV engine. > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > driveable around town? > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. Two or three at certain times. > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of that price. > Try not rewording the question and the answer is rather obvious. > > > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on > > > bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for > > > multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's > > > the EPA, in racing it's displacement. > > Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? > So far the legislating branches of the above set the standards for > fuel, so you question is mute. You mean "moot", don't you? The more fuel you use, the more you have to carry, or stop more frequently to refuel. Both of those are penalties. Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range of engine speeds. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 01:43:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:03:15 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:03:15 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Hmm... so why high perf turbo engines have multi-valves heads and high > >lift cams just as their NA counterparts? If tomorrow the atmosphere pressure > > > changes from 101kPa to 202kPa, will this change something to what > >happens inside an engine intake manifold? > >Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area. The same > >benefits go for a turbo'd car as an NA car in this area...more volume into > >the cylinder at a given pressure loss, or the same volume into the cylinder > >at a lower pressure loss...at the price of less turbulence. With more > >valves and/or more valve lift you increase the flow area, reducing pressure > >loss at a given flow rate. With more valve duration, the intake valve is > >open for a longer percentage of the compression stroke. If boost pressure > >is high enough, more air can be packed into the cylinder even as it starts > >the compression stroke, further improving volumetric efficiency. > And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves unseated for > over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to 260 degrees for 0.050" > valve lift or more. The more/less air being packed at a certain time during > the intake stroke is no different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. > The only thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed of > sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a turbo > application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for the same Helmholtz > rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread started with street cars, are you still working the street or moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a street engine. > >If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an appreciable > >difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The whole question still > >seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning an intake you are trying to > >increase intake air pressure by a small number of pascals. > Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of a valve? > When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners it can be over 20% > beyond atmospheric pressure during valve closing. We're certainly not > talking single Pascals here. At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you move back from there? > >This helps the > >engine because the intake pressure becomes slightly higher than exhaust > >pressure due to acoustic pressure, helping flow into the cylinder during > >the overlap period. If atmospheric pressure doubled you'd still need to do > >this, as exhaust pressure will double accordingly, but with turbocharging > >the exhaust pressure increase (it's all absolute pressure here of course) > >is small compared to the intake pressure increase. Tuning the manifold to > >gain a small number of pascals pressure will have an insignificant impact when > >combined with the already large pressure differential between boost > >pressure and exhaust pressure. > Proper flow during overlap is very important. Have you ever seen an exhaust > pulse's pressure trace? AVL boost's website has an example. There is a > good 2:1 or better variance in exhaust pressure at the valve during a single > engine cycle. Time exhaust valve closing/overlap during the low side and it > scavenges the cylinder very well. > I have to completely disagree on the turbo issue here. Normally with a > turbo setup you have a huge pressure swing from before spoolup, during > spoolup, then maintain a good pressure differential for ~3000 rpm, then HUGE > PRESSURE INCREASES IN THE EXHAUST. You will see drastic increases in > exhaust pressure, I've measured as much as 60psi for 23psi in the intake. That has to be about the worlds worst matching of turbo to engine. > That means I've taken the turbo WAY out of its good operating range. In > this situation, you have TONS of exhaust pressure during overlap and toss > all kinds of exhaust back up the intake and run crazy natural EGR, can't > spark it, and make very little power. This is also where its by far the > most important to have a properly tuned exhuast on the low side of its pulse > during overlap, you can then extend your rpm range (granted with some pretty > bad pumping losses) by keeping some VE at rpm's when the turbo is making a > lot of backpressure. Well, ya, but your talking at the extreme. > In an SAE car there is probably a very real balance of exhaust to intake > pressure. If you have too low of exhaust pressure I bet you lose power > since you're limited on intake flow by the restrictor. If you are > scavenging really, really well, then you'll have a considerable amount of > wasted air/fuel exiting the exhaust. A properly tuned intake is also vital > or else you'll have dead pressure times at the restrictor. Have you ever > measured and logged pressure at the orifice? You'd probably have to log at > 5KHz to get a good trace at high rpm's. > Just my $0.02, > Kevin > BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. Check out F1 > stuff before you call everything old and pushrods good. Approximately > 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline (yes, I do use that term > loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm isn't trivial. To whom? I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of performance that can't be done with engines that would have transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can win. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 02:08:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:29:57 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:29:57 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bernd Felsche tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > Marketing. > > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > > > uses an OHV engine. > > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > driveable around town? > > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > > Two or three at certain times. > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) engine. Its W-16 engine consists of two very narrow eight-cylinder banks. With four turbochargers, this 7993cc gasoline direct injection engine has a maximum torque of 1250 Nm between 2200 and 5500 rpm. Top speed is 404 kmh (251 mph). The technology is very similar to that proven at Le Mans by Audi. Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and 500 of them a year. A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Thu Dec 6 02:40:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:37:30 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:37:30 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? A couple of op amp voltage followers could drive a pair of resistors to a summing point. But I wonder what you want to do with the result? A narrow band sensor is not operating in the linear region, and summing 2 nonlinear signals is not that meaningful. The result would mean a lot more from a Wide Band sensor. An ECU would not be set up to process a summed signal. Putting a pair of WB bar graph displays side by side could be useful, I plan to do this soon. Bruce Roe On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:55:12 -0500 "Peter Florance" writes: > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > values for > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog > circuit to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and > would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > buffers. > Also interested in any comments regarding > averaging O2 sensors for dual exhaust systems > and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > Thanks in advance > > Peter Florance ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 02:25:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:39:10 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:39:10 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Kevin _" >> And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves >> unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to >> 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air >> being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no >> different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only >> thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed >> of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a >> turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for >> the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. > Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread > started with street cars, are you still working the street or > moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a > street engine. Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. It's only a bit lumpy at idle. >>>If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an >>>appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The >>>whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning >>>an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a >>>small number of pascals. >> Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of >> a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners >> it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve >> closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. > At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you > move back from there? Doesn't matter. It's the pressure at the back of the valve that acts to fill the cylinder. >> BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. >> Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods >> good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline >> (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm >> isn't trivial. > To whom? > I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to > anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of > performance that can't be done with engines that would have > transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a > game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can > win. Same in all motorsports. If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive Engineering magazine occasionally. Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 02:30:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:45:03 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 02:45:03 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > Marketing. > > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > > > uses an OHV engine. > > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > driveable around town? > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > Two or three at certain times. > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. Again your so far out on a limb as to be talking in abstracts. > High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of > that price. > > Try not rewording the question and the answer is rather obvious. > > > > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on > > > > bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for > > > > multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's > > > > the EPA, in racing it's displacement. > > > Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? Unlimited as in what you can buy at the pump (remember STREET CAR) > > So far the legislating branches of the above set the standards for > > fuel, so you question is mute. > You mean "moot", don't you? No. > The more fuel you use, the more you have to carry, or stop > more frequently to refuel. Both of those are penalties. > Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? Do you realize LeMans Audi cars aren't street cars!. > Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their > direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range > of engine speeds. And we'll all run over to an Audi dealership and buy these exact bits to be able to use on the street cars were working with. By the way how close to 400 KmH does your car run?. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 03:19:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:19:16 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:19:16 -0800 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > You can get CVTs to transmit that amount of troque, but not in a > car you'd want to put on the road. > > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia Well, I have to stand up for my fellow countrymen now :-) They are doing tests at the moment using a CVT in 300+hp GMC Yukon and it worked just fine on the Williams formula 1 car somewhere in the early nineties. You don't see many high power CVTs as the people who drive sports cars like to change gears manually. But it is only a matter of time before US manufacturers start using them with CAFE breathing down their necks. Current users of CVTs include Nissan, Toyota, Honda, Fiat, BMW and Rover. They can't all be wrong. Igor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From audserv@exis.net Thu Dec 6 02:53:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:20:02 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:20:02 -0300 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? (longish) Yes as I tried to say below, I found that my Ljet ecu supplies .45 volts at the input when the sensor is disconnected or cold. I guess I could reverse engineer it by loading the ECU input with resistors to determine the value (I'll start with 1.2 meg - thanks Ludis) to see what the resistance works out to. That seems pretty safe as the bias would be a max of .375 uA. I opened an extra box but the trace from the pin lead to a hybrid with a cover riveted to the board. I didn't need to know that badly..... AFA averaging, I'm fighting a poor mixture control at idle. I have a sensor in each down pipe which connect to 3 of in-line cylinders. This a euro car I converted to lambda and then added a Bosch heated sensor last weekend which works no better than the un heated (either which can only sample 3 cylinders currently). The US cars have 6 into 1 manifold (BMW 528i) with single unheated sensor. My feeling after watching with a scope was there was some problem with out fast the lambda worked at idle vs. the frequency of the exhaust pulses of only 3 cylinders. The idle is rough and smells rich. My thought was to average the sensor with simple linear circuit but I realize I may be limiting the swing of the output. Eventually it will be a Megasquirt but I'll still have to solve the problem (or maybe the MS will work better as it may sample faster at idle if that's the problem). Peter Florance > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 10:39 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > > > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit > > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to > > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. > > > > > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage > > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause > > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two > > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the > > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and > > > sustained operation. > > > > > > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for > > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > > > > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the > > > response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is > > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to > > > see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. > > > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that provides .45 > > volts at the sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it > > disconnected. I've read that's how they sense whether the sensor > > is working or not. How do they accomplish that? > > Probably on the output of the buffer amplifier, internal to the box. > The sensor's output voltage rises from 0V when it heats up; that > transition may be used to switch off the bias. > > You can check this by measuring the open-circuit voltage at the > ECU connector, with the lambda disconnected. > > The sensor can only source a few micro amps. Trying to run a sizeable > current through it, which is essential to bias the output directly, > will destroy the sensor. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 03:28:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:28:41 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:28:41 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI bill.shurvinton@nokia.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > FWIW: VWAudi have announced 2 direct injection petrol engines for > launch next year, a 1.4 and 2.0. Nothing to set the performance > world alight, but at least a dribble back from their motorsports > programme. VW Lupo FSI (1.4 litre) has been on sale for a while. They can't yet make enough of them despite the premium price. > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though Waiting for final D1 release date and the VW equivalent of the Porsche 'Cayenne' SUV. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 03:30:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:30:42 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:30:42 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi R8 bill.shurvinton@nokia.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > I think the fact that they didn't have to stop for a new gearbox also > had a part to play. Reliability wins Le Mans, not fuel consumption, > hence the reason Panoz always start well and then fall out. Shame, as a > mad looking car. Bentley were spewing because they only got Audi's "old" port-injected engine for their car. They lost a fraction of a second on every lap to Audi and had to do another fuel stop. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From 242Turbo@alvarogil.com Thu Dec 6 03:11:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:31:59 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:31:59 -0300 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. Fuck that, the only car I know that would even come close is the McLaren F1. A crappy twin turbo or well designed supercharged home built C5 Corvette could prob get there too. But you would need at least a 383 stroker and some crazy boost. And would have to change the gear ratios. Any large displacement modern automobile could be tweaked into coming at least near 240 MPH. Of course it would take some serious cash and lots stupidity. Why would anyone want to go 240 fucking MPH. Fucking death wish? -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 03:49:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:49:45 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:49:45 -0800 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >What are you, on freaking drugs? Ewwww. Sorry. I thought I was responding to private list. the response should not have contained all the 4 letter words... -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 02:38:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:55:29 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:55:29 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bernd Felsche tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > > Marketing. > > > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still > > > > > uses an OHV engine. > > > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable > > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > > driveable around town? > > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > > Two or three at certain times. > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was > thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced > to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) > engine. > Its W-16 engine consists of two very narrow eight-cylinder banks. > With four turbochargers, this 7993cc gasoline direct injection > engine has a maximum torque of 1250 Nm between 2200 and 5500 rpm. > Top speed is 404 kmh (251 mph). > The technology is very similar to that proven at Le Mans by Audi. > Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and > 500 of them a year. So how many of these are you or your frineds buying. 300-500 is what, an afternoons work load for a major manufacturer of STREET cars > A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. Pre-announced = commerical maybeware?. Yep, I firmly stuck on reality, Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 03:57:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:57:09 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:57:09 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Audi R8 They also filled with water and lost sync on the semi-auto due to water ingress which really slowed them down. Had this not occurred then they would probably have kept up. I was there. It was wet and miserable, but one had to admire the testicular fortitude of the drivers in the horrendous conditions. Bill NB last year everyone looked at the R8 and said 'nice but turbos are never reliable enough'. No-one bothered to tell the german engineers that! -----Original Message----- From: ext Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] Bentley were spewing because they only got Audi's "old" port-injected engine for their car. They lost a fraction of a second on every lap to Audi and had to do another fuel stop. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 03:58:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:58:12 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:58:12 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Audi DI I shall go and shoot my source right now. -----Original Message----- From: ext Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] VW Lupo FSI (1.4 litre) has been on sale for a while. They can't yet make enough of them despite the premium price. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 03:59:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:59:28 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 03:59:28 -0800 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Iron selection I have located a Weller 12W iron with an 800 deg fine tip. Would this be a good choice for the o2 board? Does anyone have anything bad to say about it? At 40 bucks, I would like to buy the correct iron the first time.... Thanks... -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 02:46:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:03:27 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:03:27 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Kevin _" > >> And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves > >> unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to > >> 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air > >> being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no > >> different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only > >> thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed > >> of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a > >> turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for > >> the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. > > Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread > > started with street cars, are you still working the street or > > moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a > > street engine. > Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. > My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. > It's only a bit lumpy at idle. 270d @ .050 clearance? 270 @ .005 maybe. > >>>If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an > >>>appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The > >>>whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning > >>>an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a > >>>small number of pascals. > >> Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of > >> a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners > >> it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve > >> closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. > > At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you > > move back from there? > Doesn't matter. It's the pressure at the back of the valve that acts > to fill the cylinder. > >> BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. > >> Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods > >> good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline > >> (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm > >> isn't trivial. > > To whom? > > I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to > > anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of > > performance that can't be done with engines that would have > > transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a > > game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can > > win. > Same in all motorsports. So we're again going off on tangents. > If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down > into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive > Engineering magazine occasionally. > Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi > Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers > Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi > Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. > Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) We were talking engine technology. F1 didn't discover multi valves. Direct injection has been used for years in IH tractors, and the 300SL did also. 2 models of one manufacurer, OK, but big deal Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From audserv@exis.net Thu Dec 6 02:53:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:18:16 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:18:16 -0300 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? I guess I wanted to simulate sampling front and rear cylinder as if I had a single sensor on all 6 cylinders instead of one sensor on 3 cylinders. Crazy? Peter > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of bcroe@juno.com > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:40 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > > A couple of op amp voltage followers could drive a > pair of resistors to a summing point. But I wonder > what you want to do with the result? A narrow band > sensor is not operating in the linear region, and > summing 2 nonlinear signals is not that meaningful. > > The result would mean a lot more from a Wide Band > sensor. An ECU would not be set up to process a > summed signal. Putting a pair of WB bar graph > displays side by side could be useful, I plan to do > this soon. > > Bruce Roe > > On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:55:12 -0500 "Peter Florance" > writes: > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) > > values for > > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog > > circuit to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and > > would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > > buffers. > > Also interested in any comments regarding > > averaging O2 sensors for dual exhaust systems > > and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > Thanks in advance > > > > Peter Florance > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 04:23:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:23:25 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:23:25 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI bill.shurvinton@nokia.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > I shall go and shoot my source right now. Here's the ammo. I translated the article for the local VW Club's web site back in September 2000. VW Lupo FSI in the Showrooms from November Wolfsburg (autouniversum) - Volkswagen's Lupo FSI (Fuel Stratified Injection) features a direct-injection petrol engine with a fuel-consumption of just 4.9 litres per 100 km (58 mpg). The car's light-weight construction using selected aluminium panels reduces its weight to 900kg. The FSI engine has a swept volume of 1.4 litres producing 77kW (105 bhp). List price in Germany will be just shy of 30,000 Deutsche Mark (about AUD $24,000), making it about 4000 DM more expensive than a similarly-equipped 'conventional' Lupo. Emissions from the Lupo FSI are compliant with the stringent Euro-4 standard, resulting in a tax-break of 600 DM for buyers in Germany. A three-way catalytic convertor and a NOx storage-cat help to comply with the standard. Volkswagen's Golf is also to be available with the 1.4-litre FSI engine early in 2001. VW also plan to put the engine into the Polo. The new technology will be used extensively by VW to achieve the requirement to reduce fleet- average fuel consumption in 2005 by 25% over 1990 figures. autouniversum / hwi 04.09.2000, 15:29 > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > > VW Lupo FSI (1.4 litre) has been on sale for a while. They can't yet > make enough of them despite the premium price. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Thu Dec 6 04:28:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:53:34 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:53:34 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > > High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of > that price. What are you, on freaking drugs? For that kind of money, damn near anybody could build a car willing to do that speed. Go ahead and stretch the definitions beyond reasonable. Street car my arse. Ok, 200mph, no problem. Last year's nascar cars are for sale. Check out the silver state classic, that's where the average joe gets to run 'em. So it's on a street, and it's a car, so makes it a street car? Ya, ok. And compared to the Porch it's cheap enough that we can buy a case of beer and a small motel for the after race celebration. Send those happy pills over here. I'd like to see what color the sky really is in your world. > Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and > 500 of them a year. At 300 models per year, the Bugatti hardly qualifies as a production vehicle, let alone a street car. Bicycle factories produce more units than that. > A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. Yes, and I read about that car 3 years ago. It was a promised item then. > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > Two or three at certain times. OMG! LMAO! So... kinda pointless, no? > > What's a reasonable > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > driveable around town? $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. They'll never drive that fast anyway. Shannen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 04:54:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:54:13 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:54:13 -0800 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Iron selection One of the few items here I might be qualified to comment on.... In my real life (repairing electronics) I employ medium sized tips (1/16") at 700 degrees. Some shops use really fine tips for everything and their soldering doesn't look that good IMO (tip cools off too fast due to small mass) I like temperature controlled irons. They sit there and idle until you solder, then they turn up the heat fast and keep the tip temp constant and are much easier to use (especially for the novice) The old Weller WTCP irons are still great and with all the TV shops closing down (~50% in the last 10 years) they should be floating around used (eBay?). You select the temp by the tip (number stamped on the end) and there's still good support for parts and supplies. I use them even to do large square flat pack IC and they work well. Get one that works as repair parts can get pricey if you need a lot of them. Whatever you get make sure you have more than one source for tips. Also many of use eschew sponges and now use the brass tip cleaners that look like pot scrubbers. And 63/37 solder will work much better that 60/40. Bottle of rosin flux (GC works well) is good for stubborn components and flat pack IC's/ HTH Peter Florance Audio Services 544 Central Drive Suite 101 Virginia Beach, VA 23454 757.498.8277 757.498.9554 Fax Email: mailto:audserv@exis.net http://www.audio-services.com > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Alvaro Gil > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:59 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Iron selection > > > I have located a Weller 12W iron with an 800 deg fine tip. Would > this be a good choice for the o2 board? > Does anyone have anything bad to say about it? At 40 bucks, I would > like to buy the correct iron the first time.... > > Thanks... > -- > ____________________________________________ > Alvaro Gil > http://www.AlvaroGil.com > '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi > '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) > NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student > ____________________________________________ > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 04:54:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:54:43 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 04:54:43 -0800 From: David Gravereaux Subject: Re: Iron selection Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> wrote: >I have located a Weller 12W iron with an 800 deg fine tip. Would >this be a good choice for the o2 board? >Does anyone have anything bad to say about it? At 40 bucks, I would >like to buy the correct iron the first time.... > >Thanks... I prefer the Weller temperature compensated irons with ptr-7 tip for small board work. But that's just me :) -- David Gravereaux Tomasoft Engineering, Hayward, CA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 05:13:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:13:04 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:13:04 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Flame on From: Subject: RE: Flame on > Bruce, > you did that on purpose didn't you. I mean the fact that noone could > ever agree what consitutes good performance or reasonable price anyway. I wasn't looking for a list full of agreement. Only to reign the conversation in the terms of reality. Sure there will always be some clown that thinks a million bucks is a resonable figure. But I would expect most resonable folks to draw their own lines in the sand of what they call resonable, based on what they can afford, not someone else. To make a point of what someone else does is playing in the Alice in Wonderland, mind set, IMO. > Anyway it's not Lotus fault that they designed a lovely modern multicam > etc engine for said car and then noone could cast it in great enough > numbers to make it viable in production ;-) Then why bother?. People can day dream all they want about design aspects, and such, which is fine, but to make a point about what is right, better, etc with no practicality, is again a game. > Personally I am more cynical. The reason that a lot of the modern dodads > have not been fitted to cars is because the car makers didn't need to. > Whilst legislation doesn't force it, and cars do the gas milage that > meets expectations, why change. Marketing, how much are you willing to pay for the dodads?. Legislation has been tne driving force to what manufacturers have to acheive. If you examine the EPA's strategy, evey thing they do tightens the noose around the new car manufacturers. There was a time when a smog alert, meant that it was really healthier to stay indoors, now adays you can hardly tell it's a bad air day. You can force regs so tight, that you can drive manufacturers profit margins down, and given time bankrupt their engineering departments. Remember when Dodge had to run Delco systems on their cars?. If you want better dodads, fine, just remember that adds to prices you have to pay for the car, and not everyone is going to agree with you on what a resonable cost increase is for said dodads. > Of course now in Europe there is this 'average' economy across the model > range which will force a lot of these ideas out of the lab and onto the > street. > My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from > 14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they can get that > to be reliable. I'd rather see the effort put into coming up with better *universally applicable dodads*, so that the world might benefit from the efforts. Variable compression, doesn't impress me in the least, but, I'm not a member of the dodads at any price club. In the real world there is a difference from gee what can we do, to hmm, how well can we solve this problem. Bruce Flames are in the eyes of the beholder. > Bill > From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Marketing. > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses > an OHV engine. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Thu Dec 6 04:54:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:15:02 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:15:02 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Audi R8 I think the fact that they didn't have to stop for a new gearbox also had a part to play. Reliability wins Le Mans, not fuel consumption, hence the reason Panoz always start well and then fall out. Shame, as a mad looking car. Bill ---- Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range of engine speeds. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Thu Dec 6 05:03:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:18:13 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:18:13 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Because you can. In germany there is the recorded case of a McLaren owner regularly exceeding 200 on the way to work. Also the proliferation of track days in Europe now means that there are many venues where you can go and take your toy for a good thrashing. Sheesh, a petrol head forum where someone is complaining about too much power and speed -----Original Message----- From: ext Alvaro Gil [mailto:242Turbo@alvarogil.com] Of course it would take some serious cash and lots stupidity. Why would anyone want to go 240 f*****g MPH. F*****g death wish? -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 05:26:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:26:17 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:26:17 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI Nice seeing 50s technology again isn't it?. Bruce From: Subject: Audi DI > FWIW: VWAudi have announced 2 direct injection petrol engines for launch > next year, a 1.4 and 2.0. Nothing to set the performance world alight, > but at least a dribble back from their motorsports programme. > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though > Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Thu Dec 6 05:15:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:35:01 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:35:01 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Flame on Bruce, you did that on purpose didn't you. I mean the fact that noone could ever agree what consitutes good performance or reasonable price anyway. Anyway it's not Lotus fault that they designed a lovely modern multicam etc engine for said car and then noone could cast it in great enough numbers to make it viable in production ;-) Personally I am more cynical. The reason that a lot of the modern dodads have not been fitted to cars is because the car makers didn't need to. Whilst legislation doesn't force it, and cars do the gas milage that meets expectations, why change. Of course now in Europe there is this 'average' economy across the model range which will force a lot of these ideas out of the lab and onto the street. My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from 14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they can get that to be reliable. Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Marketing. The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an OHV engine. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 05:45:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:45:52 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:45:52 -0800 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though What's the displacement on that? Seems pretty weak for a 10. The Cummins 5.9L I6 turbodiesels exceed that number in their stock de-tuned (for transmission life) trim....slide the timing plate up and pop in new injectors and you're almost to 1000 ft-lbs. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 05:46:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:46:45 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:46:45 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? You may want to use two O2 amps (National semi) and then sum the outputs together. In my travels w/GM ecms I've never seen any pullups or bias resistors on the O2 sensor signal line. BobR. Peter Florance wrote: > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors > for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > buffers. > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual > exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > Thanks in advance > > Peter Florance > 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 05:51:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:51:09 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:51:09 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers I see your not a member of the Politically Correct Crowd, or at least not all the time. Bruce I can't beleive it, a Volvo Owner talking like that. LOL From: "Alvaro Gil" <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 05:51:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:51:09 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:51:09 -0800 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > You don't see many high power CVTs as the people who drive sports cars like > to change gears manually. I think it has something to do with losses. You don't see many racers with auto trannies do you? They're like 20-25% losses. CVTs are in the neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10%? I haven't seen a good figure for auto manuals...the sequential 6spds in motorcycles are said to be about 5% loss. If I could get 15%+ power back by going to a manual from an auto I'd do it...and not just so I'll have something for my left foot to do. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 05:58:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:58:17 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 05:58:17 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Ya'll have Doc muttering Bruce From: "Alvaro Gil" <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >What are you, on freaking drugs? > Ewwww. Sorry. I thought I was responding to private list. the > response should not have contained all the 4 letter words... > Alvaro Gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 06:03:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:03:16 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:03:16 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Are you really sure?. Let me be upfront and say I don't rely on dynos for much of anything, other then establishing trends. But if the tranny was a 25% power consumption item, we should be able to recover some of that energy for doing something. Put another way, in any mileage rating the Manuals would flat stomp on the autos. Bruce From: "Craig Dotson" Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > > You don't see many high power CVTs as the people who drive sports cars > like to change gears manually. > I think it has something to do with losses. You don't see many racers with > auto trannies do you? They're like 20-25% losses. CVTs are in the > neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10%? I haven't seen a good > figure for auto manuals...the sequential 6spds in motorcycles are said to be > about 5% loss. If I could get 15%+ power back by going to a manual from an > auto I'd do it...and not just so I'll have something for my left foot to do. > Craig Dotson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 06:10:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:10:36 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:10:36 -0800 From: James Adams MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: New cam for TPI 350 I ran a 350 TPI in an '84 Camaro with an LT1 cam(1996 roller, not 1970), mildly ported heads, 6 speed, and 3.45 gears. It would light up the tires just about anytime, but the intake system would run out of air at about 4700 RPM. Put more cam in and you just lose low end that you can't gain at the top unless you mod the intake system. The throttle body alone won't gain you much as the runners and base are both limiting airflow as well. --- Bruce wrote: > > From: "Dan Zorde" > Subject: New cam for TPI 350 > > Does anyone have any experiences with the > CraneCams H-278-2 cam in a TPI > > 350 ? > > The application is roughly 1700kg car with 5speed > manual, 3.08 diff, > > Sportsman 2 heads (circuit work, hill climbs, > autokhanas, NO drag > > racing). TPI is controlled by aftermarket MAP > system with no closed > > loop control. > > Really just want to settly my worries that the cam > may loose too much > > vacuum at idle, hence resulting in idle problems > (also have no idle > > control motor, system just relies on a fixed size > bypass hole for idle > > air). > > My 270 was border line grief for daily use. General > driving was fine > prolonged stop and go would start to load up. I had > min the off idle timing > to keep it from lighting the tires so much. Other > then under a major > traffic jam, was fun > > > Also, I'm told the standard throttle body is good > for around 650cfm, can > > anyone tell me if I'm starting to get close to > that limit with this > > setup and if I need to look at going to a larger > size ? > > Dual 2" butterflies are about 670, as claimed my > Holley in some of their > lit, and it follows with some of what I've seen. > The dual 2s were a delite > for mild 320ish HP set up. > But just enough, using 5K ish shift point. More cam > and buzzing it higher > I'd want more air > Bruce > > > > rgds > > > > Dan dzorde@erggroup.com > > > > ---------------------------- ERG Group > -------------------------- > > The contents of this email and any attachments > are confidential > > and may only be read by the intended recipient. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 06:16:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:16:06 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:16:06 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: KC-5300 kit - Batch 7474 -- WARNING And violated the User's agreement, in ref to the DIY-WB. Bruce > Peter. > > (I have no affiliation with Jaycar and am not associated with the KC-5300 > kit in any capacity other than being an at-cost supplier of the KC-5300 kit > and someone who has modified it for use with the DIY-WB setup). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 06:27:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:27:40 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:27:40 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intro,,,, Street Outlaw (NHRA) looking for Megasquirt EFI This is one of the few times, I'd say stick with something like a SpeedPro (FAST) set up. To sort out a system on a mega motor like this could be asking for an expensive sneeze. If you consider an engine are two as mules, and want to do the work, by all means fine, but your taking an unnessary risk in my opinion. Half of what makes EFI so darned good is the ignition control. If you really want to, OK, and more power to you, just my thoughts Bruce From: powermaxx Subject: Intro,,,, Street Outlaw (NHRA) looking for Megasquirt EFI I have started to purchase injectors and came across this group and like what I see in the Megasquirt. Some of the posts had a group buy (closed, but......) would be interested if anyone drops out. From what I can see this system will do what I need. Anyone else running a supercharged setup? Ethanol? I have helped setup a Speed Pro system on a 69 Road Runner 6-71 (very nice car) so am familiar with EFI and performance applications. Steve St"RACE"ner (and toys...) 73 Challenger "Street Outlaw" 87 GLHS Shelby ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Thu Dec 6 06:02:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:28:01 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:28:01 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Audi DI FWIW: VWAudi have announced 2 direct injection petrol engines for launch next year, a 1.4 and 2.0. Nothing to set the performance world alight, but at least a dribble back from their motorsports programme. Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From anghilab@oit.edu Thu Dec 6 06:14:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:28:03 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:28:03 -0300 From: "Blake Anghilante" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: MC68HC908GP32 programmer This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C17DF3.4A3FBAA0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Anybody know how to make a programmer for a MC68HC908GP32? Or possably a cheep programmer out there? -Blake ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C17DF3.4A3FBAA0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Anybody know how to make a programmer = for a=20 MC68HC908GP32?
Or possably a cheep programmer out=20 there?
-Blake
------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C17DF3.4A3FBAA0-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 06:51:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:51:40 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 06:51:40 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) -> But if the tranny was a 25% power consumption item, we should be able -> to recover some of that energy for doing something. Yeah, with 25 to 75 kW radiating away under there, you wouldn't need a heater. For that matter, the glow would be bright enough you wouldn't need add-on neon lights under the car either! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 07:09:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:09:54 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:09:54 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd.<< Gives a whole new meaning to "gone in 60 milliseconds." If I had $150KUS to build a car, it'd certainly be faster than 400 km/hr. 1/4 mile, baby... Lyndon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 07:22:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:22:48 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:22:48 -0800 From: Peter Florance MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? That's what I had in mind. Some decent rail to rail op amp Thanks Peter -----Original Message----- From: rr [SMTP:RRauscher@nni.com] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:50 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? You may want to use two O2 amps (National semi) and then sum the outputs together. In my travels w/GM ecms I've never seen any pullups or bias resistors on the O2 sensor signal line. BobR. Peter Florance wrote: > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors > for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > buffers. > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual > exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > Thanks in advance > > Peter Florance > 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 07:25:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:25:15 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:25:15 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread > > > started with street cars, are you still working the street or > > > moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a > > > street engine. > > Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. > > My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. > > It's only a bit lumpy at idle. > > 270d @ .050 clearance? > 270 @ .005 maybe. @1 mm -- It's a Kent GS2H and used most days in traffic. Serious competition "Golfers" run asymetric cams with longer durations; 300 degrees or more. (Ref Greg Raven's book on the subject) [snip] > > If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down > > into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive > > Engineering magazine occasionally. > > > Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi > > Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers > > Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi > > Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. > > Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) > > We were talking engine technology. > F1 didn't discover multi valves. > Direct injection has been used for years in IH tractors, and the > 300SL did also. Vastly-different DI in the 300SL. It wasn't stratified-charge for one thing. And purely mechanical. By your definition, it wasn't a street car anyway. :-) > 2 models of one manufacurer, OK, but big deal Much more than two models. VW-Audi technology is shared throughout the Volkswagen Group across 8 marques and over 50 models. There'll be at least 6 distinct VW-Audi models with stratified-charge DI on sale from early 2002. There are at present two (VW Lupo and VW Golf), with the Audi A4 2-litre FSI on sale before the end of this year. FSI engines operate unthrottled in stratified-charge mode, greatly improving efficiency. Not pipe dreams. Not theory. Real, volume production cars on the road. It's only "one" manufacturer. BMW will have Valvetronic engines available for their whole model lineup next year. Their larger engines already have DI available; at least in Europe. Why is this only happening in Europe? The answer is sulphur. The VDA (German Association of Automobile Manufacturers) lobbied the oil companies to produce "sulphur-free" gasoline. Without that fuel, you can't operate in lean-burn mode very long as NOx emissions would be excessive and a storage cat to handle them becomes contaminated very quickly. BTW: The Veyron was recently shown in Frankfurt. Here's a snipping from the press release: Tu 2001/09/11 Development progress: the Bugatti EB 16·4 Veyron in the autumn of 2001 Molsheim, September 2001. At the 59th International Automobile Exhibition ('IAA') Frankfurt, Germany, BUGATTI Automobiles S.A.S. are displaying the 736 kW (1001 bhp) Bugatti EB 16·4 Veyron in its latest evolutionary stage. Both the power train and the body of the new design study are much closer to production maturity. In addition, the first theoretical performance figures have now been determined, according to which this 16-cylinder sports car, due to go on sale in 2003, will have a top speed of 406 kilometres per hour and accelerate to 300 km/h in under 14 seconds. ... New technical elements in the W16 engine The alloy-block W16 engine in the Bugatti EB 16·4 Veyron is innovative and totally unique. Two exceptionally narrow V8 cylinder blocks using the VR principle are combined at an included angle of 90 degrees. The resulting 16-cylinder engine can develop a mighty 736 kilowatts (1,001 brake horsepower) at 6,000 revolutions per minute. The W16 is installed as a mid-engine ahead of the rear axle, and measures only 710 millimetres in length and 767 millimetres in width. Its W pattern is not only the key to these compact dimensions and the generous engine size and power output from such a compact unit; it also makes the engine exceptionally rigid. Four turbochargers help to give this 7,993-cc engine a peak torque never before available in a passenger car: 1,250 newton-metres. The temperature of the charge air is reduced by passing it through two water-cooled charge-air intercoolers located above the cylinder heads. No fewer than 64 valves admit the mixture to the cylinders and expel the exhaust gas; they are operated by roller cam followers from four chain- driven overhead camshafts with continuously variable valve timing. The continuously variable electro-hydraulic camshaft control system is active in all operating conditions. ... ... 7-speed gearbox Had it not been developed specifically for the Bugatti EB 16·4 Veyron, the new seven-speed gearbox could well have come directly from the pen of a top Formula One racing car designer. Gear shifts take place sequentially at paddles behind the steering wheel, and there is no clutch pedal. The double clutch transmission (DCT) shifts from one gear to the next in a maximum of 0.2 of a second. Power from the engine reaches the wheels through a permanent all-wheel drive system. Figures are a little different to the previous ones due to design revisions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 07:31:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:31:37 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:31:37 -0800 From: Erik Quackenbush Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) At 09:42 AM 12/6/2001 +0800, Bernd Felsche wrote: >You can get CVTs to transmit that amount of troque, but not in a >car you'd want to put on the road. You will be able to buy one next year. Audi will be offering a new CVT on the A4 that can handle the full torque of their standard engine. They have a new design that uses what looks like a 2-dimensional drive chain. There are sideways links so the chain can crawl up and down a sort of "gear cone" towithout slipping. My vague description is based on a non-technical article I read in one of the mainstream US car magazines. Combine the CVT with one of the forthcoming 42 volt engine designs and you'll have a car with no gears, no timing belt (or chain), no camshaft, and no alternator. The valves will be solenoid operated which allows infinitely adjustable cam timing. The starter motor windings will double as the alternator. Imagine changing your "virtual" camshaft profile by plugging your laptop into the OBD port and dialing in a longer duration. It makes me feel old. ;{) -Erik -- Erik Quackenbush, Midwest Filter Corporation 1-847-680-0566 http://www.midwestfilter.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 07:32:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:32:32 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:32:32 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI Craig Dotson tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though > What's the displacement on that? Seems pretty weak for a 10. The > Cummins 5.9L I6 turbodiesels exceed that number in their stock > de-tuned (for transmission life) trim....slide the timing plate up > and pop in new injectors and you're almost to 1000 ft-lbs. The V10 TDI is a 5-litre designed for passenger cars and SUV. 230kW, 750Nm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 07:38:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:38:13 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:38:13 -0800 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > CVTs are in the > neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10% Well, maybe the rubberband CVTs from your snowmobile but a metal pushband is something else. The Williams formula one car was faster about a second per lap. That doesn't happen by heating your tranny. Igor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 07:46:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:46:32 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:46:32 -0800 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: SAAB variable compression, WAS: Flame on That variable compression engine was developed by SAAB, not VW. It was in Automotive Engineering last year. > -----Original Message----- > From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com [mailto:bill.shurvinton@nokia.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:16 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: Flame on > > > > My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from > 14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they > can get that > to be reliable. > > Bill > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 07:51:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:51:51 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 07:51:51 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Check nat-semi.com for the LM1964. It is the O2 Sensor interface amplifier designed for this purpose. At least the purpose of interfacing the O2 into additional electronics. BobR. Peter Florance wrote: > That's what I had in mind. Some decent rail to rail op amp > > Thanks > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: rr [SMTP:RRauscher@nni.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:50 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > You may want to use two O2 amps (National semi) and then sum > the outputs together. In my travels w/GM ecms I've never seen any > pullups or bias resistors on the O2 sensor signal line. > > BobR. > > Peter Florance wrote: > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for > > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors > > for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > > buffers. > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual > > exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > Thanks in advance > > > > Peter Florance > > 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 08:08:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:08:56 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:08:56 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" >>>> 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. >>> Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. >> OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was >> thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced >> to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) >> engine. [snip] > So how many of these are you or your frineds buying. Me; precisely zero. My friends? I dunno. It's their licence and "their" dough. > 300-500 is what, an afternoons work load for a major manufacturer > of STREET cars Afternoon? Only during vacations. It's like what get's built before the first coffee break of large-volume manufacturers. Would you call a Rolls-Royce a street car? Or a Ferrari, or a Lamborghini? So's the Bugatti. >> A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. > > Pre-announced = commerical maybeware?. > > Yep, I firmly stuck on reality, I'm sure that the reality of some people will include a Bugatti. For people (?) like Bill Gates, it's a drop in the ocean. There are hundreds of others looking for a status symbol, and perhaps a few dozen well-to-do enthusiasts who will appreciate and be able to enjoy the car. The technology is trickling down to "everyday" cars more rapidly. Unfortunately, most customers are easily distracted by "luxuries" like cup holders (silicone-damped, of course) instead of real technology. So the manufacturers are way behind in implementing the technology they have sitting on the shelf. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 08:11:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:11:37 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:11:37 -0800 From: "Richard M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SAAB variable compression, WAS: Flame on Also very interesting in a similar vein is the Mayflower development of variable CR and swept volume. An adjustable link is added between the conrod and crank pin which can adjust the effective conrod length. Reported in European Automotive Design, November 2001 - "As well as moving horizontally, the pivot arm can simultaneously move vertically, which has the effect of changing the CR and/or capacity of the engine while it is running. In this way, Mayflower's experimental single-cylinder engine can alter its capacity from 260 to 300cc or its CR from 9:1 to 15:1 in 15mS" Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: Shirley, Mark R To: Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:40 PM Subject: RE: SAAB variable compression, WAS: Flame on > That variable compression engine was developed by SAAB, not VW. > It was in Automotive Engineering last year. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com [mailto:bill.shurvinton@nokia.com] > > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:16 AM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: RE: Flame on > > > > > > > > My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from > > 14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they > > can get that > > to be reliable. > > > > Bill > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 08:30:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:30:31 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:30:31 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > >>>> 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > >>> Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > >> OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was > >> thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced > >> to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) > >> engine. > [snip] > > So how many of these are you or your frineds buying. > Me; precisely zero. My friends? I dunno. It's their licence and > "their" dough. Well, then in a like tone, I just might buy up all the ones manufactured, so there won't be any left for any of your friends to even think about. > > 300-500 is what, an afternoons work load for a major manufacturer > > of STREET cars > Afternoon? Only during vacations. It's like what get's built before > the first coffee break of large-volume manufacturers. > Would you call a Rolls-Royce a street car? Or a Ferrari, or a > Lamborghini? So's the Bugatti. Not as a resonably priced one, no. > >> A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. > > Pre-announced = commerical maybeware?. > > Yep, I firmly stuck on reality, > I'm sure that the reality of some people will include a Bugatti. For > people (?) like Bill Gates, it's a drop in the ocean. There are > hundreds of others looking for a status symbol, and perhaps a few > dozen well-to-do enthusiasts who will appreciate and be able to > enjoy the car. So now your broaching into more maybes, status symbols, etc.. You're so far removed from the aspect of DIY it's laughable. The more anyone comments the more afield you go with non related matter. > The technology is trickling down to "everyday" cars more rapidly. > Unfortunately, most customers are easily distracted by "luxuries" > like cup holders (silicone-damped, of course) instead of real > technology. So the manufacturers are way behind in implementing the > technology they have sitting on the shelf. They have to play the emission's game, in most countries now. If they do 100% immediately the prices would jump to such a level that only your friends with the big money would be able to afford them. Again, this is matter of reality. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 08:35:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:35:25 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:35:25 -0800 From: Steven Ciciora MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WBO2 kits update I've updated http://www.ciciora.com/wbo2/ to show who I've shipped kits to so far. If you have paid and your name is not on the list, please email me a.s.a.p. and I'll fix my bookkeeping errors. I'll be unavailable till tuesday or so, but when I get back, I'll email the people who signed up on the first web page, give them a chance to pay (I know, I have not figgured out shipping for the foreign orders yet, so they couldn't have paid me), then start working on the 'extras' list (the second web page). I'm still behind on my emails, and I've not been able to keep up with the diy_efi list, but the best bet is to contact me directly. - Steven Ciciora ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 08:42:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:42:11 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:42:11 -0800 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? A while ago I built a similar circuit for a twin turbo drag car running a '7148 ECM. I used a very high impedance JFET op-amp to get 0.454V open circuit and then w/ a 19.7Mohm resistor across the circuit I got 0.427V, solving for Rx gave 1.2Mohm. Hooking up the unheated O2 sensor gave no voltage change, but w/ a heated unit the voltage quickly headed to 0 in less than 30 seconds as I recall, used sensor, YMMV... For the ECM input, my logic was the ECM should see the leanest mixture, so I used 2 "precision rectifier" op-amp circuits out of Walter Jung's IC Op-Amp Cookbook into the summing point. For the 0.45V bias supply I used an LM10 which has a built-in 200mV reference, and a 7660 was used for the negative power supply. Since the car isn't finished, and they're switching to an Accel DFI, and the WB circuit has made my circuit obsolete, I have no real world testing results to report, but the ideas may be useful. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 08:45:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:45:54 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:45:54 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Erik Quackenbush tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 09:42 AM 12/6/2001 +0800, Bernd Felsche wrote: > > >You can get CVTs to transmit that amount of troque, but not in a > >car you'd want to put on the road. > You will be able to buy one next year. Audi will be offering a new > CVT on the A4 that can handle the full torque of their standard > engine. They have a new design that uses what looks like a But not yet their more-powerful engines. Multitronic has been available for a year or so. But only for the less-torquey engines. > 2-dimensional drive chain. There are sideways links so the chain > can crawl up and down a sort of "gear cone" towithout slipping. > My vague description is based on a non-technical article I read in > one of the mainstream US car magazines. It's a variation on the van Doorne (sp?) design; it uses a link-belt instead of a vee belt. I remember DAF cars from the 1960's; basic idea is the same but execution is vastly different. The new Mini gets CVT as an option as well. > Combine the CVT with one of the forthcoming 42 volt engine designs > and you'll have a car with no gears, no timing belt (or chain), no > camshaft, and no alternator. The valves will be solenoid operated > which allows infinitely adjustable cam timing. The starter motor > windings will double as the alternator. Imagine changing your > "virtual" camshaft profile by plugging your laptop into the OBD > port and dialing in a longer duration. It makes me feel old. ;{) The other advantage of the 42V electric and some of the new supercaps is that you can eliminate torque variations throughout the revolution, so a four can idle as smoothly as a turbine and flywheel mass will be no more than the windings of the alternator/motor. There's also fully-electric electric power steering and brakes waiting for 42V, as are airconditioning compressors. BMW's producing some cars with gasoline-fueled SOFC APU to run auxiliaries without having to turn the engine. Other than that; not much is changing. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 08:48:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:48:26 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 08:48:26 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Igor Dorrestijn tapped away at the keyboard with: > > CVTs are in the > > neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10% > Well, maybe the rubberband CVTs from your snowmobile but a metal > pushband is something else. The Williams formula one car was > faster about a second per lap. That doesn't happen by heating your > tranny. Audi's CVT cars are faster accelerating than manual and auto transmission versions; and they use less fuel than the manual. There's still a torque limit. Where can I find out more about the Williams F1 CVT? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 09:10:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:10:59 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:10:59 -0800 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Iron selection Peter Florance wrote: [regarding the old Weller temp controlled soldering stations] > well. Get one that works as repair parts can get pricey if you need a lot of > them. I got one for $5 at a swap meet, was broken of course. Weller/Cooper at the time would fix/replace the base station for a flat $70 fee. Ended up being a very good deal, I like this iron very much. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 09:13:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:13:40 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:13:40 -0800 From: "Axel Rietschin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Dotson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 9:24 PM Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers [...] > Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area. The same > benefits go for a turbo'd car as an NA car in this area...more volume into > the cylinder at a given pressure loss, or the same volume into the cylinder > at a lower pressure loss...at the price of less turbulence. Thank you, that was precisely my point. Turbo-ed responds just as well as NA to intake tuning. [...] > If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an appreciable > difference in the way an intake manifold worked. Perfect. What does a turbo then? IMHO it just raises the 'atmosphere' pressure, as seen at the intake. The engine still swallows the same volume of air (a function of its displacement and VE). The turbo just makes that volume 'heavier' but the fluid dynamics at the intake is probably not so drastically altered. [...] > If atmospheric pressure doubled you'd still need to do > this, as exhaust pressure will double accordingly, but with turbocharging > the exhaust pressure increase (it's all absolute pressure here of course) is > small compared to the intake pressure increase. > Tuning the manifold to gain > a small number of pascals pressure will have an insignificant impact when > combined with the already large pressure differential between boost pressure > and exhaust pressure. I disagree. On a perfectly matched turbo-engine setup the exhaust back pressure should be roughly equal to the boost pressure at max power rpm, there is no "large pressure differential between boost pressure and exhaust pressure", at some point exhaust pressure actually becomes higher than boost. --Axel > Craig Dotson > crdotson@vt.edu > 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From 242Turbo@alvarogil.com Thu Dec 6 08:59:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:19:27 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:19:27 -0300 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Iron selection I have located a Weller 12W iron with an 800 deg fine tip. Would this be a good choice for the o2 board? Does anyone have anything bad to say about it? At 40 bucks, I would like to buy the correct iron the first time.... Thanks... -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 09:27:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:27:44 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:27:44 -0800 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread started with >street cars, are you still working the street or moving into the race field >I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a street engine. I'm talking 8000-9500 rpm max. Its very common in the I4 world. Look at specs on the larger, high rpm lobes of the VTEC cams and I'm sure toyota stuff also - its in the 225-230 degree range at 0.050" from the factory. Now 270d at 0.039" is huge through if that cam is being used at low rpm's. In my former street car (now race only pretty much), I have cams that are 234/236 at 0.050" and with a well tuned EFI setup its completely smooth down low, it even idles evenly at 1000rpm, it just doesn't have much vacuum (~8-10" at idle) and doesn't make any power before 5000rpm. > > >If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an >appreciable > > >difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The whole question >still > > >seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning an intake you are trying >to > > >increase intake air pressure by a small number of pascals. > > Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of a >valve? > > When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners it can be over >20% > > beyond atmospheric pressure during valve closing. We're certainly not > > talking single Pascals here. > >At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you move back >from there? Why would you care at all what the pressure is anywhere in the intake tract besides the back of the valve during valve closing? That's the only place flow is occurring into the cylinder so it could be -10psi 4" up the runner and it'd make no difference, as long as there is good pressure behind the valve. > > I have to completely disagree on the turbo issue here. Normally with a > > turbo setup you have a huge pressure swing from before spoolup, during > > spoolup, then maintain a good pressure differential for ~3000 rpm, then >HUGE > > PRESSURE INCREASES IN THE EXHAUST. You will see drastic increases in > > exhaust pressure, I've measured as much as 60psi for 23psi in the >intake. > >That has to be about the worlds worst matching of turbo to engine. Yeah, I guess that's what I get for buying and off-the-shelf turbo that's made in mass quantities and sold for my car. Its got a 54 trim compressor wheel, which should flow about 550hp max and be very efficient in the 450hp range. Because of the small turbine side that was coupled to this wheel, it completely chokes itself off at just barely over 400hp. FYI, its a Frankenstein stage 3 in the dsm world. > > BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. Check out >F1 > > stuff before you call everything old and pushrods good. Approximately > > 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline (yes, I do use that term > > loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm isn't trivial. > >To whom? >I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to anything on >the >street yet. They still have reached any level of performance that can't be >done with engines that would have transferable technology to the street. >The rules in F1 are just a game anymore to see who can spend the most for >something that can win. >Bruce There's a 5-10 year lag on all that good stuff. But there are TONS of things that have filtered down from F1. F1 was the first to use a wideband UEGO in a racing condition (Honda in particular), last time I checked that made it down to several of their production cars. More subtly and importantly, there is a gigantic wealth of knowledge about vehicle dynamics gained from motorsports. Learning how to do a good traction control system and a good ABS system (although I still argue the tuning of many production ones) starts best in the motorsports arena. If its a slight competitive advantage in a street car, its really tough for a manufacturer to justify a big budget for it. If it helps winning races so your team can keep its sponsor, you're going to make it a priority or go hungry. The racing world, obviously, is much, much more Darwinistic than development/engineering staffs are at large auto makers. Just my $0.02, Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 09:32:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:32:06 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:32:06 -0800 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Where can I find out more about the Williams F1 CVT? Unfortunately there isn't much on the internet. They put the CVT in the 1993 Williams FW15C car. I can't seem to locate van Doorne's website either. If you really want to know you can always give them a call at +31-13-4640333 or visit their factory in Tilburg, they have the car standing in the entrance hall. Igor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 09:22:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:40:08 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:40:08 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI bill.shurvinton@nokia.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > I shall go and shoot my source right now. Here's the ammo. I translated the article for the local VW Club's web site back in September 2000. VW Lupo FSI in the Showrooms from November Wolfsburg (autouniversum) - Volkswagen's Lupo FSI (Fuel Stratified Injection) features a direct-injection petrol engine with a fuel-consumption of just 4.9 litres per 100 km (58 mpg). The car's light-weight construction using selected aluminium panels reduces its weight to 900kg. The FSI engine has a swept volume of 1.4 litres producing 77kW (105 bhp). List price in Germany will be just shy of 30,000 Deutsche Mark (about AUD $24,000), making it about 4000 DM more expensive than a similarly-equipped 'conventional' Lupo. Emissions from the Lupo FSI are compliant with the stringent Euro-4 standard, resulting in a tax-break of 600 DM for buyers in Germany. A three-way catalytic convertor and a NOx storage-cat help to comply with the standard. Volkswagen's Golf is also to be available with the 1.4-litre FSI engine early in 2001. VW also plan to put the engine into the Polo. The new technology will be used extensively by VW to achieve the requirement to reduce fleet- average fuel consumption in 2005 by 25% over 1990 figures. autouniversum / hwi 04.09.2000, 15:29 > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > > VW Lupo FSI (1.4 litre) has been on sale for a while. They can't yet > make enough of them despite the premium price. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 09:42:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:42:36 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:42:36 -0800 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb, Turbo Sunbird, and wb-lcd I sent this last Sunday, but it didn't make it due to the server outage, so here we go again.... I powered up my diy-wb board for the first time yesterday, using a 5711 bulb to simulate the heater load. At first it powered up, gradually increasing voltage to the heater until it reached full power, then remained at full power for about 15 seconds before shutting down. It tripped the thermal overload in the regulator. (This is normal, right?). I added a heat sink to the regulator and got it to power up continuously. Boy, does that regulator get hot! I went to the junkyard to get the connector for the wb-o2 sensor yesterday morning and found them in older Hondas, '88s and '89s, near the brake booster as suggested on the list. Different models may have them in different places, I found one on the firewall on the passenger's side, so look around, they're there. I may be able to light up the diy-wb with a real sensor today! While at the yard I found a Turbo Sunbird convertible that seems to be complete. I asked about taking parts but the guy said he would only sell it complete for $500. It's a bit rough, with rust here and there and the top's a bit ragged. The yard dude said it was there because it blew the head gasket. East Coast Salvage in Haddam, CT if anyone's interested. I've ordered prototype PCBs for the wb-lcd, and parts will be ordered tonight. They should be in next week, I'll keep you posted. bs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Dorrestijn@corps.nl Thu Dec 6 08:17:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:43:58 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:43:58 -0300 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > You can get CVTs to transmit that amount of troque, but not in a > car you'd want to put on the road. > > -- > Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia Well, I have to stand up for my fellow countrymen now :-) They are doing tests at the moment using a CVT in 300+hp GMC Yukon and it worked just fine on the Williams formula 1 car somewhere in the early nineties. You don't see many high power CVTs as the people who drive sports cars like to change gears manually. But it is only a matter of time before US manufacturers start using them with CAFE breathing down their necks. Current users of CVTs include Nissan, Toyota, Honda, Fiat, BMW and Rover. They can't all be wrong. Igor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 08:29:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:50:20 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:50:20 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi R8 bill.shurvinton@nokia.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > I think the fact that they didn't have to stop for a new gearbox also > had a part to play. Reliability wins Le Mans, not fuel consumption, > hence the reason Panoz always start well and then fall out. Shame, as a > mad looking car. Bentley were spewing because they only got Audi's "old" port-injected engine for their car. They lost a fraction of a second on every lap to Audi and had to do another fuel stop. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 09:53:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:53:59 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:53:59 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Shannen Durphey tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > > > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > > > > High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of > > that price. > > What are you, on freaking drugs? They are streetable cars. That's what was asked. Just because they're espen$ive doesn't mean that they're not streetable. > For that kind of money, damn near anybody could build a car > willing to do that speed. Go ahead and stretch the definitions > beyond reasonable. > Street car my arse. Ok, 200mph, no problem. Last year's nascar > cars are for sale. Check out the silver state classic, that's > where the average joe gets to run 'em. So it's on a street, and > it's a car, so makes it a street car? Ya, ok. And compared to > the Porch it's cheap enough that we can buy a case of beer > and a small motel for the after race celebration. And your 200mph nascars are equipped a full luxury cars as well, meet all emission and crash requirements? They're air conditioned? Leather seats? They go around real corners too? And along normal, bumpy roads? You can drive them down to the corner shop? The Veyron will be a proper, road-going car. > Send those happy pills over here. I'd like to see what color the > sky really is in your world. It's a bit dark at the moment. (1 a.m.) > > Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and > > 500 of them a year. > > At 300 models per year, the Bugatti hardly qualifies as a > production vehicle, let alone a street car. Bicycle factories > produce more units than that. And the McLaren F1? > > A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. > Yes, and I read about that car 3 years ago. It was a promised item then. It's still promised for 2003. See the PR in other message. > > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > > > Two or three at certain times. > > OMG! LMAO! > So... kinda pointless, no? Is it? It's not the 400+ kmh. It's the speeds up to that. > > > What's a reasonable > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > driveable around town? > > $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. ?? $150k US won't buy you one. They'll be around a million Euro. > They'll never drive that fast anyway. Never? The car has enough power to reach that speed so all speeds up to the top are easily within reach. You don't have to drive at top speed. 400kmh will require _very_ special driving skills. Most of the owners will probably never exceed 300kmh. But most cars are never driven at their top speed unless they're lucky enough to be in Germany. Speed limits in most other countries prevent exploiting about 50% of the speed potential of many cars. Bernd Pischetsrieder, former BMW CEO and soon to be VW Group CEO crashed "his" McLaren F1 at something like 300kmh. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 10:01:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:01:18 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:01:18 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Igor Dorrestijn tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Where can I find out more about the Williams F1 CVT? > Unfortunately there isn't much on the internet. They put the CVT > in the 1993 Williams FW15C car. I can't seem to locate van > Doorne's website either. If you really want to know you can always > give them a call at +31-13-4640333 or visit their factory in > Tilburg, they have the car standing in the entrance hall. It's a bit of a hike, but I may be able to make it there in 2003 on my next planned European vacation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 08:27:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:01:28 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:01:28 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI bill.shurvinton@nokia.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > FWIW: VWAudi have announced 2 direct injection petrol engines for > launch next year, a 1.4 and 2.0. Nothing to set the performance > world alight, but at least a dribble back from their motorsports > programme. VW Lupo FSI (1.4 litre) has been on sale for a while. They can't yet make enough of them despite the premium price. > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though Waiting for final D1 release date and the VW equivalent of the Porsche 'Cayenne' SUV. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 10:03:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:03:28 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:03:28 -0800 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: RE: Flame on Just wanted to mension that saab has been creating the same type of thing... had it running about a year ago... using a supercharger and 20 some odd psi boost. I'm guessing they're using a new type of compressor-- i'm suspicious that it is a new garrett unit that uses hydrolics---(like a power steering pump)-- to spin the turbine.... Camden snip.. >My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from >14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they can get that >to be reliable. > >Bill end snip _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From 242Turbo@alvarogil.com Thu Dec 6 08:49:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:08:52 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:08:52 -0300 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >What are you, on freaking drugs? Ewwww. Sorry. I thought I was responding to private list. the response should not have contained all the 4 letter words... -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 10:09:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:09:37 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:09:37 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI Or...replace the timing plate with one that actually pulls the rack at WOT. We make serious torque with the 24 valve mods... Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Dotson" To: Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:45 AM Subject: Re: Audi DI > > > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though > > What's the displacement on that? Seems pretty weak for a 10. The Cummins > 5.9L I6 turbodiesels exceed that number in their stock de-tuned (for > transmission life) trim....slide the timing plate up and pop in new > injectors and you're almost to 1000 ft-lbs. > > Craig Dotson > crdotson@vt.edu > 2002 VT FormulaSAE > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 10:09:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:09:40 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:09:40 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Oh--gee--can I respond to the 25% losses in an automatic Puullleeasse ? Convert HP to Watts, and you'll quickly find that if a 300HP engine is losing 75HP in the transmission, the thing'll be baked to a crisp on the first road trip. Real losses are in the 5-8% range. With the lockup converters available today, and torque multiplication IN a converter, losses are extremely low. As for racers and automatics--you've obviously not been to the track... Lyndon > From: "Craig Dotson" > Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > > > You don't see many high power CVTs as the people who drive sports cars > > like to change gears manually. > > I think it has something to do with losses. You don't see many racers > with > > auto trannies do you? They're like 20-25% losses. CVTs are in the > > neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10%? I haven't seen a good > > figure for auto manuals...the sequential 6spds in motorcycles are said to > be > > about 5% loss. If I could get 15%+ power back by going to a manual from > an > > auto I'd do it...and not just so I'll have something for my left foot to > do. > > Craig Dotson > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Thu Dec 6 08:56:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:11:45 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:11:45 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Audi R8 They also filled with water and lost sync on the semi-auto due to water ingress which really slowed them down. Had this not occurred then they would probably have kept up. I was there. It was wet and miserable, but one had to admire the testicular fortitude of the drivers in the horrendous conditions. Bill NB last year everyone looked at the R8 and said 'nice but turbos are never reliable enough'. No-one bothered to tell the german engineers that! -----Original Message----- From: ext Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] Bentley were spewing because they only got Audi's "old" port-injected engine for their car. They lost a fraction of a second on every lap to Audi and had to do another fuel stop. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From davygrvy@pobox.com Thu Dec 6 09:51:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:11:56 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:11:56 -0300 From: David Gravereaux Subject: Re: Iron selection Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> wrote: >I have located a Weller 12W iron with an 800 deg fine tip. Would >this be a good choice for the o2 board? >Does anyone have anything bad to say about it? At 40 bucks, I would >like to buy the correct iron the first time.... > >Thanks... I prefer the Weller temperature compensated irons with ptr-7 tip for small board work. But that's just me :) -- David Gravereaux Tomasoft Engineering, Hayward, CA ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From audserv@exis.net Thu Dec 6 09:47:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:12:16 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:12:16 -0300 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Iron selection One of the few items here I might be qualified to comment on.... In my real life (repairing electronics) I employ medium sized tips (1/16") at 700 degrees. Some shops use really fine tips for everything and their soldering doesn't look that good IMO (tip cools off too fast due to small mass) I like temperature controlled irons. They sit there and idle until you solder, then they turn up the heat fast and keep the tip temp constant and are much easier to use (especially for the novice) The old Weller WTCP irons are still great and with all the TV shops closing down (~50% in the last 10 years) they should be floating around used (eBay?). You select the temp by the tip (number stamped on the end) and there's still good support for parts and supplies. I use them even to do large square flat pack IC and they work well. Get one that works as repair parts can get pricey if you need a lot of them. Whatever you get make sure you have more than one source for tips. Also many of use eschew sponges and now use the brass tip cleaners that look like pot scrubbers. And 63/37 solder will work much better that 60/40. Bottle of rosin flux (GC works well) is good for stubborn components and flat pack IC's/ HTH Peter Florance Audio Services 544 Central Drive Suite 101 Virginia Beach, VA 23454 757.498.8277 757.498.9554 Fax Email: mailto:audserv@exis.net http://www.audio-services.com > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Alvaro Gil > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:59 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Iron selection > > > I have located a Weller 12W iron with an 800 deg fine tip. Would > this be a good choice for the o2 board? > Does anyone have anything bad to say about it? At 40 bucks, I would > like to buy the correct iron the first time.... > > Thanks... > -- > ____________________________________________ > Alvaro Gil > http://www.AlvaroGil.com > '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi > '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) > NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student > ____________________________________________ > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Thu Dec 6 08:56:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:12:52 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:12:52 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Audi DI I shall go and shoot my source right now. -----Original Message----- From: ext Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] VW Lupo FSI (1.4 litre) has been on sale for a while. They can't yet make enough of them despite the premium price. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 10:12:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:30:39 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:30:39 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Flame on From: Subject: RE: Flame on > Bruce, > you did that on purpose didn't you. I mean the fact that noone could > ever agree what consitutes good performance or reasonable price anyway. I wasn't looking for a list full of agreement. Only to reign the conversation in the terms of reality. Sure there will always be some clown that thinks a million bucks is a resonable figure. But I would expect most resonable folks to draw their own lines in the sand of what they call resonable, based on what they can afford, not someone else. To make a point of what someone else does is playing in the Alice in Wonderland, mind set, IMO. > Anyway it's not Lotus fault that they designed a lovely modern multicam > etc engine for said car and then noone could cast it in great enough > numbers to make it viable in production ;-) Then why bother?. People can day dream all they want about design aspects, and such, which is fine, but to make a point about what is right, better, etc with no practicality, is again a game. > Personally I am more cynical. The reason that a lot of the modern dodads > have not been fitted to cars is because the car makers didn't need to. > Whilst legislation doesn't force it, and cars do the gas milage that > meets expectations, why change. Marketing, how much are you willing to pay for the dodads?. Legislation has been tne driving force to what manufacturers have to acheive. If you examine the EPA's strategy, evey thing they do tightens the noose around the new car manufacturers. There was a time when a smog alert, meant that it was really healthier to stay indoors, now adays you can hardly tell it's a bad air day. You can force regs so tight, that you can drive manufacturers profit margins down, and given time bankrupt their engineering departments. Remember when Dodge had to run Delco systems on their cars?. If you want better dodads, fine, just remember that adds to prices you have to pay for the car, and not everyone is going to agree with you on what a resonable cost increase is for said dodads. > Of course now in Europe there is this 'average' economy across the model > range which will force a lot of these ideas out of the lab and onto the > street. > My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from > 14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they can get that > to be reliable. I'd rather see the effort put into coming up with better *universally applicable dodads*, so that the world might benefit from the efforts. Variable compression, doesn't impress me in the least, but, I'm not a member of the dodads at any price club. In the real world there is a difference from gee what can we do, to hmm, how well can we solve this problem. Bruce Flames are in the eyes of the beholder. > Bill > From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Marketing. > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses > an OHV engine. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 10:26:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:52:48 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:52:48 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI Nice seeing 50s technology again isn't it?. Bruce From: Subject: Audi DI > FWIW: VWAudi have announced 2 direct injection petrol engines for launch > next year, a 1.4 and 2.0. Nothing to set the performance world alight, > but at least a dribble back from their motorsports programme. > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though > Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Thu Dec 6 10:49:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:00:46 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:00:46 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? You may want to use two O2 amps (National semi) and then sum the outputs together. In my travels w/GM ecms I've never seen any pullups or bias resistors on the O2 sensor signal line. BobR. Peter Florance wrote: > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors > for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > buffers. > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual > exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > Thanks in advance > > Peter Florance > 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From crdotson@vt.edu Thu Dec 6 10:45:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:03:17 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:03:17 -0300 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though What's the displacement on that? Seems pretty weak for a 10. The Cummins 5.9L I6 turbodiesels exceed that number in their stock de-tuned (for transmission life) trim....slide the timing plate up and pop in new injectors and you're almost to 1000 ft-lbs. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 10:50:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:08:35 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:08:35 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers I see your not a member of the Politically Correct Crowd, or at least not all the time. Bruce I can't beleive it, a Volvo Owner talking like that. LOL From: "Alvaro Gil" <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From crdotson@vt.edu Thu Dec 6 10:50:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:08:37 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:08:37 -0300 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > You don't see many high power CVTs as the people who drive sports cars like > to change gears manually. I think it has something to do with losses. You don't see many racers with auto trannies do you? They're like 20-25% losses. CVTs are in the neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10%? I haven't seen a good figure for auto manuals...the sequential 6spds in motorcycles are said to be about 5% loss. If I could get 15%+ power back by going to a manual from an auto I'd do it...and not just so I'll have something for my left foot to do. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 10:58:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:13:59 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:13:59 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Ya'll have Doc muttering Bruce From: "Alvaro Gil" <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >What are you, on freaking drugs? > Ewwww. Sorry. I thought I was responding to private list. the > response should not have contained all the 4 letter words... > Alvaro Gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 11:03:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:15:25 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:15:25 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Are you really sure?. Let me be upfront and say I don't rely on dynos for much of anything, other then establishing trends. But if the tranny was a 25% power consumption item, we should be able to recover some of that energy for doing something. Put another way, in any mileage rating the Manuals would flat stomp on the autos. Bruce From: "Craig Dotson" Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > > You don't see many high power CVTs as the people who drive sports cars > like to change gears manually. > I think it has something to do with losses. You don't see many racers with > auto trannies do you? They're like 20-25% losses. CVTs are in the > neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10%? I haven't seen a good > figure for auto manuals...the sequential 6spds in motorcycles are said to be > about 5% loss. If I could get 15%+ power back by going to a manual from an > auto I'd do it...and not just so I'll have something for my left foot to do. > Craig Dotson ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 11:16:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:16:42 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:16:42 -0800 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > As for racers and automatics--you've obviously not been to the track... What kind of racing are you talking about? Some drag racers use automatics, but that's mainly because they are consistent. In bracket racing consistency wins, not ETs. I've been to autocrosses (SCCA Solo II) and the automatic cars pretty much suck. NASCAR series....don't recall seeing an automatic, not even at the local Winston Weekly track. I do admit in all honesty that IRL/CART/F1 never could hold my interest more than a few minutes. I can't remember the last time I saw a Touring Car race, and Rally racing's just plain rare on TV here so I don't have much experience with it. Rockcrawlers seem to prefer automatics, but that's a whole different ballgame. Sure losses in the transmission create lots of heat. Vehicles with automatics that are used for heavy duty utility or racing duty more often than not are equipped with auxiliary transmission fluid coolers for that reason. Remember your 300HP engine losing 75HP through the tranny only happens to do so at a particular engine speed at WOT, the rest of the time (normal driving) the power through the system is significantly less. The momentarily high heat levels in the transmission are possible because the large fluid volume takes quite a bit of energy to warm up (my truck's automatic holds somewhere from 10-14 quarts IIRC), and the cooler dissipates that through periods of lower power. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rktscience2000@yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 11:10:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:26:37 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:26:37 -0300 From: James Adams MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: New cam for TPI 350 I ran a 350 TPI in an '84 Camaro with an LT1 cam(1996 roller, not 1970), mildly ported heads, 6 speed, and 3.45 gears. It would light up the tires just about anytime, but the intake system would run out of air at about 4700 RPM. Put more cam in and you just lose low end that you can't gain at the top unless you mod the intake system. The throttle body alone won't gain you much as the runners and base are both limiting airflow as well. --- Bruce wrote: > > From: "Dan Zorde" > Subject: New cam for TPI 350 > > Does anyone have any experiences with the > CraneCams H-278-2 cam in a TPI > > 350 ? > > The application is roughly 1700kg car with 5speed > manual, 3.08 diff, > > Sportsman 2 heads (circuit work, hill climbs, > autokhanas, NO drag > > racing). TPI is controlled by aftermarket MAP > system with no closed > > loop control. > > Really just want to settly my worries that the cam > may loose too much > > vacuum at idle, hence resulting in idle problems > (also have no idle > > control motor, system just relies on a fixed size > bypass hole for idle > > air). > > My 270 was border line grief for daily use. General > driving was fine > prolonged stop and go would start to load up. I had > min the off idle timing > to keep it from lighting the tires so much. Other > then under a major > traffic jam, was fun > > > Also, I'm told the standard throttle body is good > for around 650cfm, can > > anyone tell me if I'm starting to get close to > that limit with this > > setup and if I need to look at going to a larger > size ? > > Dual 2" butterflies are about 670, as claimed my > Holley in some of their > lit, and it follows with some of what I've seen. > The dual 2s were a delite > for mild 320ish HP set up. > But just enough, using 5K ish shift point. More cam > and buzzing it higher > I'd want more air > Bruce > > > > rgds > > > > Dan dzorde@erggroup.com > > > > ---------------------------- ERG Group > -------------------------- > > The contents of this email and any attachments > are confidential > > and may only be read by the intended recipient. > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 11:16:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:29:46 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:29:46 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: KC-5300 kit - Batch 7474 -- WARNING And violated the User's agreement, in ref to the DIY-WB. Bruce > Peter. > > (I have no affiliation with Jaycar and am not associated with the KC-5300 > kit in any capacity other than being an at-cost supplier of the KC-5300 kit > and someone who has modified it for use with the DIY-WB setup). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 11:27:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:43:51 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:43:51 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intro,,,, Street Outlaw (NHRA) looking for Megasquirt EFI This is one of the few times, I'd say stick with something like a SpeedPro (FAST) set up. To sort out a system on a mega motor like this could be asking for an expensive sneeze. If you consider an engine are two as mules, and want to do the work, by all means fine, but your taking an unnessary risk in my opinion. Half of what makes EFI so darned good is the ignition control. If you really want to, OK, and more power to you, just my thoughts Bruce From: powermaxx Subject: Intro,,,, Street Outlaw (NHRA) looking for Megasquirt EFI I have started to purchase injectors and came across this group and like what I see in the Megasquirt. Some of the posts had a group buy (closed, but......) would be interested if anyone drops out. From what I can see this system will do what I need. Anyone else running a supercharged setup? Ethanol? I have helped setup a Speed Pro system on a 69 Road Runner 6-71 (very nice car) so am familiar with EFI and performance applications. Steve St"RACE"ner (and toys...) 73 Challenger "Street Outlaw" 87 GLHS Shelby ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 11:57:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:57:10 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:57:10 -0800 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >I see your not a member of the Politically Correct Crowd, or at least not >all the time. >Bruce > I can't beleive it, a Volvo Owner talking like that. LOL Eh. Sorry. I am studying for finals, you know how your mind gets. That e-mail was intended for much less civil list. -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 11:57:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:57:43 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 11:57:43 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Iron selection The wattage is unimportant if you have temperature control. The best irons I have used had temperature control and were about 25 watts so they would do both large and small components on a PCB without burning the board or lifting the runs. I never needed more than 735F at the tip for any circuit board work. 800 degrees is too hot. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of David Gravereaux Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:51 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Iron selection Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> wrote: >I have located a Weller 12W iron with an 800 deg fine tip. Would >this be a good choice for the o2 board? >Does anyone have anything bad to say about it? At 40 bucks, I would >like to buy the correct iron the first time.... > >Thanks... I prefer the Weller temperature compensated irons with ptr-7 tip for small board work. But that's just me :) -- David Gravereaux Tomasoft Engineering, Hayward, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 12:06:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:06:27 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:06:27 -0800 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) I am a huge fan of the CVT. It is a mechanical marvel. These new automotive CVT are based on new technology. They have come a long way from the simple go cart or snow mobile CVT. Some use new variable friction lubricants... Automotive Engineering magazine had a few articles if you are interested in a more in depth article than the consumer car mags... -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Thu Dec 6 09:37:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:22:29 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:22:29 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) -> But if the tranny was a 25% power consumption item, we should be able -> to recover some of that energy for doing something. Yeah, with 25 to 75 kW radiating away under there, you wouldn't need a heater. For that matter, the glow would be bright enough you wouldn't need add-on neon lights under the car either! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Thu Dec 6 13:12:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:27:02 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:27:02 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd.<< Gives a whole new meaning to "gone in 60 milliseconds." If I had $150KUS to build a car, it'd certainly be faster than 400 km/hr. 1/4 mile, baby... Lyndon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From audserv@exis.net Thu Dec 6 12:12:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:41:55 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:41:55 -0300 From: Peter Florance MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? That's what I had in mind. Some decent rail to rail op amp Thanks Peter -----Original Message----- From: rr [SMTP:RRauscher@nni.com] Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:50 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? You may want to use two O2 amps (National semi) and then sum the outputs together. In my travels w/GM ecms I've never seen any pullups or bias resistors on the O2 sensor signal line. BobR. Peter Florance wrote: > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors > for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > buffers. > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual > exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > Thanks in advance > > Peter Florance > 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 12:24:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:42:39 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:42:39 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread > > > started with street cars, are you still working the street or > > > moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a > > > street engine. > > Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. > > My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. > > It's only a bit lumpy at idle. > > 270d @ .050 clearance? > 270 @ .005 maybe. @1 mm -- It's a Kent GS2H and used most days in traffic. Serious competition "Golfers" run asymetric cams with longer durations; 300 degrees or more. (Ref Greg Raven's book on the subject) [snip] > > If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down > > into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive > > Engineering magazine occasionally. > > > Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi > > Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers > > Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi > > Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. > > Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) > > We were talking engine technology. > F1 didn't discover multi valves. > Direct injection has been used for years in IH tractors, and the > 300SL did also. Vastly-different DI in the 300SL. It wasn't stratified-charge for one thing. And purely mechanical. By your definition, it wasn't a street car anyway. :-) > 2 models of one manufacurer, OK, but big deal Much more than two models. VW-Audi technology is shared throughout the Volkswagen Group across 8 marques and over 50 models. There'll be at least 6 distinct VW-Audi models with stratified-charge DI on sale from early 2002. There are at present two (VW Lupo and VW Golf), with the Audi A4 2-litre FSI on sale before the end of this year. FSI engines operate unthrottled in stratified-charge mode, greatly improving efficiency. Not pipe dreams. Not theory. Real, volume production cars on the road. It's only "one" manufacturer. BMW will have Valvetronic engines available for their whole model lineup next year. Their larger engines already have DI available; at least in Europe. Why is this only happening in Europe? The answer is sulphur. The VDA (German Association of Automobile Manufacturers) lobbied the oil companies to produce "sulphur-free" gasoline. Without that fuel, you can't operate in lean-burn mode very long as NOx emissions would be excessive and a storage cat to handle them becomes contaminated very quickly. BTW: The Veyron was recently shown in Frankfurt. Here's a snipping from the press release: Tu 2001/09/11 Development progress: the Bugatti EB 16·4 Veyron in the autumn of 2001 Molsheim, September 2001. At the 59th International Automobile Exhibition ('IAA') Frankfurt, Germany, BUGATTI Automobiles S.A.S. are displaying the 736 kW (1001 bhp) Bugatti EB 16·4 Veyron in its latest evolutionary stage. Both the power train and the body of the new design study are much closer to production maturity. In addition, the first theoretical performance figures have now been determined, according to which this 16-cylinder sports car, due to go on sale in 2003, will have a top speed of 406 kilometres per hour and accelerate to 300 km/h in under 14 seconds. ... New technical elements in the W16 engine The alloy-block W16 engine in the Bugatti EB 16·4 Veyron is innovative and totally unique. Two exceptionally narrow V8 cylinder blocks using the VR principle are combined at an included angle of 90 degrees. The resulting 16-cylinder engine can develop a mighty 736 kilowatts (1,001 brake horsepower) at 6,000 revolutions per minute. The W16 is installed as a mid-engine ahead of the rear axle, and measures only 710 millimetres in length and 767 millimetres in width. Its W pattern is not only the key to these compact dimensions and the generous engine size and power output from such a compact unit; it also makes the engine exceptionally rigid. Four turbochargers help to give this 7,993-cc engine a peak torque never before available in a passenger car: 1,250 newton-metres. The temperature of the charge air is reduced by passing it through two water-cooled charge-air intercoolers located above the cylinder heads. No fewer than 64 valves admit the mixture to the cylinders and expel the exhaust gas; they are operated by roller cam followers from four chain- driven overhead camshafts with continuously variable valve timing. The continuously variable electro-hydraulic camshaft control system is active in all operating conditions. ... ... 7-speed gearbox Had it not been developed specifically for the Bugatti EB 16·4 Veyron, the new seven-speed gearbox could well have come directly from the pen of a top Formula One racing car designer. Gear shifts take place sequentially at paddles behind the steering wheel, and there is no clutch pedal. The double clutch transmission (DCT) shifts from one gear to the next in a maximum of 0.2 of a second. Power from the engine reaches the wheels through a permanent all-wheel drive system. Figures are a little different to the previous ones due to design revisions. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 12:45:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:45:15 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:45:15 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) -> Combine the CVT with one of the forthcoming 42 volt engine designs -> and you'll have a car with no gears, Take a look at the Owen Magnetic cars of 80 years or so ago. They used an eddy current coupler with a variable slip rate. Quite efficient and reliable, particularly when compared to the gear technology of the day. It was the most sophisticated device of its type I've encountered; the eddy current brakes in some cranes and the "Telma" retarders used by some large trucks operate on the same principle. The Owen didn't have a lockup method, but the slip was only 60 to 100 RPM, the same as an average non-lockup automatic transmission torque convertor. The Magnetic had no torque multiplication ability, of course, being just a variable slip device, but you could run the engine up to the torque peak and adjust the transmission's hand lever to adjust the load. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 12:31:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:47:09 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:47:09 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI Craig Dotson tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though > What's the displacement on that? Seems pretty weak for a 10. The > Cummins 5.9L I6 turbodiesels exceed that number in their stock > de-tuned (for transmission life) trim....slide the timing plate up > and pop in new injectors and you're almost to 1000 ft-lbs. The V10 TDI is a 5-litre designed for passenger cars and SUV. 230kW, 750Nm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Dorrestijn@corps.nl Thu Dec 6 12:36:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:56:48 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:56:48 -0300 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > CVTs are in the > neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10% Well, maybe the rubberband CVTs from your snowmobile but a metal pushband is something else. The Williams formula one car was faster about a second per lap. That doesn't happen by heating your tranny. Igor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From erik@midwestfilter.com Thu Dec 6 12:31:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:03:52 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:03:52 -0300 From: Erik Quackenbush Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) At 09:42 AM 12/6/2001 +0800, Bernd Felsche wrote: >You can get CVTs to transmit that amount of troque, but not in a >car you'd want to put on the road. You will be able to buy one next year. Audi will be offering a new CVT on the A4 that can handle the full torque of their standard engine. They have a new design that uses what looks like a 2-dimensional drive chain. There are sideways links so the chain can crawl up and down a sort of "gear cone" towithout slipping. My vague description is based on a non-technical article I read in one of the mainstream US car magazines. Combine the CVT with one of the forthcoming 42 volt engine designs and you'll have a car with no gears, no timing belt (or chain), no camshaft, and no alternator. The valves will be solenoid operated which allows infinitely adjustable cam timing. The starter motor windings will double as the alternator. Imagine changing your "virtual" camshaft profile by plugging your laptop into the OBD port and dialing in a longer duration. It makes me feel old. ;{) -Erik -- Erik Quackenbush, Midwest Filter Corporation 1-847-680-0566 http://www.midwestfilter.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From MarkRShirley@eaton.com Thu Dec 6 12:40:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:15:16 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:15:16 -0300 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: SAAB variable compression, WAS: Flame on That variable compression engine was developed by SAAB, not VW. It was in Automotive Engineering last year. > -----Original Message----- > From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com [mailto:bill.shurvinton@nokia.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:16 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: Flame on > > > > My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from > 14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they > can get that > to be reliable. > > Bill > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 13:08:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:30:39 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:30:39 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" >>>> 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. >>> Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. >> OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was >> thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced >> to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) >> engine. [snip] > So how many of these are you or your frineds buying. Me; precisely zero. My friends? I dunno. It's their licence and "their" dough. > 300-500 is what, an afternoons work load for a major manufacturer > of STREET cars Afternoon? Only during vacations. It's like what get's built before the first coffee break of large-volume manufacturers. Would you call a Rolls-Royce a street car? Or a Ferrari, or a Lamborghini? So's the Bugatti. >> A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. > > Pre-announced = commerical maybeware?. > > Yep, I firmly stuck on reality, I'm sure that the reality of some people will include a Bugatti. For people (?) like Bill Gates, it's a drop in the ocean. There are hundreds of others looking for a status symbol, and perhaps a few dozen well-to-do enthusiasts who will appreciate and be able to enjoy the car. The technology is trickling down to "everyday" cars more rapidly. Unfortunately, most customers are easily distracted by "luxuries" like cup holders (silicone-damped, of course) instead of real technology. So the manufacturers are way behind in implementing the technology they have sitting on the shelf. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Thu Dec 6 12:54:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:31:35 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:31:35 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? Check nat-semi.com for the LM1964. It is the O2 Sensor interface amplifier designed for this purpose. At least the purpose of interfacing the O2 into additional electronics. BobR. Peter Florance wrote: > That's what I had in mind. Some decent rail to rail op amp > > Thanks > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: rr [SMTP:RRauscher@nni.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 8:50 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > > You may want to use two O2 amps (National semi) and then sum > the outputs together. In my travels w/GM ecms I've never seen any > pullups or bias resistors on the O2 sensor signal line. > > BobR. > > Peter Florance wrote: > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) values for > > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit to average 2 sensors > > for my L-jet box and would like to incorporate it in the front end of the > > buffers. > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for dual > > exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) > > Thanks in advance > > > > Peter Florance > > 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From richm@ntlworld.com Thu Dec 6 13:11:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:36:34 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:36:34 -0300 From: "Richard M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SAAB variable compression, WAS: Flame on Also very interesting in a similar vein is the Mayflower development of variable CR and swept volume. An adjustable link is added between the conrod and crank pin which can adjust the effective conrod length. Reported in European Automotive Design, November 2001 - "As well as moving horizontally, the pivot arm can simultaneously move vertically, which has the effect of changing the CR and/or capacity of the engine while it is running. In this way, Mayflower's experimental single-cylinder engine can alter its capacity from 260 to 300cc or its CR from 9:1 to 15:1 in 15mS" Rich ----- Original Message ----- From: Shirley, Mark R To: Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:40 PM Subject: RE: SAAB variable compression, WAS: Flame on > That variable compression engine was developed by SAAB, not VW. > It was in Automotive Engineering last year. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com [mailto:bill.shurvinton@nokia.com] > > Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 3:16 AM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: RE: Flame on > > > > > > > > My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from > > 14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they > > can get that > > to be reliable. > > > > Bill > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 13:30:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:56:38 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:56:38 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > >>>> 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > >>> Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > >> OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was > >> thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced > >> to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) > >> engine. > [snip] > > So how many of these are you or your frineds buying. > Me; precisely zero. My friends? I dunno. It's their licence and > "their" dough. Well, then in a like tone, I just might buy up all the ones manufactured, so there won't be any left for any of your friends to even think about. > > 300-500 is what, an afternoons work load for a major manufacturer > > of STREET cars > Afternoon? Only during vacations. It's like what get's built before > the first coffee break of large-volume manufacturers. > Would you call a Rolls-Royce a street car? Or a Ferrari, or a > Lamborghini? So's the Bugatti. Not as a resonably priced one, no. > >> A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. > > Pre-announced = commerical maybeware?. > > Yep, I firmly stuck on reality, > I'm sure that the reality of some people will include a Bugatti. For > people (?) like Bill Gates, it's a drop in the ocean. There are > hundreds of others looking for a status symbol, and perhaps a few > dozen well-to-do enthusiasts who will appreciate and be able to > enjoy the car. So now your broaching into more maybes, status symbols, etc.. You're so far removed from the aspect of DIY it's laughable. The more anyone comments the more afield you go with non related matter. > The technology is trickling down to "everyday" cars more rapidly. > Unfortunately, most customers are easily distracted by "luxuries" > like cup holders (silicone-damped, of course) instead of real > technology. So the manufacturers are way behind in implementing the > technology they have sitting on the shelf. They have to play the emission's game, in most countries now. If they do 100% immediately the prices would jump to such a level that only your friends with the big money would be able to afford them. Again, this is matter of reality. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ciciora@Ciciora.com Thu Dec 6 13:33:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:58:33 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:58:33 -0300 From: Steven Ciciora MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WBO2 kits update I've updated http://www.ciciora.com/wbo2/ to show who I've shipped kits to so far. If you have paid and your name is not on the list, please email me a.s.a.p. and I'll fix my bookkeeping errors. I'll be unavailable till tuesday or so, but when I get back, I'll email the people who signed up on the first web page, give them a chance to pay (I know, I have not figgured out shipping for the foreign orders yet, so they couldn't have paid me), then start working on the 'extras' list (the second web page). I'm still behind on my emails, and I've not been able to keep up with the diy_efi list, but the best bet is to contact me directly. - Steven Ciciora ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ilphayunterhay@yahoo.com Thu Dec 6 13:42:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:58:56 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:58:56 -0300 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? A while ago I built a similar circuit for a twin turbo drag car running a '7148 ECM. I used a very high impedance JFET op-amp to get 0.454V open circuit and then w/ a 19.7Mohm resistor across the circuit I got 0.427V, solving for Rx gave 1.2Mohm. Hooking up the unheated O2 sensor gave no voltage change, but w/ a heated unit the voltage quickly headed to 0 in less than 30 seconds as I recall, used sensor, YMMV... For the ECM input, my logic was the ECM should see the leanest mixture, so I used 2 "precision rectifier" op-amp circuits out of Walter Jung's IC Op-Amp Cookbook into the summing point. For the 0.45V bias supply I used an LM10 which has a built-in 200mV reference, and a 7660 was used for the negative power supply. Since the car isn't finished, and they're switching to an Accel DFI, and the WB circuit has made my circuit obsolete, I have no real world testing results to report, but the ideas may be useful. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 13:45:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:09:38 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:09:38 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Erik Quackenbush tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 09:42 AM 12/6/2001 +0800, Bernd Felsche wrote: > > >You can get CVTs to transmit that amount of troque, but not in a > >car you'd want to put on the road. > You will be able to buy one next year. Audi will be offering a new > CVT on the A4 that can handle the full torque of their standard > engine. They have a new design that uses what looks like a But not yet their more-powerful engines. Multitronic has been available for a year or so. But only for the less-torquey engines. > 2-dimensional drive chain. There are sideways links so the chain > can crawl up and down a sort of "gear cone" towithout slipping. > My vague description is based on a non-technical article I read in > one of the mainstream US car magazines. It's a variation on the van Doorne (sp?) design; it uses a link-belt instead of a vee belt. I remember DAF cars from the 1960's; basic idea is the same but execution is vastly different. The new Mini gets CVT as an option as well. > Combine the CVT with one of the forthcoming 42 volt engine designs > and you'll have a car with no gears, no timing belt (or chain), no > camshaft, and no alternator. The valves will be solenoid operated > which allows infinitely adjustable cam timing. The starter motor > windings will double as the alternator. Imagine changing your > "virtual" camshaft profile by plugging your laptop into the OBD > port and dialing in a longer duration. It makes me feel old. ;{) The other advantage of the 42V electric and some of the new supercaps is that you can eliminate torque variations throughout the revolution, so a four can idle as smoothly as a turbine and flywheel mass will be no more than the windings of the alternator/motor. There's also fully-electric electric power steering and brakes waiting for 42V, as are airconditioning compressors. BMW's producing some cars with gasoline-fueled SOFC APU to run auxiliaries without having to turn the engine. Other than that; not much is changing. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 13:47:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:09:39 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:09:39 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Igor Dorrestijn tapped away at the keyboard with: > > CVTs are in the > > neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10% > Well, maybe the rubberband CVTs from your snowmobile but a metal > pushband is something else. The Williams formula one car was > faster about a second per lap. That doesn't happen by heating your > tranny. Audi's CVT cars are faster accelerating than manual and auto transmission versions; and they use less fuel than the manual. There's still a torque limit. Where can I find out more about the Williams F1 CVT? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 14:39:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:39:01 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:39:01 -0800 From: Charles MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #913 Please take me off the list, your instructions don't work. (Fifth request). On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:00:21 -0800, you wrote: >In this issue: > > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? (longish) > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > RE: Audi R8 > RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > RE: Flame on > >See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the >DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:25:39 +0800 (WST) >From: Bernd Felsche >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> From: "Kevin _" > >>> And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves >>> unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to >>> 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air >>> being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no >>> different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only >>> thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed >>> of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a >>> turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for >>> the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. > >> Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread >> started with street cars, are you still working the street or >> moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a >> street engine. > >Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. >My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. >It's only a bit lumpy at idle. > >>>>If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an >>>>appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The >>>>whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning >>>>an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a >>>>small number of pascals. > >>> Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of >>> a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners >>> it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve >>> closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. > >> At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you >> move back from there? > >Doesn't matter. It's the pressure at the back of the valve that acts >to fill the cylinder. > >>> BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. >>> Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods >>> good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline >>> (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm >>> isn't trivial. > >> To whom? >> I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to >> anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of >> performance that can't be done with engines that would have >> transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a >> game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can >> win. > >Same in all motorsports. > >If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down >into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive >Engineering magazine occasionally. > >Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi >Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers >Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi >Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. >Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:30:42 -0500 >From: "Bruce" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >From: "Bernd Felsche" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > From: "Bernd Felsche" >> > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > > > Marketing. >> > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still >> > > > uses an OHV engine. >> > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable >> > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still >> > > driveable around town? > >> > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. >> Two or three at certain times. >> > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. >> Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > >Again your so far out on a limb as to be talking in abstracts. > > >> High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of >> that price. >> > Try not rewording the question and the answer is rather obvious. >> > > > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on >> > > > bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for >> > > > multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's >> > > > the EPA, in racing it's displacement. >> > > Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? > >Unlimited as in what you can buy at the pump (remember STREET CAR) > >> > So far the legislating branches of the above set the standards for >> > fuel, so you question is mute. >> You mean "moot", don't you? > >No. > >> The more fuel you use, the more you have to carry, or stop >> more frequently to refuel. Both of those are penalties. >> Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? > >Do you realize LeMans Audi cars aren't street cars!. > >> Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their >> direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range >> of engine speeds. > >And we'll all run over to an Audi dealership and buy these exact bits to be >able to use on the street cars were working with. > By the way how close to 400 KmH does your car run?. >Bruce > > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:38:07 -0500 >From: "Bruce" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >From: "Bernd Felsche" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> Bernd Felsche tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > > From: "Bernd Felsche" >> > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> > > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > > > > Marketing. >> > > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still >> > > > > uses an OHV engine. >> > > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable >> > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still >> > > > driveable around town? >> > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. >> > Two or three at certain times. >> > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. >> > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > >> OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was >> thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced >> to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) >> engine. >> Its W-16 engine consists of two very narrow eight-cylinder banks. >> With four turbochargers, this 7993cc gasoline direct injection >> engine has a maximum torque of 1250 Nm between 2200 and 5500 rpm. >> Top speed is 404 kmh (251 mph). >> The technology is very similar to that proven at Le Mans by Audi. >> Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and >> 500 of them a year. > >So how many of these are you or your frineds buying. >300-500 is what, an afternoons work load for a major manufacturer of STREET >cars > >> A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. > >Pre-announced = commerical maybeware?. > >Yep, I firmly stuck on reality, >Bruce > > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:46:23 -0500 >From: "Bruce" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >From: "Bernd Felsche" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > From: "Kevin _" >> >> And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves >> >> unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to >> >> 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air >> >> being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no >> >> different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only >> >> thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed >> >> of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a >> >> turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for >> >> the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. >> > Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread >> > started with street cars, are you still working the street or >> > moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a >> > street engine. > >> Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. >> My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. >> It's only a bit lumpy at idle. > >270d @ .050 clearance? >270 @ .005 maybe. > >> >>>If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an >> >>>appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The >> >>>whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning >> >>>an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a >> >>>small number of pascals. >> >> Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of >> >> a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners >> >> it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve >> >> closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. >> > At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you >> > move back from there? >> Doesn't matter. It's the pressure at the back of the valve that acts >> to fill the cylinder. >> >> BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. >> >> Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods >> >> good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline >> >> (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm >> >> isn't trivial. >> > To whom? >> > I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to >> > anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of >> > performance that can't be done with engines that would have >> > transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a >> > game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can >> > win. > >> Same in all motorsports. > >So we're again going off on tangents. > >> If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down >> into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive >> Engineering magazine occasionally. > >> Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi >> Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers >> Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi >> Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. >> Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) > >We were talking engine technology. >F1 didn't discover multi valves. >Direct injection has been used for years in IH tractors, and the 300SL did >also. >2 models of one manufacurer, OK, but big deal >Bruce > > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:53:25 -0500 >From: "Peter Florance" >Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > >I guess I wanted to simulate sampling front and rear cylinder as if I had a >single sensor on all 6 cylinders instead of one sensor on 3 cylinders. >Crazy? > >Peter > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On >> Behalf Of bcroe@juno.com >> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:40 AM >> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >> Subject: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? >> >> >> A couple of op amp voltage followers could drive a >> pair of resistors to a summing point. But I wonder >> what you want to do with the result? A narrow band >> sensor is not operating in the linear region, and >> summing 2 nonlinear signals is not that meaningful. >> >> The result would mean a lot more from a Wide Band >> sensor. An ECU would not be set up to process a >> summed signal. Putting a pair of WB bar graph >> displays side by side could be useful, I plan to do >> this soon. >> >> Bruce Roe >> >> On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:55:12 -0500 "Peter Florance" >> writes: >> > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) >> > values for >> > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog >> > circuit to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and >> > would like to incorporate it in the front end of the >> > buffers. >> > Also interested in any comments regarding >> > averaging O2 sensors for dual exhaust systems >> > and idle performance (in line 6 engine) >> > Thanks in advance >> > >> > Peter Florance >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without >> the quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:53:23 -0500 >From: "Peter Florance" >Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? (longish) > >Yes as I tried to say below, I found that my Ljet ecu supplies .45 volts at >the input when the sensor is disconnected or cold. I guess I could reverse >engineer it by loading the ECU input with resistors to determine the value >(I'll start with 1.2 meg - thanks Ludis) to see what the resistance works >out to. That seems pretty safe as the bias would be a max of .375 uA. I >opened an extra box but the trace from the pin lead to a hybrid with a cover >riveted to the board. I didn't need to know that badly..... > >AFA averaging, I'm fighting a poor mixture control at idle. I have a sensor >in each down pipe which connect to 3 of in-line cylinders. This a euro car I >converted to lambda and then added a Bosch heated sensor last weekend which >works no better than the un heated (either which can only sample 3 cylinders >currently). The US cars have 6 into 1 manifold (BMW 528i) with single >unheated sensor. My feeling after watching with a scope was there was some >problem with out fast the lambda worked at idle vs. the frequency of the >exhaust pulses of only 3 cylinders. The idle is rough and smells rich. >My thought was to average the sensor with simple linear circuit but I >realize I may be limiting the swing of the output. > > >Eventually it will be a Megasquirt but I'll still have to solve the problem >(or maybe the MS will work better as it may sample faster at idle if that's >the problem). > >Peter Florance >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On >> Behalf Of Bernd Felsche >> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 10:39 PM >> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >> Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? >> >> >> Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: >> >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche >> >> > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) >> > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit >> > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to >> > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. >> > > >> > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage >> > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause >> > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two >> > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the >> > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and >> > > sustained operation. >> > > >> > > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for >> > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) >> > > >> > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the >> > > response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is >> > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to >> > > see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. >> >> > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that provides .45 >> > volts at the sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it >> > disconnected. I've read that's how they sense whether the sensor >> > is working or not. How do they accomplish that? >> >> Probably on the output of the buffer amplifier, internal to the box. >> The sensor's output voltage rises from 0V when it heats up; that >> transition may be used to switch off the bias. >> >> You can check this by measuring the open-circuit voltage at the >> ECU connector, with the lambda disconnected. >> >> The sensor can only source a few micro amps. Trying to run a sizeable >> current through it, which is essential to bias the output directly, >> will destroy the sensor. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without >> the quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:11:34 -0500 >From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >> >> >> > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > >Fuck that, the only car I know that would even come close is the >McLaren F1. A crappy twin turbo or well designed supercharged home >built C5 Corvette could prob get there too. But you would need at >least a 383 stroker and some crazy boost. And would have to change >the gear ratios. Any large displacement modern automobile could be >tweaked into coming at least near 240 MPH. Of course it would take >some serious cash and lots stupidity. Why would anyone want to go >240 fucking MPH. Fucking death wish? >- -- >____________________________________________ >Alvaro Gil >http://www.AlvaroGil.com >'84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi >'97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) >NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student >____________________________________________ >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 02:28:14 -0500 >From: Shannen Durphey >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >Bernd Felsche wrote: > >> >> > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. >> >> Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. >> >> High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of >> that price. > >What are you, on freaking drugs? >For that kind of money, damn near anybody could build a car willing to do that >speed. Go ahead and stretch the definitions beyond reasonable. > >Street car my arse. Ok, 200mph, no problem. Last year's nascar cars are for >sale. Check out the silver state classic, that's where the average joe gets to >run 'em. So it's on a street, and it's a car, so makes it a street car? Ya, >ok. And compared to the Porch it's cheap enough that we can buy a case of beer >and a small motel for the after race celebration. > >Send those happy pills over here. I'd like to see what color the sky really is >in your world. > >> Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and >> 500 of them a year. > >At 300 models per year, the Bugatti hardly qualifies as a production vehicle, >let alone a street car. Bicycle factories produce more units than that. > > >> A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. >Yes, and I read about that car 3 years ago. It was a promised item then. > > >> > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > >> Two or three at certain times. > >OMG! LMAO! >So... kinda pointless, no? > >> > What's a reasonable >> > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still >> > driveable around town? > >$150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. > >They'll never drive that fast anyway. > >Shannen >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:54:04 +0200 >From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com >Subject: RE: Audi R8 > >I think the fact that they didn't have to stop for a new gearbox also >had a part to play. Reliability wins Le Mans, not fuel consumption, >hence the reason Panoz always start well and then fall out. Shame, as a >mad looking car. > >Bill > >- ---- >Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? > >Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their >direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range >of engine speeds. >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:03:57 +0200 >From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com >Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >Because you can. In germany there is the recorded case of a McLaren >owner regularly exceeding 200 on the way to work. > >Also the proliferation of track days in Europe now means that there are >many venues where you can go and take your toy for a good thrashing. > >Sheesh, a petrol head forum where someone is complaining about too much >power and speed > >- -----Original Message----- >From: ext Alvaro Gil [mailto:242Turbo@alvarogil.com] > Of course it would take >some serious cash and lots stupidity. Why would anyone want to go >240 f*****g MPH. F*****g death wish? ------------------------------------------------- Tired of noise from Dulles Airport, BWI or National? Check out www.caan.org and call your Congressman! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sravet@arm.com Thu Dec 6 14:05:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:45:34 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:45:34 -0300 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Iron selection Peter Florance wrote: [regarding the old Weller temp controlled soldering stations] > well. Get one that works as repair parts can get pricey if you need a lot of > them. I got one for $5 at a swap meet, was broken of course. Weller/Cooper at the time would fix/replace the base station for a flat $70 fee. Ended up being a very good deal, I like this iron very much. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From axel_rietschin@compuserve.com Thu Dec 6 14:13:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:48:36 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:48:36 -0300 From: "Axel Rietschin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Dotson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 9:24 PM Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers [...] > Many engines use multi-valve arrangements to increase flow area. The same > benefits go for a turbo'd car as an NA car in this area...more volume into > the cylinder at a given pressure loss, or the same volume into the cylinder > at a lower pressure loss...at the price of less turbulence. Thank you, that was precisely my point. Turbo-ed responds just as well as NA to intake tuning. [...] > If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an appreciable > difference in the way an intake manifold worked. Perfect. What does a turbo then? IMHO it just raises the 'atmosphere' pressure, as seen at the intake. The engine still swallows the same volume of air (a function of its displacement and VE). The turbo just makes that volume 'heavier' but the fluid dynamics at the intake is probably not so drastically altered. [...] > If atmospheric pressure doubled you'd still need to do > this, as exhaust pressure will double accordingly, but with turbocharging > the exhaust pressure increase (it's all absolute pressure here of course) is > small compared to the intake pressure increase. > Tuning the manifold to gain > a small number of pascals pressure will have an insignificant impact when > combined with the already large pressure differential between boost pressure > and exhaust pressure. I disagree. On a perfectly matched turbo-engine setup the exhaust back pressure should be roughly equal to the boost pressure at max power rpm, there is no "large pressure differential between boost pressure and exhaust pressure", at some point exhaust pressure actually becomes higher than boost. --Axel > Craig Dotson > crdotson@vt.edu > 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Dorrestijn@corps.nl Thu Dec 6 14:30:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:48:41 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:48:41 -0300 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Where can I find out more about the Williams F1 CVT? Unfortunately there isn't much on the internet. They put the CVT in the 1993 Williams FW15C car. I can't seem to locate van Doorne's website either. If you really want to know you can always give them a call at +31-13-4640333 or visit their factory in Tilburg, they have the car standing in the entrance hall. Igor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 14:49:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:49:00 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:49:00 -0800 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers "Rausch, Bernd" wrote: > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts throttle > response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the throttle body, > with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so throttle response should > become even better. Way back when Fred Britweisser built a plenum with a water cooled IC inside it. Seemed like a neat idea and he liked it. His WWW page was at: http://www.xephic.dynip.com/ but I haven't been able to connect to it. He did have a lot of cool stuff there, including pictures of a Buick V6 that briefly made 800 hp on a dyno before it exploded. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From kiggly@hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 14:27:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:49:11 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:49:11 -0300 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread started with >street cars, are you still working the street or moving into the race field >I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a street engine. I'm talking 8000-9500 rpm max. Its very common in the I4 world. Look at specs on the larger, high rpm lobes of the VTEC cams and I'm sure toyota stuff also - its in the 225-230 degree range at 0.050" from the factory. Now 270d at 0.039" is huge through if that cam is being used at low rpm's. In my former street car (now race only pretty much), I have cams that are 234/236 at 0.050" and with a well tuned EFI setup its completely smooth down low, it even idles evenly at 1000rpm, it just doesn't have much vacuum (~8-10" at idle) and doesn't make any power before 5000rpm. > > >If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an >appreciable > > >difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The whole question >still > > >seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning an intake you are trying >to > > >increase intake air pressure by a small number of pascals. > > Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of a >valve? > > When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners it can be over >20% > > beyond atmospheric pressure during valve closing. We're certainly not > > talking single Pascals here. > >At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you move back >from there? Why would you care at all what the pressure is anywhere in the intake tract besides the back of the valve during valve closing? That's the only place flow is occurring into the cylinder so it could be -10psi 4" up the runner and it'd make no difference, as long as there is good pressure behind the valve. > > I have to completely disagree on the turbo issue here. Normally with a > > turbo setup you have a huge pressure swing from before spoolup, during > > spoolup, then maintain a good pressure differential for ~3000 rpm, then >HUGE > > PRESSURE INCREASES IN THE EXHAUST. You will see drastic increases in > > exhaust pressure, I've measured as much as 60psi for 23psi in the >intake. > >That has to be about the worlds worst matching of turbo to engine. Yeah, I guess that's what I get for buying and off-the-shelf turbo that's made in mass quantities and sold for my car. Its got a 54 trim compressor wheel, which should flow about 550hp max and be very efficient in the 450hp range. Because of the small turbine side that was coupled to this wheel, it completely chokes itself off at just barely over 400hp. FYI, its a Frankenstein stage 3 in the dsm world. > > BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. Check out >F1 > > stuff before you call everything old and pushrods good. Approximately > > 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline (yes, I do use that term > > loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm isn't trivial. > >To whom? >I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to anything on >the >street yet. They still have reached any level of performance that can't be >done with engines that would have transferable technology to the street. >The rules in F1 are just a game anymore to see who can spend the most for >something that can win. >Bruce There's a 5-10 year lag on all that good stuff. But there are TONS of things that have filtered down from F1. F1 was the first to use a wideband UEGO in a racing condition (Honda in particular), last time I checked that made it down to several of their production cars. More subtly and importantly, there is a gigantic wealth of knowledge about vehicle dynamics gained from motorsports. Learning how to do a good traction control system and a good ABS system (although I still argue the tuning of many production ones) starts best in the motorsports arena. If its a slight competitive advantage in a street car, its really tough for a manufacturer to justify a big budget for it. If it helps winning races so your team can keep its sponsor, you're going to make it a priority or go hungry. The racing world, obviously, is much, much more Darwinistic than development/engineering staffs are at large auto makers. Just my $0.02, Kevin _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From w.shawsr@att.net Thu Dec 6 13:43:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:59:11 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 14:59:11 -0300 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb, Turbo Sunbird, and wb-lcd I sent this last Sunday, but it didn't make it due to the server outage, so here we go again.... I powered up my diy-wb board for the first time yesterday, using a 5711 bulb to simulate the heater load. At first it powered up, gradually increasing voltage to the heater until it reached full power, then remained at full power for about 15 seconds before shutting down. It tripped the thermal overload in the regulator. (This is normal, right?). I added a heat sink to the regulator and got it to power up continuously. Boy, does that regulator get hot! I went to the junkyard to get the connector for the wb-o2 sensor yesterday morning and found them in older Hondas, '88s and '89s, near the brake booster as suggested on the list. Different models may have them in different places, I found one on the firewall on the passenger's side, so look around, they're there. I may be able to light up the diy-wb with a real sensor today! While at the yard I found a Turbo Sunbird convertible that seems to be complete. I asked about taking parts but the guy said he would only sell it complete for $500. It's a bit rough, with rust here and there and the top's a bit ragged. The yard dude said it was there because it blew the head gasket. East Coast Salvage in Haddam, CT if anyone's interested. I've ordered prototype PCBs for the wb-lcd, and parts will be ordered tonight. They should be in next week, I'll keep you posted. bs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 15:11:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:11:21 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:11:21 -0800 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: (944 Technologist) RE: Need Info On Programming ECU So, do you have any information on chipping/interfacing with the LH Jetronic 2.4? I also have what I think is the version number which was on the outside of the ECU box: 0 280 000 563. Thanks, -David -----Original Message----- From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 3:51 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU I thought you had a L-Jetronic. The LH Jetronic does have a CPU. FR Wilk ____________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 11:49 AM Subject: RE: (911 Technologist) Need Info On Programming ECU > There are a number of companies out there selling chips for the 1990 760 > turbo LH Jetronic 2.4 EFI. I don't know how they do it but I'll believe it > when I see it. Your help is much appreciated! -David > > -----Original Message----- > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:28 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > Unfortunately Jetronics are not computerized. They have no chip. It is all > circuitry and no CPU. > > FR Wilk > _____________________________________________ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Goldstein" > To: > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 3:19 PM > Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > My car has the Jetronic Turbo. > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > -David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? > > > > FR Wilk > > ___________________________________ > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Goldstein" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM > > Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > > > > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. > I > > > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware > for > > > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his > Firebird. > > > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess > I'm > > > looking for similar equipment. > > > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > > > -David > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > > quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 15:20:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:20:47 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:20:47 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers He worked on two actually. One for his truck where the I/C was in the manifold but had coolant flowing thru it. Neither made it to actual road testing Bruce > Way back when Fred Britweisser built a plenum with a water cooled IC > inside it. Seemed like a neat idea and he liked it. > His WWW page was at: > http://www.xephic.dynip.com/ > but I haven't been able to connect to it. He did have a lot of cool > stuff there, including pictures of a Buick V6 that briefly made 800 hp > on a dyno before it exploded. > --steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 15:32:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:32:58 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:32:58 -0800 From: Bruce Bowling Subject: Re: MC68HC908GP32 programmer Yes, there is a simple GP32 programmer - go to http://www.mot-sps.com, then do a search for the MC68HC908GP32 and look at the GP32 product page. You will see the applications note links near the bottom - in there is several descriptions for various programmers, including in-circuit setups. - Bruce >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > >- ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C17DF3.4A3FBAA0 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >Anybody know how to make a programmer for a MC68HC908GP32? >Or possably a cheep programmer out there? >- -Blake > - Bruce --------------------------------------------- Bruce A. Bowling bbowling@earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~bbowling --------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 14:53:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:33:30 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:33:30 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Shannen Durphey tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > > > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > > > > High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of > > that price. > > What are you, on freaking drugs? They are streetable cars. That's what was asked. Just because they're espen$ive doesn't mean that they're not streetable. > For that kind of money, damn near anybody could build a car > willing to do that speed. Go ahead and stretch the definitions > beyond reasonable. > Street car my arse. Ok, 200mph, no problem. Last year's nascar > cars are for sale. Check out the silver state classic, that's > where the average joe gets to run 'em. So it's on a street, and > it's a car, so makes it a street car? Ya, ok. And compared to > the Porch it's cheap enough that we can buy a case of beer > and a small motel for the after race celebration. And your 200mph nascars are equipped a full luxury cars as well, meet all emission and crash requirements? They're air conditioned? Leather seats? They go around real corners too? And along normal, bumpy roads? You can drive them down to the corner shop? The Veyron will be a proper, road-going car. > Send those happy pills over here. I'd like to see what color the > sky really is in your world. It's a bit dark at the moment. (1 a.m.) > > Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and > > 500 of them a year. > > At 300 models per year, the Bugatti hardly qualifies as a > production vehicle, let alone a street car. Bicycle factories > produce more units than that. And the McLaren F1? > > A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. > Yes, and I read about that car 3 years ago. It was a promised item then. It's still promised for 2003. See the PR in other message. > > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > > > Two or three at certain times. > > OMG! LMAO! > So... kinda pointless, no? Is it? It's not the 400+ kmh. It's the speeds up to that. > > > What's a reasonable > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > driveable around town? > > $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. ?? $150k US won't buy you one. They'll be around a million Euro. > They'll never drive that fast anyway. Never? The car has enough power to reach that speed so all speeds up to the top are easily within reach. You don't have to drive at top speed. 400kmh will require _very_ special driving skills. Most of the owners will probably never exceed 300kmh. But most cars are never driven at their top speed unless they're lucky enough to be in Germany. Speed limits in most other countries prevent exploiting about 50% of the speed potential of many cars. Bernd Pischetsrieder, former BMW CEO and soon to be VW Group CEO crashed "his" McLaren F1 at something like 300kmh. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Thu Dec 6 13:26:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:34:39 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:34:39 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Oh--gee--can I respond to the 25% losses in an automatic Puullleeasse ? Convert HP to Watts, and you'll quickly find that if a 300HP engine is losing 75HP in the transmission, the thing'll be baked to a crisp on the first road trip. Real losses are in the 5-8% range. With the lockup converters available today, and torque multiplication IN a converter, losses are extremely low. As for racers and automatics--you've obviously not been to the track... Lyndon > From: "Craig Dotson" > Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > > > You don't see many high power CVTs as the people who drive sports cars > > like to change gears manually. > > I think it has something to do with losses. You don't see many racers > with > > auto trannies do you? They're like 20-25% losses. CVTs are in the > > neighborhood of 30%, where manuals are maybe 10%? I haven't seen a good > > figure for auto manuals...the sequential 6spds in motorcycles are said to > be > > about 5% loss. If I could get 15%+ power back by going to a manual from > an > > auto I'd do it...and not just so I'll have something for my left foot to > do. > > Craig Dotson > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 6 15:00:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:35:02 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:35:02 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Igor Dorrestijn tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Where can I find out more about the Williams F1 CVT? > Unfortunately there isn't much on the internet. They put the CVT > in the 1993 Williams FW15C car. I can't seem to locate van > Doorne's website either. If you really want to know you can always > give them a call at +31-13-4640333 or visit their factory in > Tilburg, they have the car standing in the entrance hall. It's a bit of a hike, but I may be able to make it there in 2003 on my next planned European vacation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From cjl169@hotmail.com Thu Dec 6 15:02:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:35:20 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:35:20 -0300 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: RE: Flame on Just wanted to mension that saab has been creating the same type of thing... had it running about a year ago... using a supercharger and 20 some odd psi boost. I'm guessing they're using a new type of compressor-- i'm suspicious that it is a new garrett unit that uses hydrolics---(like a power steering pump)-- to spin the turbine.... Camden snip.. >My particular fave is the VW variable compression head which goes from >14:1 lean burn to 8.5:1 forced induction. Hats off if they can get that >to be reliable. > >Bill end snip _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Thu Dec 6 13:19:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:36:20 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:36:20 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Audi DI Or...replace the timing plate with one that actually pulls the rack at WOT. We make serious torque with the 24 valve mods... Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Dotson" To: Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 6:45 AM Subject: Re: Audi DI > > > Still no launch date for the V10 500lb/ft diesel though > > What's the displacement on that? Seems pretty weak for a 10. The Cummins > 5.9L I6 turbodiesels exceed that number in their stock de-tuned (for > transmission life) trim....slide the timing plate up and pop in new > injectors and you're almost to 1000 ft-lbs. > > Craig Dotson > crdotson@vt.edu > 2002 VT FormulaSAE > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 15:41:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:41:57 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:41:57 -0800 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? rr wrote: > > Check nat-semi.com for the LM1964. It is the O2 Sensor interface > amplifier designed for this purpose. At least the purpose of interfacing > the O2 into additional electronics. It's now known as the LM9044. The data sheet contains a schematic diagram of what's in the chip. Bernd Felsche wrote: > > Probably on the output of the buffer amplifier, internal to the box. > The sensor's output voltage rises from 0V when it heats up; that > transition may be used to switch off the bias. There is no bias on the output, nor is there a bias that gets switched off. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From crdotson@vt.edu Thu Dec 6 16:16:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:10:04 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:10:04 -0300 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > As for racers and automatics--you've obviously not been to the track... What kind of racing are you talking about? Some drag racers use automatics, but that's mainly because they are consistent. In bracket racing consistency wins, not ETs. I've been to autocrosses (SCCA Solo II) and the automatic cars pretty much suck. NASCAR series....don't recall seeing an automatic, not even at the local Winston Weekly track. I do admit in all honesty that IRL/CART/F1 never could hold my interest more than a few minutes. I can't remember the last time I saw a Touring Car race, and Rally racing's just plain rare on TV here so I don't have much experience with it. Rockcrawlers seem to prefer automatics, but that's a whole different ballgame. Sure losses in the transmission create lots of heat. Vehicles with automatics that are used for heavy duty utility or racing duty more often than not are equipped with auxiliary transmission fluid coolers for that reason. Remember your 300HP engine losing 75HP through the tranny only happens to do so at a particular engine speed at WOT, the rest of the time (normal driving) the power through the system is significantly less. The momentarily high heat levels in the transmission are possible because the large fluid volume takes quite a bit of energy to warm up (my truck's automatic holds somewhere from 10-14 quarts IIRC), and the cooler dissipates that through periods of lower power. Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 17:15:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:15:42 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:15:42 -0800 From: "powermaxx" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intro,,,, Street Outlaw (NHRA) looking for Megasquirt EFI Looks like I can still get on the Megasquirt buy list, thanks for the offers guys. Thanks for the concern on the "Mega Motor" sneezing. Did that this year and yes it hurts....$$$$ I wouldn't put it on without rigorous testing first! And as a last resort the SpeedPro could go on at the last minute. Hope the wierd text (HTML???) following first post is fixed, sorry about that. Steve St"RACE"ner (and toys...) {Digest Mode but changing] 73 Challenger "Street Outlaw" 87 GLHS Shelby ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 6 16:57:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:20:35 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:20:35 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Iron selection The wattage is unimportant if you have temperature control. The best irons I have used had temperature control and were about 25 watts so they would do both large and small components on a PCB without burning the board or lifting the runs. I never needed more than 735F at the tip for any circuit board work. 800 degrees is too hot. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of David Gravereaux Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 4:51 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Iron selection Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> wrote: >I have located a Weller 12W iron with an 800 deg fine tip. Would >this be a good choice for the o2 board? >Does anyone have anything bad to say about it? At 40 bucks, I would >like to buy the correct iron the first time.... > >Thanks... I prefer the Weller temperature compensated irons with ptr-7 tip for small board work. But that's just me :) -- David Gravereaux Tomasoft Engineering, Hayward, CA ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From 242Turbo@alvarogil.com Thu Dec 6 16:56:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:21:49 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:21:49 -0300 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >I see your not a member of the Politically Correct Crowd, or at least not >all the time. >Bruce > I can't beleive it, a Volvo Owner talking like that. LOL Eh. Sorry. I am studying for finals, you know how your mind gets. That e-mail was intended for much less civil list. -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From 242Turbo@alvarogil.com Thu Dec 6 17:06:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:40:01 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 17:40:01 -0300 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) I am a huge fan of the CVT. It is a mechanical marvel. These new automotive CVT are based on new technology. They have come a long way from the simple go cart or snow mobile CVT. Some use new variable friction lubricants... Automotive Engineering magazine had a few articles if you are interested in a more in depth article than the consumer car mags... -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Thu Dec 6 14:51:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:24:16 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 18:24:16 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) -> Combine the CVT with one of the forthcoming 42 volt engine designs -> and you'll have a car with no gears, Take a look at the Owen Magnetic cars of 80 years or so ago. They used an eddy current coupler with a variable slip rate. Quite efficient and reliable, particularly when compared to the gear technology of the day. It was the most sophisticated device of its type I've encountered; the eddy current brakes in some cranes and the "Telma" retarders used by some large trucks operate on the same principle. The Owen didn't have a lockup method, but the slip was only 60 to 100 RPM, the same as an average non-lockup automatic transmission torque convertor. The Magnetic had no torque multiplication ability, of course, being just a variable slip device, but you could run the engine up to the torque peak and adjust the transmission's hand lever to adjust the load. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 19:04:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 19:04:35 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 19:04:35 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) I'm sorry--you can't lose 75HP in the transmission. No amount of cooler would dissipate that kind of heat. A factory cooler is nothing more than a loop of tubing in the radiator...not much of a cooler at any rate. Even an aftermarket self regulating cooler with 12 litres wouldn't handle 56,000 watts. That's enough energy to melt 3/4 ton block of ice in an hour ! Auto trans are so fluid "fussy" that even lowering a 190F ATF temp by 10 degrees F will double the fluid life. Lyndon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 20:09:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:09:31 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:09:31 -0800 From: Kazuhisa Nishishita Subject: D8 of DIY WB Hi, I'm soldering the board. I ordered LM285Z-1.2, as the Excel file lists. However, the other column listed LM285Z. Which is correct? Can I use LM285Z-1.2? Thanks, KAZU ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sravet@arm.com Thu Dec 6 19:43:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:14:04 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:14:04 -0300 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers "Rausch, Bernd" wrote: > I do not understand why integrating the IC in the plenum hurts throttle > response. In a "classic" setup I have the IC before the throttle body, > with extra piping and manifolds on the IC, so throttle response should > become even better. Way back when Fred Britweisser built a plenum with a water cooled IC inside it. Seemed like a neat idea and he liked it. His WWW page was at: http://www.xephic.dynip.com/ but I haven't been able to connect to it. He did have a lot of cool stuff there, including pictures of a Buick V6 that briefly made 800 hp on a dyno before it exploded. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From charlesmorris@erols.com Thu Dec 6 19:38:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:15:00 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:15:00 -0300 From: Charles MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #913 Please take me off the list, your instructions don't work. (Fifth request). On Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:00:21 -0800, you wrote: >In this issue: > > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? (longish) > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > RE: Audi R8 > RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > RE: Flame on > >See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the >DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:25:39 +0800 (WST) From: Bernd Felsche >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> From: "Kevin _" > >>> And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves >>> unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to >>> 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air >>> being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no >>> different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only >>> thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed >>> of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a >>> turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for >>> the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. > >> Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread >> started with street cars, are you still working the street or >> moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a >> street engine. > >Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. >My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. >It's only a bit lumpy at idle. > >>>>If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an >>>>appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The >>>>whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning >>>>an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a >>>>small number of pascals. > >>> Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of >>> a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners >>> it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve >>> closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. > >> At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you >> move back from there? > >Doesn't matter. It's the pressure at the back of the valve that acts >to fill the cylinder. > >>> BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. >>> Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods >>> good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline >>> (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm >>> isn't trivial. > >> To whom? >> I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to >> anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of >> performance that can't be done with engines that would have >> transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a >> game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can >> win. > >Same in all motorsports. > >If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down >into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive >Engineering magazine occasionally. > >Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi >Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers >Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi >Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. >Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:30:42 -0500 From: "Bruce" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > From: "Bernd Felsche" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > From: "Bernd Felsche" >> > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > > > Marketing. >> > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still >> > > > uses an OHV engine. >> > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable >> > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still >> > > driveable around town? > >> > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. >> Two or three at certain times. >> > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. >> Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > >Again your so far out on a limb as to be talking in abstracts. > > >> High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of >> that price. >> > Try not rewording the question and the answer is rather obvious. >> > > > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on >> > > > bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for >> > > > multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's >> > > > the EPA, in racing it's displacement. >> > > Ahhh... unlimited fuel available? > >Unlimited as in what you can buy at the pump (remember STREET CAR) > >> > So far the legislating branches of the above set the standards for >> > fuel, so you question is mute. >> You mean "moot", don't you? > >No. > >> The more fuel you use, the more you have to carry, or stop >> more frequently to refuel. Both of those are penalties. >> Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? > >Do you realize LeMans Audi cars aren't street cars!. > >> Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their >> direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range >> of engine speeds. > >And we'll all run over to an Audi dealership and buy these exact bits to be >able to use on the street cars were working with. > By the way how close to 400 KmH does your car run?. >Bruce > > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:38:07 -0500 From: "Bruce" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > From: "Bernd Felsche" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> Bernd Felsche tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > > From: "Bernd Felsche" >> > > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> > > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > > > > Marketing. >> > > > > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still >> > > > > uses an OHV engine. >> > > > Depends on what you call reasonably priced. What's a reasonable >> > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still >> > > > driveable around town? >> > > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. >> > Two or three at certain times. >> > > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. >> > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > >> OOPS... shocking cockup.... it's less than US$1 million... (I was >> thinking in Aussie dollars) One million Euro is the price announced >> to the Veyron EB 16.4 with the less-powerful 1001 bhp (736 kW) >> engine. >> Its W-16 engine consists of two very narrow eight-cylinder banks. >> With four turbochargers, this 7993cc gasoline direct injection >> engine has a maximum torque of 1250 Nm between 2200 and 5500 rpm. >> Top speed is 404 kmh (251 mph). >> The technology is very similar to that proven at Le Mans by Audi. >> Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and >> 500 of them a year. > >So how many of these are you or your frineds buying. >300-500 is what, an afternoons work load for a major manufacturer of STREET >cars > >> A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. > >Pre-announced = commerical maybeware?. > >Yep, I firmly stuck on reality, >Bruce > > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:46:23 -0500 From: "Bruce" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > From: "Bernd Felsche" >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > From: "Kevin _" >> >> And when you're making a high rpm engine you keep the valves >> >> unseated for over 300 cranshaft degrees. Usually about 250 to >> >> 260 degrees for 0.050" valve lift or more. The more/less air >> >> being packed at a certain time during the intake stroke is no >> >> different at all for a turbo or non-turbo engine. The only >> >> thing you design slightly differently for a turbo is the speed >> >> of sound is higher because the intake air temp is higher in a >> >> turbo application. Thus, you need slightly longer runners for >> >> the same Helmholtz rpm, but its nearly inconsequential. >> > Higher rpm, OK, how high are you talking about. The thread >> > started with street cars, are you still working the street or >> > moving into the race field I'd hardly call 250d at .050 as a >> > street engine. > >> Depends on number of cylinders and method of induction. >> My 4-cylinder car's NA with 270 degrees and more than 10mm lift. >> It's only a bit lumpy at idle. > >270d @ .050 clearance? >270 @ .005 maybe. > >> >>>If atmospheric pressure doubled, I don't think it will make an >> >>>appreciable difference in the way an intake manifold worked. The >> >>>whole question still seems inconsequential to me, since by tuning >> >>>an intake you are trying to increase intake air pressure by a >> >>>small number of pascals. >> >> Have you ever datalogged and seen pressure pulses at the back of >> >> a valve? When its all tuned right with the proper sized runners >> >> it can be over 20% beyond atmospheric pressure during valve >> >> closing. We're certainly not talking single Pascals here. >> > At the back of the valve, OK, and how fast does that decay as you >> > move back from there? >> Doesn't matter. It's the pressure at the back of the valve that acts >> to fill the cylinder. >> >> BTW - Bruce said he was looking for 'new' stuff in engines. >> >> Check out F1 stuff before you call everything old and pushrods >> >> good. Approximately 300hp/liter naturally aspirated on gasoline >> >> (yes, I do use that term loosely) and revving to near 20k rpm >> >> isn't trivial. >> > To whom? >> > I haven't seen any of that wizz bang technology filtering to >> > anything on the street yet. They still have reached any level of >> > performance that can't be done with engines that would have >> > transferable technology to the street. The rules in F1 are just a >> > game anymore to see who can spend the most for something that can >> > win. > >> Same in all motorsports. > >So we're again going off on tangents. > >> If you want to see how much of that technology is filtering down >> into production cars, I suggest you browse through SAE's Automotive >> Engineering magazine occasionally. > >> Cars built on space-frame: yes - FIAT and Audi >> Multi-valve engines with variable manifolds: yes - most manufacturers >> Dierect gasoline injection: yes - Toyota, VW-Audi, Mitsubishi >> Turbo-multivalve engines: yes - Volvo, VW-Audi, Subaru, etc. >> Independent cylinder throttling: yes - BMW (3 series and 7-series) > >We were talking engine technology. >F1 didn't discover multi valves. >Direct injection has been used for years in IH tractors, and the 300SL did >also. >2 models of one manufacurer, OK, but big deal >Bruce > > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:53:25 -0500 From: "Peter Florance" >Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? > >I guess I wanted to simulate sampling front and rear cylinder as if I had a >single sensor on all 6 cylinders instead of one sensor on 3 cylinders. >Crazy? > >Peter > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On >> Behalf Of bcroe@juno.com >> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 12:40 AM >> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >> Subject: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? >> >> >> A couple of op amp voltage followers could drive a >> pair of resistors to a summing point. But I wonder >> what you want to do with the result? A narrow band >> sensor is not operating in the linear region, and >> summing 2 nonlinear signals is not that meaningful. >> >> The result would mean a lot more from a Wide Band >> sensor. An ECU would not be set up to process a >> summed signal. Putting a pair of WB bar graph >> displays side by side could be useful, I plan to do >> this soon. >> >> Bruce Roe >> >> On Wed, 5 Dec 2001 19:55:12 -0500 "Peter Florance" >> writes: >> > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) >> > values for >> > O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog >> > circuit to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and >> > would like to incorporate it in the front end of the >> > buffers. >> > Also interested in any comments regarding >> > averaging O2 sensors for dual exhaust systems >> > and idle performance (in line 6 engine) >> > Thanks in advance >> > >> > Peter Florance >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without >> the quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 00:53:23 -0500 From: "Peter Florance" >Subject: RE: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? (longish) > >Yes as I tried to say below, I found that my Ljet ecu supplies .45 volts at >the input when the sensor is disconnected or cold. I guess I could reverse >engineer it by loading the ECU input with resistors to determine the value >(I'll start with 1.2 meg - thanks Ludis) to see what the resistance works >out to. That seems pretty safe as the bias would be a max of .375 uA. I >opened an extra box but the trace from the pin lead to a hybrid with a cover >riveted to the board. I didn't need to know that badly..... > >AFA averaging, I'm fighting a poor mixture control at idle. I have a sensor >in each down pipe which connect to 3 of in-line cylinders. This a euro car I >converted to lambda and then added a Bosch heated sensor last weekend which >works no better than the un heated (either which can only sample 3 cylinders >currently). The US cars have 6 into 1 manifold (BMW 528i) with single >unheated sensor. My feeling after watching with a scope was there was some >problem with out fast the lambda worked at idle vs. the frequency of the >exhaust pulses of only 3 cylinders. The idle is rough and smells rich. >My thought was to average the sensor with simple linear circuit but I >realize I may be limiting the swing of the output. > > >Eventually it will be a Megasquirt but I'll still have to solve the problem >(or maybe the MS will work better as it may sample faster at idle if that's >the problem). > >Peter Florance >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On >> Behalf Of Bernd Felsche >> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 10:39 PM >> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >> Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? >> >> >> Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: >> >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche >> >> > > Peter Florance tapped away at the keyboard with: >> > > > Anyone have any idea of typical ECU pullup resistor (to ~ .45V) >> > > > values for O2 sensors inputs? I'm trying to make a analog circuit >> > > > to average 2 sensors for my L-jet box and would like to >> > > > incorporate it in the front end of the buffers. >> > > >> > > The "pullup resistors" would be infinite. The sensor is a voltage >> > > cell; it provides a voltage. Attempting to bias the sensor can cause >> > > damage to the sensor. If you want to level-shift or add/average two >> > > sensor inputs, the easiest solution is to use op amps to perform the >> > > task. Their high input impedance ensures minimum current draw and >> > > sustained operation. >> > > >> > > > Also interested in any comments regarding averaging O2 sensors for >> > > > dual exhaust systems and idle performance (in line 6 engine) >> > > >> > > Before you go and build a simple adder circuit however, look at the >> > > response curves and the consequences of what will happen if one is >> > > receiving rich and the other a lean mixture. The ECU needs then to >> > > see a constant switching between the levels for correct operation. >> >> > On my L jet box there is some sort of 'bias' that provides .45 >> > volts at the sensor input before the sensor warms up or if it >> > disconnected. I've read that's how they sense whether the sensor >> > is working or not. How do they accomplish that? >> >> Probably on the output of the buffer amplifier, internal to the box. >> The sensor's output voltage rises from 0V when it heats up; that >> transition may be used to switch off the bias. >> >> You can check this by measuring the open-circuit voltage at the >> ECU connector, with the lambda disconnected. >> >> The sensor can only source a few micro amps. Trying to run a sizeable >> current through it, which is essential to bias the output directly, >> will destroy the sensor. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without >> the quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> > >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 01:11:34 -0500 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >> >> >> > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. > >Fuck that, the only car I know that would even come close is the >McLaren F1. A crappy twin turbo or well designed supercharged home >built C5 Corvette could prob get there too. But you would need at >least a 383 stroker and some crazy boost. And would have to change >the gear ratios. Any large displacement modern automobile could be >tweaked into coming at least near 240 MPH. Of course it would take >some serious cash and lots stupidity. Why would anyone want to go >240 fucking MPH. Fucking death wish? >- -- >____________________________________________ >Alvaro Gil >http://www.AlvaroGil.com >'84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi >'97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) >NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student >____________________________________________ >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 02:28:14 -0500 From: Shannen Durphey >Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >Bernd Felsche wrote: > >> >> > 240 MPH, OK what even streetable car can do that?. >> >> Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. >> >> High-end production Porsches can exceed 320kmh at less than half of >> that price. > >What are you, on freaking drugs? >For that kind of money, damn near anybody could build a car willing to do that >speed. Go ahead and stretch the definitions beyond reasonable. > >Street car my arse. Ok, 200mph, no problem. Last year's nascar cars are for >sale. Check out the silver state classic, that's where the average joe gets to >run 'em. So it's on a street, and it's a car, so makes it a street car? Ya, >ok. And compared to the Porch it's cheap enough that we can buy a case of beer >and a small motel for the after race celebration. > >Send those happy pills over here. I'd like to see what color the sky really is >in your world. > >> Production starts in 2003. Bugatti expect to sell between 300 and >> 500 of them a year. > >At 300 models per year, the Bugatti hardly qualifies as a production vehicle, >let alone a street car. Bicycle factories produce more units than that. > > >> A 1200bhp version has been pre-announced. >Yes, and I read about that car 3 years ago. It was a promised item then. > > >> > 400 kmh is approachable on how many streets?. > >> Two or three at certain times. > >OMG! LMAO! >So... kinda pointless, no? > >> > What's a reasonable >> > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still >> > driveable around town? > >$150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. > >They'll never drive that fast anyway. > >Shannen >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:54:04 +0200 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com >Subject: RE: Audi R8 > >I think the fact that they didn't have to stop for a new gearbox also >had a part to play. Reliability wins Le Mans, not fuel consumption, >hence the reason Panoz always start well and then fall out. Shame, as a >mad looking car. > >Bill > >- ---- >Do you realize why Audi won the 24 hour Le Mans? > >Because they were more fuel-efficient, saving a fuel stop and their >direct fuel injection also gave them more torque over a wider range >of engine speeds. >- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >------------------------------ > >Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:03:57 +0200 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com >Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >Because you can. In germany there is the recorded case of a McLaren >owner regularly exceeding 200 on the way to work. > >Also the proliferation of track days in Europe now means that there are >many venues where you can go and take your toy for a good thrashing. > >Sheesh, a petrol head forum where someone is complaining about too much >power and speed > >- -----Original Message----- From: ext Alvaro Gil [mailto:242Turbo@alvarogil.com] > Of course it would take >some serious cash and lots stupidity. Why would anyone want to go >240 f*****g MPH. F*****g death wish? ------------------------------------------------- Tired of noise from Dulles Airport, BWI or National? Check out www.caan.org and call your Congressman! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 20:43:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:43:14 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 20:43:14 -0800 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > Marketing. > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an > OHV engine. What is this "best performing Reasonably priced car" that you speak so highly of? > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the > manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves etc., is > due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing it's displacement. Please correct me if I'm wrong - EFI came from EPA, as opposed to multi-valve coming from EPA. Mos. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bbowling@earthlink.net Thu Dec 6 20:32:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:10:02 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:10:02 -0300 From: Bruce Bowling Subject: Re: MC68HC908GP32 programmer Yes, there is a simple GP32 programmer - go to http://www.mot-sps.com, then do a search for the MC68HC908GP32 and look at the GP32 product page. You will see the applications note links near the bottom - in there is several descriptions for various programmers, including in-circuit setups. - Bruce >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > >- ------=_NextPart_000_0038_01C17DF3.4A3FBAA0 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" >Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > >Anybody know how to make a programmer for a MC68HC908GP32? >Or possably a cheep programmer out there? >- -Blake > - Bruce --------------------------------------------- Bruce A. Bowling bbowling@earthlink.net http://home.earthlink.net/~bbowling --------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 6 20:20:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:20:24 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:20:24 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers He worked on two actually. One for his truck where the I/C was in the manifold but had coolant flowing thru it. Neither made it to actual road testing Bruce > Way back when Fred Britweisser built a plenum with a water cooled IC > inside it. Seemed like a neat idea and he liked it. > His WWW page was at: > http://www.xephic.dynip.com/ > but I haven't been able to connect to it. He did have a lot of cool > stuff there, including pictures of a Buick V6 that briefly made 800 hp > on a dyno before it exploded. > --steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From davidmga@netzero.net Thu Dec 6 20:10:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:23:41 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:23:41 -0300 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: (944 Technologist) RE: Need Info On Programming ECU So, do you have any information on chipping/interfacing with the LH Jetronic 2.4? I also have what I think is the version number which was on the outside of the ECU box: 0 280 000 563. Thanks, -David -----Original Message----- From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 3:51 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU I thought you had a L-Jetronic. The LH Jetronic does have a CPU. FR Wilk ____________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Goldstein" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 11:49 AM Subject: RE: (911 Technologist) Need Info On Programming ECU > There are a number of companies out there selling chips for the 1990 760 > turbo LH Jetronic 2.4 EFI. I don't know how they do it but I'll believe it > when I see it. Your help is much appreciated! -David > > -----Original Message----- > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 3:28 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > Unfortunately Jetronics are not computerized. They have no chip. It is all > circuitry and no CPU. > > FR Wilk > _____________________________________________ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Goldstein" > To: > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 3:19 PM > Subject: RE: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > My car has the Jetronic Turbo. > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > -David > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: 944Technologist [SMTP:f_wilk@hotmail.com] > > Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:03 PM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > Is it a Motronic (BOSCH# 0 261 200 026) or Jetronic Turbo 760? > > > > FR Wilk > > ___________________________________ > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "David Goldstein" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:14 PM > > Subject: Need Info On Programming ECU > > > > > > > I would like to program a new chip for my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. > I > > > would appreciate any leads on where to get the software and hardware > for > > > the project. A friend of mine is programming a new chip for his > Firebird. > > > One device I know he is using is an Intronics EEPROM burner. I guess > I'm > > > looking for similar equipment. > > > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > > > -David > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > > quotes) > > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ludis@cruzers.com Thu Dec 6 20:39:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:32:14 -0300 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 21:32:14 -0300 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 sensor pullup resistor values? rr wrote: > > Check nat-semi.com for the LM1964. It is the O2 Sensor interface > amplifier designed for this purpose. At least the purpose of interfacing > the O2 into additional electronics. It's now known as the LM9044. The data sheet contains a schematic diagram of what's in the chip. Bernd Felsche wrote: > > Probably on the output of the buffer amplifier, internal to the box. > The sensor's output voltage rises from 0V when it heats up; that > transition may be used to switch off the bias. There is no bias on the output, nor is there a bias that gets switched off. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 6 23:59:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:59:20 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 23:59:20 -0800 From: "ivan" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: gm idle valve Hi I wander if anyone knows how to controll gm type idle stabilisor valve looks like screw type. connector has 4 pins. any help will be apprichated Ivan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 00:15:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 00:15:22 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 00:15:22 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: SAAB variable compression Oops sorry. Still wacky -----Original Message----- From: ext Shirley, Mark R [mailto:MarkRShirley@eaton.com] That variable compression engine was developed by SAAB, not VW. It was in Automotive Engineering last year. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 01:12:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:12:12 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:12:12 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Frederic Breitwieser Doas anyone has a e-mail address of Frederic ? His website seems to be down. Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Freitag, 7. Dezember 2001 00:21 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers He worked on two actually. One for his truck where the I/C was in the manifold but had coolant flowing thru it. Neither made it to actual road testing Bruce > Way back when Fred Britweisser built a plenum with a water cooled IC > inside it. Seemed like a neat idea and he liked it. > His WWW page was at: > http://www.xephic.dynip.com/ > but I haven't been able to connect to it. He did have a lot of cool > stuff there, including pictures of a Buick V6 that briefly made 800 hp > on a dyno before it exploded. > --steve ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 01:12:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:12:48 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:12:48 -0800 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve ivan wrote: > > I wander if anyone knows how to controll gm type idle stabilisor valve > looks like screw type. connector has 4 pins. > any help will be apprichated It is a stepper motor. There are two windings. You will need two H-bridge drivers. You need to apply "12" volts to the windings in various polarities: Winding A Winding B + + + - - - - + + + ... To reverse the direction, repeat the pattern in the opposite order. To get extra steps, try this sequence (GM doesn't do this): Winding A Winding B + + + off + - off - - - - off - + off + + + ... -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 01:23:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:23:44 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 01:23:44 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Spark plugs Hi, Back to DIY with a quick theory question on spark plugs. I was reading some conjecture somewhere that plugs with >1 ground strap actually shroud the spark and that you would get improved performance by grinding off the extra straps. Proviso being that if you go from 4 straps to 1 you also get a 4:1 drop in plug life. On the face of it this sounds correct, but my spark propagation theory is lacking a tad so I wondered if the old hands (OK Bruce) had any thoughts or practical experience on this. On a related topic for those of us who are still new to the arcane arts, is there a good primer on how to tell if you plugs are too hot/cold. It seems to be one of those areas where it's deemed that if you don't know then you shouldn't be messing with them. All I know is that mine are well worn after 2000 miles, which seems to indicate something is wrong. Rgds Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 02:01:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 02:01:51 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 02:01:51 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve Ludis Langens wrote: > > It is a stepper motor. I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 02:30:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 02:30:05 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 02:30:05 -0800 From: dave.johnson@gb.abb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Megasquirt Injector PWM How does the pwm for current limiting affect the pw timing of the injector squirt? By using pwm doesn't this create an error in that the calculated squirt duration is effectively made shorter by the pwm? Have I missed something? Regards Dave ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 06:22:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:22:35 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:22:35 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB The LM285Z-1.2 is correct. BobR. Kazuhisa Nishishita wrote: > Hi, I'm soldering the board. > I ordered LM285Z-1.2, as the Excel file lists. > However, the other column listed LM285Z. Which is > correct? Can I use LM285Z-1.2? > Thanks, > KAZU > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 06:24:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:24:50 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:24:50 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At 3:42 PM 12/7/01, Mos wrote: >On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > >> >> Marketing. >> The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an >> OHV engine. > > >What is this "best performing Reasonably priced car" that you speak so >highly of? > >> Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the >> manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves etc., is >> due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing it's displacement. > >Please correct me if I'm wrong - EFI came from EPA, as opposed to >multi-valve coming from EPA. > >Mos. You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC and DOHC has. Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far as street motors are concerned . Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 06:25:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:25:37 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:25:37 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs From: Subject: Spark plugs > Back to DIY with a quick theory question on spark plugs. I was reading > some conjecture > somewhere that plugs with >1 ground strap actually shroud the spark and > that you would get improved performance by grinding off the extra > straps. Proviso being that if you go from 4 straps to 1 you also get a > 4:1 drop in plug life. If the erosion rate of the plug is what is limiting it's service life. > On a related topic for those of us who are still new to the arcane arts, > is there a good primer on how to tell if you plugs are too hot/cold. Examine the center porclean to center electrode area, on a new plug, closely, you'll notice no (most generally) bonding goo being exposed there. If you used plug has the appearance of an excessive (any more then was there originally), goo showing the plug is too hot. If the side electrode has a *fish scale* appearing blue / green hue to it it's too hot. One other sometimes is the rounding off of the center electrode quickly could be an indicator of too hot of plug. If your absolutely sure of your AFR, and running conservative timing, and your still seeing detonation sights on the plug, you might want to try a colder plug. >It seems to be one of those areas where it's deemed that if you don't know > then you shouldn't be messing with them. All I know is that mine are > well worn after 2000 miles, which seems to indicate something is wrong. Rarely will going with a cooler then oem plug cause you any serious grief. If in doubt, just try a set, and then pull em and take a look. If motor get real cold blooded, ot the plugs are too dark well, the warmer ones were in fact right. All spark plugs do is supply an air gap for where a spark may occur. They vary in design and materials, but when all is said an done, that's it. A plug will erode. Bits and ions are generated from the material for the spark to follow. A **soft** easily erodable plug will do that well. But life will be short. A harder plug will require a little longer for the ion path to occur, and require a slightly higher voltage for it too happen. All any plug can do is help compensate for a poor ignition system. If the basic system is fine then you should be able to run a hard material plug, just fine (Autolite). In hardness of side eletrodes in conventional plugs you have Autolite, AC, and then the others. On a street car projected nose plugs will help with being resistant to fouling. On a hypo engine you want to get the center electrode out of the chamber so it doesn't help introduce any detonation. If someone get the systems right would be nice to have surface gaps plugs. Problem with most (if not all) surface gaps is that they have so little heat in them that they can foul easily. A fast rise ignition system can help min that. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. > Rgds > Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 06:37:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:37:51 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:37:51 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve Peter Gargano tapped away at the keyboard with: > Ludis Langens wrote: > > > > It is a stepper motor. > I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating > these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get > "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than > cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? I've had the idle stabilizer in my Golf (it's an oscillating type) out once every year of so for cleaning - after buying a replacement after two year ($450!!). So I thought it worthwhile to try to keep it clean. The replacement valve has held up now for about 8 years. First of all; clean the bugger. A good soaking in carby cleaner. (Some people say brake cleaner is better; it might clean faster but seems way too agressive.) Send an apprentice down to the corner shop and buy a Magnum Classic icecream. Enjoy. Then use the paddle to scrape away any deposits that remain in the valve and flush again. A few drops of engine oil on the valve certainly won't hurt. Just a few. Too much oil will attract all sorts of buildup. I'm trying a secret formulation that supposedly works better than engine oil and doesn't develop into a sticky surface in a short time. It's NOT silicone-based, or PTFE. I'll see what it's like in another few months. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 06:41:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:41:43 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:41:43 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Spark plugs Bruce, Thanks for that. I have new plugs in the post and will monitor them. I have heared good things about the beatings-proofness of the autolites, but have to mail order them. Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:26 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Spark plugs Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 06:42:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:42:11 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:42:11 -0800 From: "Axel Rietschin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:25 PM Subject: Re: Spark plugs [...] > If your absolutely sure of your AFR, and running conservative timing, and > your still seeing detonation sights on the plug, you might want to try a > colder plug. More porclean, less volume, higher CR, more knock? :-) --Axel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 06:42:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:42:50 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:42:50 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Spark plugs At 11:22 AM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >Hi, > >Back to DIY with a quick theory question on spark plugs. I was reading >some conjecture >somewhere that plugs with >1 ground strap actually shroud the spark and >that you would get improved performance by grinding off the extra >straps. Proviso being that if you go from 4 straps to 1 you also get a >4:1 drop in plug life. > >On the face of it this sounds correct, but my spark propagation theory >is lacking a tad so I wondered if the old hands (OK Bruce) had any >thoughts or practical experience on this. > >On a related topic for those of us who are still new to the arcane arts, >is there a good primer on how to tell if you plugs are too hot/cold. It >seems to be one of those areas where it's deemed that if you don't know >then you shouldn't be messing with them. All I know is that mine are >well worn after 2000 miles, which seems to indicate something is wrong. > >Rgds > >Bill Is this in a piston or rotary engine, Bill ?? Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 06:50:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:50:32 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:50:32 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 3:42 PM 12/7/01, Mos wrote: > >On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > >> Marketing. > >> The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an > >> OHV engine. > > > > > >What is this "best performing Reasonably priced car" that you speak so > >highly of? > > > >> Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on > >> bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for > >> multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's > >> the EPA, in racing it's displacement. > >Please correct me if I'm wrong - EFI came from EPA, as opposed to > >multi-valve coming from EPA. > You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came > from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC > and DOHC has. > Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows > reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to > both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow > higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve > timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far > as street motors are concerned . Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and to set themselves apart from the crowd. Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 06:51:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:51:55 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 06:51:55 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Spark plugs The rotary. The GM V6 just gets new plugs every 20-30K. ----- Is this in a piston or rotary engine, Bill ?? Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 07:14:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:14:38 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:14:38 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Now we have strayed into market expectations. In US, those who owned their first cars before 1974 had BIG engines, low revs, autos, megatorque etc. In Europe we had piddly little 750cc side valves with 4 speed manuals. Added to which driving styles are very different, as the roads are very different. Upshot being, at least in Europe, we like 4-pot screamers. Or to put it another way, In UK we don't get it about the 'vette. In US they don't get it about the Lotus 7. Crass oversimplification, but a kernel of truth I believe that ya pays and ya takes ya choice. Having lived in the USA, I now understand 'vettes, harleys and boat-like suspension Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows > reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to > both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow > higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve > timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far > as street motors are concerned . Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and to set themselves apart from the crowd. Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 07:15:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:15:42 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:15:42 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came >> from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC >> and DOHC has. > >> Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows >> reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to >> both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow >> higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve >> timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far >> as street motors are concerned . > >Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, >Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of >technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and >to set themselves apart from the crowd. > >Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already >exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. Perhaps I should have said "mass market" cars, rather than "street" cars. Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc brakes in competition! Greg (raced an Alfa Guilia Spider Abnormale and tuned a GTZ for years, both of which were very quick indeed (especially the TZ), but both of which also lost REGULARLY to pushrod motored Cobras--- although NOT to Porsh*ts) (Also once had a pal who was a member of Ecurie Ecosse, if you want to argue the particulars of Jags !) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 07:19:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:19:34 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:19:34 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Trouble is so many have no idea of what better actually means. Bruce Brutal snippage From: "Bernd Felsche" > Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already > exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 07:20:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:20:48 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:20:48 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Spark plugs At 4:51 PM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >The rotary. The GM V6 just gets new plugs every 20-30K. >----- >Is this in a piston or rotary engine, Bill ?? > >Greg Rotaries tend to be a particular b*tch on plugs--as the plugs never get a chance to cool off during the "overlap" and intake portions of of the cycle, as they do in a piston engine. For a rotary, I would say go absolutely as cold as you can get without fouling, and also to as erosion resistant a plug as you can find--yep, Autolites are pretty good in this regard. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 07:37:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:37:44 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:37:44 -0800 From: Kazuhisa Nishishita Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB Thanks. but I typed wrong number. LM285Z-1.2 or LM385Z-1.2? Kazu >The LM285Z-1.2 is correct. > >BobR. > >Kazuhisa Nishishita wrote: > >> Hi, I'm soldering the board. >> I ordered LM285Z-1.2, as the Excel file lists. >> However, the other column listed LM285Z. Which is >> correct? Can I use LM285Z-1.2? >> Thanks, >> KAZU ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 07:58:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:58:33 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 07:58:33 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At 5:14 PM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >Now we have strayed into market expectations. > >In US, those who owned their first cars before 1974 had BIG engines, low >revs, autos, megatorque etc. In Europe we had piddly little 750cc side >valves with 4 speed manuals. Added to which driving styles are very >different, as the roads are very different. Upshot being, at least in >Europe, we like 4-pot screamers. > >Or to put it another way, In UK we don't get it about the 'vette. In US >they don't get it about the Lotus 7. Crass oversimplification, but a >kernel of truth > >I believe that ya pays and ya takes ya choice. Having lived in the USA, >I now understand 'vettes, harleys and boat-like suspension > >Bill We also seem to have neglected to mention that the near confiscatory displacement taxes, such as are common in Europe and Japan (and which are, no doubt, a product of the Labor/Commie Party Axis) present every bit as real an artificial displacement limitation as many racing formulas do ! Large displacement, compactly packaged, torquey engines with tall gears tend to win in most categories, both performance and economic. Including first cost, durability, and acceleration. Fuel economy over long distances is on a par with small engines, the one weakness is idling in heavy traffic--but lots of power accessories, as is commonly the case in the US market, tends to even this one out as well. If you think power (or torque) to weight ratio is a problem for the classic US large displacement V-8 design, look into some of the most fully developed iterations of the breed, such as the Buick 455 or the Cad 500 !!! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 08:39:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 08:39:59 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 08:39:59 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers bill.shurvinton@nokia.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Now we have strayed into market expectations. > > In US, those who owned their first cars before 1974 had BIG engines, low > revs, autos, megatorque etc. In Europe we had piddly little 750cc side > valves with 4 speed manuals. Added to which driving styles are very 1974 - it was predominately overhead valves if not overhead cams, along with about 1.5 litre displacement. Sure, there were new cars with less displacement but the real volume was at least 1200cc. Except maybe Italy with their idiotic tax system of the time. Fuel has generally been considered expensive in Europe - I remember that being the case in the 1960's. It's been getting worse since. Low fuel consumption was therefore as much a priority as low engine capacity to avoid high taxes. Small, multi-valve engines weren't just in cars. They were on motorbikes as well. EFI was basically impractical until the 1970's. Merc and Bosch worked together (IIRC) on the development of D-Jetronic, not only as a means of reducing emissions, but also to improve driveability. And driveability was definitely a seller. Bosch did (as we know) also produce a cheaper mechanical, continuous fuel injection system that survived in production cars into the early 1990's (after adding some electronic gadgets). AFAIK, nobody uses a K-Jetronic based system any more in new cars. The EFI became cheaper, more flexible, more reliable and more sellable... Customer demand very much drove those developments. There's a nice chart in SAE's latest AE showing that engines produce far more power than they did 15 years ago, yet emissions haven't improved to the same degree. Cars have also gotten heavier, but the power to weight ratio is still increasing. The EPA may well be giving the Engineers good excuses to get their ideas past the accountants into cars. > different, as the roads are very different. Upshot being, at least in > Europe, we like 4-pot screamers. > Or to put it another way, In UK we don't get it about the 'vette. In US > they don't get it about the Lotus 7. Crass oversimplification, but a > kernel of truth > I believe that ya pays and ya takes ya choice. Having lived in the USA, > I now understand 'vettes, harleys and boat-like suspension A friend of mine recently took a holiday; a round the world trip. He drove a long way in a rental in the USA. He couldn't believe how bad the car was; abysmal handling, crappy fittings, etc. The aircon was good though. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 08:45:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 08:45:51 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 08:45:51 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 5:14 PM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: > >Now we have strayed into market expectations. That's what drives manufacturers. > >In US, those who owned their first cars before 1974 had BIG > >engines, low revs, autos, megatorque etc. In Europe we had piddly > >little 750cc side valves with 4 speed manuals. Added to which > >driving styles are very different, as the roads are very > >different. Upshot being, at least in Europe, we like 4-pot > >screamers. [snip] > We also seem to have neglected to mention that the near > confiscatory displacement taxes, such as are common in Europe and > Japan (and which are, no doubt, a product of the Labor/Commie > Party Axis) present every bit as real an artificial displacement > limitation as many racing formulas do ! Those taxes are a product of American Imperialism! :-) > Large displacement, compactly packaged, torquey engines with tall > gears tend to win in most categories, both performance and > economic. Including first cost, durability, and acceleration. > Fuel economy over long distances is on a par with small engines, > the one weakness is idling in heavy traffic--but lots of power > accessories, as is commonly the case in the US market, tends to > even this one out as well. That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > If you think power (or torque) to weight ratio is a problem for > the classic US large displacement V-8 design, look into some of > the most fully developed iterations of the breed, such as the > Buick 455 or the Cad 500 !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 08:59:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 08:59:15 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 08:59:15 -0800 From: Brian Renegar Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB >Thanks. but I typed wrong number. >LM285Z-1.2 or LM385Z-1.2? Both work. The only difference is temperature range. I believe the LM285 has a larger range, so if that's the one you have, that's even better. But either one with work. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 09:06:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 09:06:30 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 09:06:30 -0800 From: "Huw Scourfield" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Is this the 2V per cylinder PRV or the later 4V one, I have a Volvo version under the bench in my workshop, know someone who runs one at 30 psi boost, pretty impressive! Huw ----- Original Message ----- From: Rausch, Bernd To: Sent: 05 December 2001 14:00 Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Vibration is a point I did not think about before. > Does anyone on the list run an air/liquid intercooler and can confirm > the sizing information from Spearco ? I thought that an a/l coolder is > more effective and smaller in size than an air/air cooler. > > The engine is a Renault/Peugeot V6 3L 24V, with Garrett GT twin > ballbearing turbos (GT25 Turbine, T3-60 compressor). max RPM is 7200, > boost will be about 1.2-1.5bar. The ECU is a Pectel T6M. > > Bernd > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Kevin _ [mailto:kiggly@hotmail.com] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2001 05:52 > An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > > > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > > >To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing > >off the plenum as well as the runners? > > KART cars last year (and probably this year too) used an extra throttle > that's on the plenum and electronically controlled to limit boost. I > guess > they found they could react faster there to limit a spike event than > they > could with controlling the wastegate. I'm guessing they also have a > good > spike wanting to naturally happen after <100ms shift (I don't know for > sure > what their shift times are). > > >Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to > >fill that volume as well as that of the runners. > > If you do a throttle before all that volume like you were saying, its > really > going to have terrible throttle response. > > >OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already > >filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners > >sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, > >the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening > >of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure > >hasn't bled out through the turbo. > > > >Which system will have less lag? > > The system with 6 throttle plates will have less lag. It should also > have > much, much better throttle response. You will have to make a plenum of > air > pressure from all 6 runners past the throttles though to get a MAP > pressure. > This can just be 6 lines tee'd together, just keep the lines as short > as > possible and use, probably, 1/8" or 3/16" diameter hoses. > > >A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate > >throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. > >In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little > >advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical > >setups). > > You can't use a slide throttle on a street car though. There is > terribly > inconsistent flow through them at part throttle. I liked the stratus > touring car that had barrel throttles though, those were cool as hell! > They > split at the middle and rolled away (like double-doors opening) to make > a > completely smooth runner at WOT. Slide throttles are your best bet by > far. > > >The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. > >The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. > >Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be > >around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. > > 70mm??? For what, if you're going to have 100%VE at 12000 rpm? What > rpm > will the motor go to? I'm guessing you'd need somewhere in the low 50mm > > range. Smaller is better as long as its not a restriction because if > you go > too big the throttles just end up becoming an on/off switch. For a 2L > NA > engine going to 8500 rpm and making ~300hp, we found that 52mm was the > smallest that we didn't lose any hp. Anything bigger than that didn't > gain > any hp at all and just made the engine more difficult to drive. > > >One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very > >durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. > >You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by > >chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just > >the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. > > > >No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air > >distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that > >requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. > > You'll have to be VERY careful about thermal expansion of the engine. > This > is without a doubt the most difficult part of this entire system. You > need > to make a setup that holds the butterflies aligned within the trumpets > or > else they will bind up. This seems trivial, but it really requires some > > attention. I would put a pair of ball bearings on each butterfly and > join > the butterflies from cylinder-to-cylinder with fittings that allow some > axial growth. http://www.zeromax.com has some neat couplings that can > get > this job done well. I haven't used them, but they really look like the > perfect part for this application. > > Just wondering though, but why don't you just make a normal-ish intake > manifold and mount the intercooler away from the engine? This is > normally > much easier to do and you don't have to worry so much about heat soak > from > the engine getting the IC hot. You're also talking about mounting > something > big, heavy, and with very little thermal expansion (as long as you keep > the > water cool that is) on top of a somewhat high vibration environment that > > goes through wild temperature swings, expansions, and deflections. Its > just > a recipe for a part thats going to be difficult to make last very long. > > If you go through and make it, I'd love to see some pictures! Just > curious > also though, what rpm range, boost range, and displacement are you > planning > for this V6? I believe you mentioned a 650hp goal... > > Kevin > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 09:35:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 09:35:39 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 09:35:39 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor >of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > Uh Huh. Let's see you present how much it would cost in import duties, registration fees, and insurance, Vette v. GTI in Europe. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 09:49:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 09:49:02 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 09:49:02 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Spark plugs Thanks, I suspect I will have to live with the fouling until I get EFI running as the current DCOE is seriously rich at low RPM (i.e. in traffic). Not my choice I hasten to add. -----Original Message----- From: ext Greg Hermann [mailto:bearbvd@mindspring.com] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:23 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Spark plugs At 4:51 PM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >The rotary. The GM V6 just gets new plugs every 20-30K. >----- >Is this in a piston or rotary engine, Bill ?? > >Greg Rotaries tend to be a particular b*tch on plugs--as the plugs never get a chance to cool off during the "overlap" and intake portions of of the cycle, as they do in a piston engine. For a rotary, I would say go absolutely as cold as you can get without fouling, and also to as erosion resistant a plug as you can find--yep, Autolites are pretty good in this regard. Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 10:01:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:01:21 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:01:21 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs Nothing a soldering gun, some solder / flux, drills and a thumb vise wouldn't cure. Getta DCOE right, and just use the *EFI* for ignition work. Trick is getting it right. . Bruce From: Subject: RE: Spark plugs > I suspect I will have to live with the fouling until I get EFI running > as the current DCOE is seriously rich at low RPM (i.e. in traffic). Not > my choice I hasten to add. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 10:08:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:08:42 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:08:42 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs Less filling, more taste?. Or are you asking about why the cooler plug?. If the later: The center electrode can hold just enough heat that in some transistional stuff (tip-in detonation / ping), and some conditions of WOT trigger a slight amount of detonation. Lots of reasons, but usually from running too small of injector, and running out of AE. Often folks just look at injector sizing as a function of BSFC, and totally miss the AE stuff. Or get cought up in the lean as possible mode, and then any variance in fuel fubar's things. Bruce From: "Axel Rietschin" Subject: Re: Spark plugs > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: Spark plugs > [...] > > If your absolutely sure of your AFR, and running conservative timing, > and your still seeing detonation sights on the plug, you might want to try a > > colder plug. > More porclean, less volume, higher CR, more knock? :-) > --Axel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 10:17:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:17:33 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 10:17:33 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Spark plugs At 1:01 PM 12/7/01, Bruce wrote: >Nothing a soldering gun, some solder / flux, drills and a thumb vise >wouldn't cure. Getta DCOE right, and just use the *EFI* for ignition work. >Trick is getting it right. . >Bruce > > > >From: >Subject: RE: Spark plugs >> I suspect I will have to live with the fouling until I get EFI running >> as the current DCOE is seriously rich at low RPM (i.e. in traffic). Not >> my choice I hasten to add. > Bill-- I suspect that Bruce and I, between us, could help you through getting the DCOE _"RIGHT"_ . This oughtta be done off list, though. If you think "source code" is black magic, you haven't been around much DCOE/IDA tuning !! Definitely something only to be shared with the "annointed" !! :-) Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 11:23:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:23:23 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:23:23 -0800 From: "Bob" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: OBD 2 Connectors Does anyone have an inexpensive source for OBD 2 connectors/pins and/or custom cables? Thanks ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 11:39:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:39:17 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:39:17 -0800 From: "Schroeder, Ronald J" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Renegar" To: Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:59 AM Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB > > >Thanks. but I typed wrong number. > >LM285Z-1.2 or LM385Z-1.2? > > Both work. The only difference is temperature range. I believe the LM285 > has a larger range, so if that's the one you have, that's even better. But > either one with work. > > Brian > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 11:55:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:55:17 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 11:55:17 -0800 From: cmillard@crutchfield.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: gm idle valve This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C17F58.FF188090 Content-Type: text/plain Peter, I've gone the IAC cleaning route twice with no long term luck (slowed after a month), so I'm going the replacement route. Prices aren't too bad on the units here ($90 list, $50 wholesale.) I degreased, soaked in a "super lube" synth stuff, then removed excess as not to attract dirt. Good temporary fix, but after 6 years and too many miles I'm going to give the Z a new idle stepper motor for Christmas (no wonder my friends think I'm weird :^) -Christian (Good to see familiar faces here) RE: I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? Peter ------_=_NextPart_001_01C17F58.FF188090 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: gm idle valve

Peter,
I've gone the IAC cleaning route twice with no long = term luck (slowed after a month), so I'm going the replacement route. = Prices aren't too bad on the units here ($90 list, $50 = wholesale.)

I degreased, soaked in a "super lube" synth = stuff, then removed excess as not to attract dirt.
Good temporary fix, but after 6 years and too many = miles I'm going to give the Z a new idle stepper motor for Christmas = (no wonder my friends think I'm weird :^)

-Christian
(Good to see familiar faces here)

RE:

I've often wondered what the correct procedure for = re-lubricating these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently = had two get "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer = ones, rather than cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried = tips?

Peter

------_=_NextPart_001_01C17F58.FF188090-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 12:47:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:47:11 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 12:47:11 -0800 From: Bob Tom Subject: Re: Spark plugs At 01:08 PM 12/7/01 -0500, you wrote: >--SNIP-- The center electrode can hold just enough heat >that in some transistional stuff (tip-in detonation / ping), and >some conditions of WOT trigger a slight amount of detonation. I would be interested in reading about these WOT conditions as I have, once in a blue moon, had a couple of slight detonations on a run just as I'm approaching the finish line (using Autolite 3923, one range colder than normal, and gapped to .035 from the normal .040 on a stock ignition). I was thinking that I might be maxing out the injector's duty cycle. >Lots of reasons, but usually from running too small of injector, >and running out of AE. Often folks just look at injector >sizing as a function of BSFC, and totally miss the AE stuff. >Or get cought up in the lean as possible mode, and then any >variance in fuel fubar's things. Bruce AE = ? Sorry, got lost here. Thanks for your post(s) on this thread ... very informative. Bob Tom Burlington, Ont., Canada '97 Dakota Sport, 4x2, CC, Flame red, 5.2L, auto., 3.92SG ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 13:08:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:08:53 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:08:53 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs From: "Bob Tom" Subject: Re: Spark plugs > >--SNIP-- The center electrode can hold just enough heat > >that in some transistional stuff (tip-in detonation / ping), and > >some conditions of WOT trigger a slight amount of detonation. > I would be interested in reading about these WOT conditions > as I have, once in a blue moon, had a couple of slight detonations > on a run just as I'm approaching the finish line (using Autolite 3923, > one range colder than normal, and gapped to .035 from the normal > .040 on a stock ignition). I was thinking that I might be maxing > out the injector's duty cycle. *Generally* when people say they think they are out of injector, they are. You'll need some way of looking at what your duty cycle is to see where you are. If you getting into the 90% DC, (depending on rpm), you very well might be having an injector starting to hang as it cycles. > >Lots of reasons, but usually from running too small of injector, > >and running out of AE. Often folks just look at injector > >sizing as a function of BSFC, and totally miss the AE stuff. > >Or get cought up in the lean as possible mode, and then any > >variance in fuel fubar's things. Bruce > AE = ? Sorry, got lost here. Accleration Enrichment. > Thanks for your post(s) on this thread ... very informative. Welcome Bruce > Bob Tom Burlington, Ont., Canada ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 13:35:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:35:29 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 13:35:29 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve Bernd Felsche wrote: > > I've had the idle stabilizer in my Golf (it's an oscillating type) > out once every year of so for cleaning - I suspect that the Golf's IS (idle stabiliser) is a bit different to the GM IAC. Although I have not pulled one to pieces (yet, they don't seem repairable once the "rivets" in the side are removed) the IAC is a genuine rotary stepper that looks like it may use different lubrication for the end rotary bearing and for the pintel sliding bearing. I'm also a bit wary of using a solvent to flush out old lubricant without mechanically removing all built up contaminants on the bearing surfaces. So, there are no IAC experts out there? Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 14:03:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:03:40 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:03:40 -0800 From: "Jason Wade" Subject: Re: OBD 2 Connectors Junk yard _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 14:06:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:06:56 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 14:06:56 -0800 From: "Ken Richardson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Chevy 383 Stroker My Uncle has just built a 383 stroker for this '91 Camaro. The car use to have a 305 multi-port injected engine, speed density system. He installed a high volume intake system, headers, cam, injectors, etc. I'm going to burn him a new EPROM for the ECM but I don't think what I'm going to send him will fix his immediate problem. The problem.... When the engine warms up (ie. closed loop) it will not idle very smooth at all, it surges as in almost stalls then revs to 2000 RPM. It just keeps oscillating back and forth. It did this with the 305 chip as well as a new 350 chip. A cold engine runs fine. Ideas? Now, I'm going to send him a chip calibrated for the new injectors and cylinder displacement. After that we're going to work with the oxygen sensor to get the fuel mapping right. No problem, I can handle this, but I'm at a loss for the problem I mentioned above. Should I send him a calibration with closed loop disabled? I would rather not run the engine this way. Anybody here work with a stroker before? Thanks Ken R. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 15:03:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 15:03:32 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 15:03:32 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB Either are OK. The LM285-1.2 has a wider temperature range. Better for automotive use. BobR. Kazuhisa Nishishita wrote: > Thanks. but I typed wrong number. > LM285Z-1.2 or LM385Z-1.2? > > Kazu > > >The LM285Z-1.2 is correct. > > > >BobR. > > > >Kazuhisa Nishishita wrote: > > > >> Hi, I'm soldering the board. > >> I ordered LM285Z-1.2, as the Excel file lists. > >> However, the other column listed LM285Z. Which is > >> correct? Can I use LM285Z-1.2? > >> Thanks, > >> KAZU > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 15:30:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 15:30:34 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 15:30:34 -0800 From: "Jim Sloan" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb works! I just wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this effort especially Steven and Robert. Also many thanks to Bruce and the little guys, whose posts I look forward to enthusiastically. Bruce does make me feel a little guilty for being a lurker, but it may be a good thing, since my primitive conception of how things work is often wrong. I'm excited, since this is my first real electronic project. It fired up without any snags. I used a heat sink from an injector driver from a dead ecm for U1. Now we'll see how far off my tuning has been. Many thanks. Jim Sloan leroy@sunflower.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 7 15:01:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:06:21 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:06:21 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs Nothing a soldering gun, some solder / flux, drills and a thumb vise wouldn't cure. Getta DCOE right, and just use the *EFI* for ignition work. Trick is getting it right. . Bruce From: Subject: RE: Spark plugs > I suspect I will have to live with the fouling until I get EFI running > as the current DCOE is seriously rich at low RPM (i.e. in traffic). Not > my choice I hasten to add. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 15:20:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:07:13 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:07:13 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Spark plugs At 1:01 PM 12/7/01, Bruce wrote: >Nothing a soldering gun, some solder / flux, drills and a thumb vise >wouldn't cure. Getta DCOE right, and just use the *EFI* for ignition work. >Trick is getting it right. . >Bruce > > > From: >Subject: RE: Spark plugs >> I suspect I will have to live with the fouling until I get EFI running >> as the current DCOE is seriously rich at low RPM (i.e. in traffic). Not >> my choice I hasten to add. > Bill-- I suspect that Bruce and I, between us, could help you through getting the DCOE _"RIGHT"_ . This oughtta be done off list, though. If you think "source code" is black magic, you haven't been around much DCOE/IDA tuning !! Definitely something only to be shared with the "annointed" !! :-) Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 14:38:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:07:15 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:07:15 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor >of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > Uh Huh. Let's see you present how much it would cost in import duties, registration fees, and insurance, Vette v. GTI in Europe. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 7 15:08:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:07:58 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:07:58 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs Less filling, more taste?. Or are you asking about why the cooler plug?. If the later: The center electrode can hold just enough heat that in some transistional stuff (tip-in detonation / ping), and some conditions of WOT trigger a slight amount of detonation. Lots of reasons, but usually from running too small of injector, and running out of AE. Often folks just look at injector sizing as a function of BSFC, and totally miss the AE stuff. Or get cought up in the lean as possible mode, and then any variance in fuel fubar's things. Bruce From: "Axel Rietschin" Subject: Re: Spark plugs > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: Spark plugs > [...] > > If your absolutely sure of your AFR, and running conservative timing, > and your still seeing detonation sights on the plug, you might want to try a > > colder plug. > More porclean, less volume, higher CR, more knock? :-) > --Axel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Fri Dec 7 11:25:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:07:58 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:07:58 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB The LM285Z-1.2 is correct. BobR. Kazuhisa Nishishita wrote: > Hi, I'm soldering the board. > I ordered LM285Z-1.2, as the Excel file lists. > However, the other column listed LM285Z. Which is > correct? Can I use LM285Z-1.2? > Thanks, > KAZU > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 11:45:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:00 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:00 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Spark plugs At 11:22 AM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >Hi, > >Back to DIY with a quick theory question on spark plugs. I was reading >some conjecture >somewhere that plugs with >1 ground strap actually shroud the spark and >that you would get improved performance by grinding off the extra >straps. Proviso being that if you go from 4 straps to 1 you also get a >4:1 drop in plug life. > >On the face of it this sounds correct, but my spark propagation theory >is lacking a tad so I wondered if the old hands (OK Bruce) had any >thoughts or practical experience on this. > >On a related topic for those of us who are still new to the arcane arts, >is there a good primer on how to tell if you plugs are too hot/cold. It >seems to be one of those areas where it's deemed that if you don't know >then you shouldn't be messing with them. All I know is that mine are >well worn after 2000 miles, which seems to indicate something is wrong. > >Rgds > >Bill Is this in a piston or rotary engine, Bill ?? Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Dec 7 11:37:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:03 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:03 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve Peter Gargano tapped away at the keyboard with: > Ludis Langens wrote: > > > > It is a stepper motor. > I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating > these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get > "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than > cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? I've had the idle stabilizer in my Golf (it's an oscillating type) out once every year of so for cleaning - after buying a replacement after two year ($450!!). So I thought it worthwhile to try to keep it clean. The replacement valve has held up now for about 8 years. First of all; clean the bugger. A good soaking in carby cleaner. (Some people say brake cleaner is better; it might clean faster but seems way too agressive.) Send an apprentice down to the corner shop and buy a Magnum Classic icecream. Enjoy. Then use the paddle to scrape away any deposits that remain in the valve and flush again. A few drops of engine oil on the valve certainly won't hurt. Just a few. Too much oil will attract all sorts of buildup. I'm trying a secret formulation that supposedly works better than engine oil and doesn't develop into a sticky surface in a short time. It's NOT silicone-based, or PTFE. I'll see what it's like in another few months. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Dec 7 11:49:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:05 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:05 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 3:42 PM 12/7/01, Mos wrote: > >On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > >> Marketing. > >> The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an > >> OHV engine. > > > > > >What is this "best performing Reasonably priced car" that you speak so > >highly of? > > > >> Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on > >> bits the manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for > >> multi-valves etc., is due to rules, in the street world it's > >> the EPA, in racing it's displacement. > >Please correct me if I'm wrong - EFI came from EPA, as opposed to > >multi-valve coming from EPA. > You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came > from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC > and DOHC has. > Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows > reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to > both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow > higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve > timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far > as street motors are concerned . Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and to set themselves apart from the crowd. Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 11:27:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:08 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:08 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At 3:42 PM 12/7/01, Mos wrote: >On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > >> >> Marketing. >> The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an >> OHV engine. > > >What is this "best performing Reasonably priced car" that you speak so >highly of? > >> Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the >> manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves etc., is >> due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing it's displacement. > >Please correct me if I'm wrong - EFI came from EPA, as opposed to >multi-valve coming from EPA. > >Mos. You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC and DOHC has. Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far as street motors are concerned . Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 7 11:25:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:09 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:09 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs From: Subject: Spark plugs > Back to DIY with a quick theory question on spark plugs. I was reading > some conjecture > somewhere that plugs with >1 ground strap actually shroud the spark and > that you would get improved performance by grinding off the extra > straps. Proviso being that if you go from 4 straps to 1 you also get a > 4:1 drop in plug life. If the erosion rate of the plug is what is limiting it's service life. > On a related topic for those of us who are still new to the arcane arts, > is there a good primer on how to tell if you plugs are too hot/cold. Examine the center porclean to center electrode area, on a new plug, closely, you'll notice no (most generally) bonding goo being exposed there. If you used plug has the appearance of an excessive (any more then was there originally), goo showing the plug is too hot. If the side electrode has a *fish scale* appearing blue / green hue to it it's too hot. One other sometimes is the rounding off of the center electrode quickly could be an indicator of too hot of plug. If your absolutely sure of your AFR, and running conservative timing, and your still seeing detonation sights on the plug, you might want to try a colder plug. >It seems to be one of those areas where it's deemed that if you don't know > then you shouldn't be messing with them. All I know is that mine are > well worn after 2000 miles, which seems to indicate something is wrong. Rarely will going with a cooler then oem plug cause you any serious grief. If in doubt, just try a set, and then pull em and take a look. If motor get real cold blooded, ot the plugs are too dark well, the warmer ones were in fact right. All spark plugs do is supply an air gap for where a spark may occur. They vary in design and materials, but when all is said an done, that's it. A plug will erode. Bits and ions are generated from the material for the spark to follow. A **soft** easily erodable plug will do that well. But life will be short. A harder plug will require a little longer for the ion path to occur, and require a slightly higher voltage for it too happen. All any plug can do is help compensate for a poor ignition system. If the basic system is fine then you should be able to run a hard material plug, just fine (Autolite). In hardness of side eletrodes in conventional plugs you have Autolite, AC, and then the others. On a street car projected nose plugs will help with being resistant to fouling. On a hypo engine you want to get the center electrode out of the chamber so it doesn't help introduce any detonation. If someone get the systems right would be nice to have surface gaps plugs. Problem with most (if not all) surface gaps is that they have so little heat in them that they can foul easily. A fast rise ignition system can help min that. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. > Rgds > Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.johnson@gb.abb.com Fri Dec 7 07:26:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:11 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:11 -0300 From: dave.johnson@gb.abb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Megasquirt Injector PWM How does the pwm for current limiting affect the pw timing of the injector squirt? By using pwm doesn't this create an error in that the calculated squirt duration is effectively made shorter by the pwm? Have I missed something? Regards Dave ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Fri Dec 7 07:05:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:13 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:13 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve Ludis Langens wrote: > > It is a stepper motor. I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ludis@cruzers.com Fri Dec 7 06:13:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:15 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:15 -0300 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve ivan wrote: > > I wander if anyone knows how to controll gm type idle stabilisor valve > looks like screw type. connector has 4 pins. > any help will be apprichated It is a stepper motor. There are two windings. You will need two H-bridge drivers. You need to apply "12" volts to the windings in various polarities: Winding A Winding B + + + - - - - + + + ... To reverse the direction, repeat the pattern in the opposite order. To get extra steps, try this sequence (GM doesn't do this): Winding A Winding B + + + off + - off - - - - off - + off + + + ... -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Fri Dec 7 06:11:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:17 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:17 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Frederic Breitwieser Doas anyone has a e-mail address of Frederic ? His website seems to be down. Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Gesendet: Freitag, 7. Dezember 2001 00:21 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers He worked on two actually. One for his truck where the I/C was in the manifold but had coolant flowing thru it. Neither made it to actual road testing Bruce > Way back when Fred Britweisser built a plenum with a water cooled IC > inside it. Seemed like a neat idea and he liked it. > His WWW page was at: > http://www.xephic.dynip.com/ > but I haven't been able to connect to it. He did have a lot of cool > stuff there, including pictures of a Buick V6 that briefly made 800 hp > on a dyno before it exploded. > --steve ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Fri Dec 7 06:22:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:19 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:19 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Spark plugs Hi, Back to DIY with a quick theory question on spark plugs. I was reading some conjecture somewhere that plugs with >1 ground strap actually shroud the spark and that you would get improved performance by grinding off the extra straps. Proviso being that if you go from 4 straps to 1 you also get a 4:1 drop in plug life. On the face of it this sounds correct, but my spark propagation theory is lacking a tad so I wondered if the old hands (OK Bruce) had any thoughts or practical experience on this. On a related topic for those of us who are still new to the arcane arts, is there a good primer on how to tell if you plugs are too hot/cold. It seems to be one of those areas where it's deemed that if you don't know then you shouldn't be messing with them. All I know is that mine are well worn after 2000 miles, which seems to indicate something is wrong. Rgds Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Fri Dec 7 05:14:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:21 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:21 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: SAAB variable compression Oops sorry. Still wacky -----Original Message----- From: ext Shirley, Mark R [mailto:MarkRShirley@eaton.com] That variable compression engine was developed by SAAB, not VW. It was in Automotive Engineering last year. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mjvn1598@mjvnet.co.za Fri Dec 7 04:56:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:23 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:23 -0300 From: "ivan" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: gm idle valve Hi I wander if anyone knows how to controll gm type idle stabilisor valve looks like screw type. connector has 4 pins. any help will be apprichated Ivan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos@sydney.net Fri Dec 7 01:42:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:25 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:25 -0300 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > Marketing. > The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an > OHV engine. What is this "best performing Reasonably priced car" that you speak so highly of? > Most of the turbo'd engines in production cars are based on bits the > manufacturer has laying around. The only reason for multi-valves etc., is > due to rules, in the street world it's the EPA, in racing it's displacement. Please correct me if I'm wrong - EFI came from EPA, as opposed to multi-valve coming from EPA. Mos. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From kazuhix@earthlink.net Fri Dec 7 02:07:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:26 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:26 -0300 From: Kazuhisa Nishishita Subject: D8 of DIY WB Hi, I'm soldering the board. I ordered LM285Z-1.2, as the Excel file lists. However, the other column listed LM285Z. Which is correct? Can I use LM285Z-1.2? Thanks, KAZU ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Thu Dec 6 20:54:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:28 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:28 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) I'm sorry--you can't lose 75HP in the transmission. No amount of cooler would dissipate that kind of heat. A factory cooler is nothing more than a loop of tubing in the radiator...not much of a cooler at any rate. Even an aftermarket self regulating cooler with 12 litres wouldn't handle 56,000 watts. That's enough energy to melt 3/4 ton block of ice in an hour ! Auto trans are so fluid "fussy" that even lowering a 190F ATF temp by 10 degrees F will double the fluid life. Lyndon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From powermaxx@netzero.net Thu Dec 6 22:15:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:30 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:30 -0300 From: "powermaxx" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intro,,,, Street Outlaw (NHRA) looking for Megasquirt EFI Looks like I can still get on the Megasquirt buy list, thanks for the offers guys. Thanks for the concern on the "Mega Motor" sneezing. Did that this year and yes it hurts....$$$$ I wouldn't put it on without rigorous testing first! And as a last resort the SpeedPro could go on at the last minute. Hope the wierd text (HTML???) following first post is fixed, sorry about that. Steve St"RACE"ner (and toys...) {Digest Mode but changing] 73 Challenger "Street Outlaw" 87 GLHS Shelby ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Fri Dec 7 12:47:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:45 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:45 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Spark plugs Thanks, I suspect I will have to live with the fouling until I get EFI running as the current DCOE is seriously rich at low RPM (i.e. in traffic). Not my choice I hasten to add. -----Original Message----- From: ext Greg Hermann [mailto:bearbvd@mindspring.com] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:23 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Spark plugs At 4:51 PM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >The rotary. The GM V6 just gets new plugs every 20-30K. >----- >Is this in a piston or rotary engine, Bill ?? > >Greg Rotaries tend to be a particular b*tch on plugs--as the plugs never get a chance to cool off during the "overlap" and intake portions of of the cycle, as they do in a piston engine. For a rotary, I would say go absolutely as cold as you can get without fouling, and also to as erosion resistant a plug as you can find--yep, Autolites are pretty good in this regard. Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From huw.scourfield@lineone.net Fri Dec 7 14:48:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:47 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:47 -0300 From: "Huw Scourfield" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Is this the 2V per cylinder PRV or the later 4V one, I have a Volvo version under the bench in my workshop, know someone who runs one at 30 psi boost, pretty impressive! Huw ----- Original Message ----- From: Rausch, Bernd To: Sent: 05 December 2001 14:00 Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Vibration is a point I did not think about before. > Does anyone on the list run an air/liquid intercooler and can confirm > the sizing information from Spearco ? I thought that an a/l coolder is > more effective and smaller in size than an air/air cooler. > > The engine is a Renault/Peugeot V6 3L 24V, with Garrett GT twin > ballbearing turbos (GT25 Turbine, T3-60 compressor). max RPM is 7200, > boost will be about 1.2-1.5bar. The ECU is a Pectel T6M. > > Bernd > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Kevin _ [mailto:kiggly@hotmail.com] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2001 05:52 > An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > > > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > > >To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing > >off the plenum as well as the runners? > > KART cars last year (and probably this year too) used an extra throttle > that's on the plenum and electronically controlled to limit boost. I > guess > they found they could react faster there to limit a spike event than > they > could with controlling the wastegate. I'm guessing they also have a > good > spike wanting to naturally happen after <100ms shift (I don't know for > sure > what their shift times are). > > >Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to > >fill that volume as well as that of the runners. > > If you do a throttle before all that volume like you were saying, its > really > going to have terrible throttle response. > > >OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already > >filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners > >sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, > >the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening > >of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure > >hasn't bled out through the turbo. > > > >Which system will have less lag? > > The system with 6 throttle plates will have less lag. It should also > have > much, much better throttle response. You will have to make a plenum of > air > pressure from all 6 runners past the throttles though to get a MAP > pressure. > This can just be 6 lines tee'd together, just keep the lines as short > as > possible and use, probably, 1/8" or 3/16" diameter hoses. > > >A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate > >throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. > >In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little > >advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical > >setups). > > You can't use a slide throttle on a street car though. There is > terribly > inconsistent flow through them at part throttle. I liked the stratus > touring car that had barrel throttles though, those were cool as hell! > They > split at the middle and rolled away (like double-doors opening) to make > a > completely smooth runner at WOT. Slide throttles are your best bet by > far. > > >The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. > >The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. > >Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be > >around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. > > 70mm??? For what, if you're going to have 100%VE at 12000 rpm? What > rpm > will the motor go to? I'm guessing you'd need somewhere in the low 50mm > > range. Smaller is better as long as its not a restriction because if > you go > too big the throttles just end up becoming an on/off switch. For a 2L > NA > engine going to 8500 rpm and making ~300hp, we found that 52mm was the > smallest that we didn't lose any hp. Anything bigger than that didn't > gain > any hp at all and just made the engine more difficult to drive. > > >One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very > >durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. > >You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by > >chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just > >the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. > > > >No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air > >distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that > >requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. > > You'll have to be VERY careful about thermal expansion of the engine. > This > is without a doubt the most difficult part of this entire system. You > need > to make a setup that holds the butterflies aligned within the trumpets > or > else they will bind up. This seems trivial, but it really requires some > > attention. I would put a pair of ball bearings on each butterfly and > join > the butterflies from cylinder-to-cylinder with fittings that allow some > axial growth. http://www.zeromax.com has some neat couplings that can > get > this job done well. I haven't used them, but they really look like the > perfect part for this application. > > Just wondering though, but why don't you just make a normal-ish intake > manifold and mount the intercooler away from the engine? This is > normally > much easier to do and you don't have to worry so much about heat soak > from > the engine getting the IC hot. You're also talking about mounting > something > big, heavy, and with very little thermal expansion (as long as you keep > the > water cool that is) on top of a somewhat high vibration environment that > > goes through wild temperature swings, expansions, and deflections. Its > just > a recipe for a part thats going to be difficult to make last very long. > > If you go through and make it, I'd love to see some pictures! Just > curious > also though, what rpm range, boost range, and displacement are you > planning > for this V6? I believe you mentioned a 650hp goal... > > Kevin > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From thomas.renegar@nist.gov Fri Dec 7 13:59:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:49 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:49 -0300 From: Brian Renegar Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB >Thanks. but I typed wrong number. >LM285Z-1.2 or LM385Z-1.2? Both work. The only difference is temperature range. I believe the LM285 has a larger range, so if that's the one you have, that's even better. But either one with work. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Dec 7 13:45:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:51 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:51 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 5:14 PM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: > >Now we have strayed into market expectations. That's what drives manufacturers. > >In US, those who owned their first cars before 1974 had BIG > >engines, low revs, autos, megatorque etc. In Europe we had piddly > >little 750cc side valves with 4 speed manuals. Added to which > >driving styles are very different, as the roads are very > >different. Upshot being, at least in Europe, we like 4-pot > >screamers. [snip] > We also seem to have neglected to mention that the near > confiscatory displacement taxes, such as are common in Europe and > Japan (and which are, no doubt, a product of the Labor/Commie > Party Axis) present every bit as real an artificial displacement > limitation as many racing formulas do ! Those taxes are a product of American Imperialism! :-) > Large displacement, compactly packaged, torquey engines with tall > gears tend to win in most categories, both performance and > economic. Including first cost, durability, and acceleration. > Fuel economy over long distances is on a par with small engines, > the one weakness is idling in heavy traffic--but lots of power > accessories, as is commonly the case in the US market, tends to > even this one out as well. That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > If you think power (or torque) to weight ratio is a problem for > the classic US large displacement V-8 design, look into some of > the most fully developed iterations of the breed, such as the > Buick 455 or the Cad 500 !!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Dec 7 13:39:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:54 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:54 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers bill.shurvinton@nokia.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Now we have strayed into market expectations. > > In US, those who owned their first cars before 1974 had BIG engines, low > revs, autos, megatorque etc. In Europe we had piddly little 750cc side > valves with 4 speed manuals. Added to which driving styles are very 1974 - it was predominately overhead valves if not overhead cams, along with about 1.5 litre displacement. Sure, there were new cars with less displacement but the real volume was at least 1200cc. Except maybe Italy with their idiotic tax system of the time. Fuel has generally been considered expensive in Europe - I remember that being the case in the 1960's. It's been getting worse since. Low fuel consumption was therefore as much a priority as low engine capacity to avoid high taxes. Small, multi-valve engines weren't just in cars. They were on motorbikes as well. EFI was basically impractical until the 1970's. Merc and Bosch worked together (IIRC) on the development of D-Jetronic, not only as a means of reducing emissions, but also to improve driveability. And driveability was definitely a seller. Bosch did (as we know) also produce a cheaper mechanical, continuous fuel injection system that survived in production cars into the early 1990's (after adding some electronic gadgets). AFAIK, nobody uses a K-Jetronic based system any more in new cars. The EFI became cheaper, more flexible, more reliable and more sellable... Customer demand very much drove those developments. There's a nice chart in SAE's latest AE showing that engines produce far more power than they did 15 years ago, yet emissions haven't improved to the same degree. Cars have also gotten heavier, but the power to weight ratio is still increasing. The EPA may well be giving the Engineers good excuses to get their ideas past the accountants into cars. > different, as the roads are very different. Upshot being, at least in > Europe, we like 4-pot screamers. > Or to put it another way, In UK we don't get it about the 'vette. In US > they don't get it about the Lotus 7. Crass oversimplification, but a > kernel of truth > I believe that ya pays and ya takes ya choice. Having lived in the USA, > I now understand 'vettes, harleys and boat-like suspension A friend of mine recently took a holiday; a round the world trip. He drove a long way in a rental in the USA. He couldn't believe how bad the car was; abysmal handling, crappy fittings, etc. The aircon was good though. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 7 12:19:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:55 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:55 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Trouble is so many have no idea of what better actually means. Bruce Brutal snippage From: "Bernd Felsche" > Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already > exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 13:01:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:59 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:08:59 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At 5:14 PM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >Now we have strayed into market expectations. > >In US, those who owned their first cars before 1974 had BIG engines, low >revs, autos, megatorque etc. In Europe we had piddly little 750cc side >valves with 4 speed manuals. Added to which driving styles are very >different, as the roads are very different. Upshot being, at least in >Europe, we like 4-pot screamers. > >Or to put it another way, In UK we don't get it about the 'vette. In US >they don't get it about the Lotus 7. Crass oversimplification, but a >kernel of truth > >I believe that ya pays and ya takes ya choice. Having lived in the USA, >I now understand 'vettes, harleys and boat-like suspension > >Bill We also seem to have neglected to mention that the near confiscatory displacement taxes, such as are common in Europe and Japan (and which are, no doubt, a product of the Labor/Commie Party Axis) present every bit as real an artificial displacement limitation as many racing formulas do ! Large displacement, compactly packaged, torquey engines with tall gears tend to win in most categories, both performance and economic. Including first cost, durability, and acceleration. Fuel economy over long distances is on a par with small engines, the one weakness is idling in heavy traffic--but lots of power accessories, as is commonly the case in the US market, tends to even this one out as well. If you think power (or torque) to weight ratio is a problem for the classic US large displacement V-8 design, look into some of the most fully developed iterations of the breed, such as the Buick 455 or the Cad 500 !!! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From kazuhix@earthlink.net Fri Dec 7 13:35:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:01 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:01 -0300 From: Kazuhisa Nishishita Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB Thanks. but I typed wrong number. LM285Z-1.2 or LM385Z-1.2? Kazu >The LM285Z-1.2 is correct. > >BobR. > >Kazuhisa Nishishita wrote: > >> Hi, I'm soldering the board. >> I ordered LM285Z-1.2, as the Excel file lists. >> However, the other column listed LM285Z. Which is >> correct? Can I use LM285Z-1.2? >> Thanks, >> KAZU ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 12:23:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:03 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:03 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Spark plugs At 4:51 PM 12/7/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >The rotary. The GM V6 just gets new plugs every 20-30K. >----- >Is this in a piston or rotary engine, Bill ?? > >Greg Rotaries tend to be a particular b*tch on plugs--as the plugs never get a chance to cool off during the "overlap" and intake portions of of the cycle, as they do in a piston engine. For a rotary, I would say go absolutely as cold as you can get without fouling, and also to as erosion resistant a plug as you can find--yep, Autolites are pretty good in this regard. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 7 12:18:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:05 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:05 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >> You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came >> from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC >> and DOHC has. > >> Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows >> reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to >> both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow >> higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve >> timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far >> as street motors are concerned . > >Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, >Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of >technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and >to set themselves apart from the crowd. > >Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already >exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. Perhaps I should have said "mass market" cars, rather than "street" cars. Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc brakes in competition! Greg (raced an Alfa Guilia Spider Abnormale and tuned a GTZ for years, both of which were very quick indeed (especially the TZ), but both of which also lost REGULARLY to pushrod motored Cobras--- although NOT to Porsh*ts) (Also once had a pal who was a member of Ecurie Ecosse, if you want to argue the particulars of Jags !) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Fri Dec 7 12:14:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:07 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:07 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Now we have strayed into market expectations. In US, those who owned their first cars before 1974 had BIG engines, low revs, autos, megatorque etc. In Europe we had piddly little 750cc side valves with 4 speed manuals. Added to which driving styles are very different, as the roads are very different. Upshot being, at least in Europe, we like 4-pot screamers. Or to put it another way, In UK we don't get it about the 'vette. In US they don't get it about the Lotus 7. Crass oversimplification, but a kernel of truth I believe that ya pays and ya takes ya choice. Having lived in the USA, I now understand 'vettes, harleys and boat-like suspension Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows > reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to > both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow > higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve > timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far > as street motors are concerned . Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and to set themselves apart from the crowd. Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Fri Dec 7 11:51:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:09 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:09 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Spark plugs The rotary. The GM V6 just gets new plugs every 20-30K. ----- Is this in a piston or rotary engine, Bill ?? Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From axel_rietschin@compuserve.com Fri Dec 7 11:41:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:11 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:11 -0300 From: "Axel Rietschin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:25 PM Subject: Re: Spark plugs [...] > If your absolutely sure of your AFR, and running conservative timing, and > your still seeing detonation sights on the plug, you might want to try a > colder plug. More porclean, less volume, higher CR, more knock? :-) --Axel ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Fri Dec 7 11:41:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:14 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:09:14 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Spark plugs Bruce, Thanks for that. I have new plugs in the post and will monitor them. I have heared good things about the beatings-proofness of the autolites, but have to mail order them. Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 2:26 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Spark plugs Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 16:44:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:44:30 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:44:30 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! There is no guilt about being a lurker. Just support those that are trying to good things, and share when you do find out a neat thing. Just a shame a couple guys had to ruin so much for so many. Just wait until you see how easy things get using it. Your welcome Bruce From: "Jim Sloan" Subject: diy-wb works! > I just wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this effort especially > Steven and Robert. Also many thanks to Bruce and the little guys, whose > posts I look forward to enthusiastically. Bruce does make me feel a little > guilty for being a lurker, but it may be a good thing, since my primitive > conception of how things work is often wrong. > I'm excited, since this is my first real electronic project. It fired up > without any snags. I used a heat sink from an injector driver from a dead > ecm for U1. Now we'll see how far off my tuning has been. > Many thanks. > Jim Sloan > leroy@sunflower.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bob@scientist.com Fri Dec 7 16:23:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:47:00 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:47:00 -0300 From: "Bob" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: OBD 2 Connectors Does anyone have an inexpensive source for OBD 2 connectors/pins and/or custom cables? Thanks ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rschroeder@bnl.gov Fri Dec 7 16:38:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:56:27 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 16:56:27 -0300 From: "Schroeder, Ronald J" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Renegar" To: Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:59 AM Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB > > >Thanks. but I typed wrong number. > >LM285Z-1.2 or LM385Z-1.2? > > Both work. The only difference is temperature range. I believe the LM285 > has a larger range, so if that's the one you have, that's even better. But > either one with work. > > Brian > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 17:08:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:08:58 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:08:58 -0800 From: "Joe Piche" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Chevy 383 Stroker My ford pickup had the very same problem. It turned out to be a massive vacuum leak. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Richardson" To: Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:06 PM Subject: Chevy 383 Stroker > My Uncle has just built a 383 stroker for this '91 Camaro. The car use to > have a 305 multi-port injected engine, speed density system. He installed a > high volume intake system, headers, cam, injectors, etc. I'm going to burn > him a new EPROM for the ECM but I don't think what I'm going to send him > will fix his immediate problem. The problem.... When the engine warms up > (ie. closed loop) it will not idle very smooth at all, it surges as in > almost stalls then revs to 2000 RPM. It just keeps oscillating back and > forth. It did this with the 305 chip as well as a new 350 chip. A cold > engine runs fine. Ideas? > > Now, I'm going to send him a chip calibrated for the new injectors and > cylinder displacement. After that we're going to work with the oxygen sensor > to get the fuel mapping right. No problem, I can handle this, but I'm at a > loss for the problem I mentioned above. Should I send him a calibration with > closed loop disabled? I would rather not run the engine this way. > > Anybody here work with a stroker before? > > Thanks > Ken R. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From cmillard@crutchfield.com Fri Dec 7 16:54:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:15:19 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 17:15:19 -0300 From: cmillard@crutchfield.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: gm idle valve This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C17F58.FF188090 Content-Type: text/plain Peter, I've gone the IAC cleaning route twice with no long term luck (slowed after a month), so I'm going the replacement route. Prices aren't too bad on the units here ($90 list, $50 wholesale.) I degreased, soaked in a "super lube" synth stuff, then removed excess as not to attract dirt. Good temporary fix, but after 6 years and too many miles I'm going to give the Z a new idle stepper motor for Christmas (no wonder my friends think I'm weird :^) -Christian (Good to see familiar faces here) RE: I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? Peter ------_=_NextPart_001_01C17F58.FF188090 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: gm idle valve

Peter,
I've gone the IAC cleaning route twice with no long = term luck (slowed after a month), so I'm going the replacement route. = Prices aren't too bad on the units here ($90 list, $50 = wholesale.)

I degreased, soaked in a "super lube" synth = stuff, then removed excess as not to attract dirt.
Good temporary fix, but after 6 years and too many = miles I'm going to give the Z a new idle stepper motor for Christmas = (no wonder my friends think I'm weird :^)

-Christian
(Good to see familiar faces here)

RE:

I've often wondered what the correct procedure for = re-lubricating these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently = had two get "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer = ones, rather than cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried = tips?

Peter

------_=_NextPart_001_01C17F58.FF188090-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From tigers@bserv.com Fri Dec 7 17:43:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 18:11:44 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 18:11:44 -0300 From: Bob Tom Subject: Re: Spark plugs At 01:08 PM 12/7/01 -0500, you wrote: >--SNIP-- The center electrode can hold just enough heat >that in some transistional stuff (tip-in detonation / ping), and >some conditions of WOT trigger a slight amount of detonation. I would be interested in reading about these WOT conditions as I have, once in a blue moon, had a couple of slight detonations on a run just as I'm approaching the finish line (using Autolite 3923, one range colder than normal, and gapped to .035 from the normal .040 on a stock ignition). I was thinking that I might be maxing out the injector's duty cycle. >Lots of reasons, but usually from running too small of injector, >and running out of AE. Often folks just look at injector >sizing as a function of BSFC, and totally miss the AE stuff. >Or get cought up in the lean as possible mode, and then any >variance in fuel fubar's things. Bruce AE = ? Sorry, got lost here. Thanks for your post(s) on this thread ... very informative. Bob Tom Burlington, Ont., Canada '97 Dakota Sport, 4x2, CC, Flame red, 5.2L, auto., 3.92SG ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 7 18:08:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 18:29:22 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 18:29:22 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Spark plugs From: "Bob Tom" Subject: Re: Spark plugs > >--SNIP-- The center electrode can hold just enough heat > >that in some transistional stuff (tip-in detonation / ping), and > >some conditions of WOT trigger a slight amount of detonation. > I would be interested in reading about these WOT conditions > as I have, once in a blue moon, had a couple of slight detonations > on a run just as I'm approaching the finish line (using Autolite 3923, > one range colder than normal, and gapped to .035 from the normal > .040 on a stock ignition). I was thinking that I might be maxing > out the injector's duty cycle. *Generally* when people say they think they are out of injector, they are. You'll need some way of looking at what your duty cycle is to see where you are. If you getting into the 90% DC, (depending on rpm), you very well might be having an injector starting to hang as it cycles. > >Lots of reasons, but usually from running too small of injector, > >and running out of AE. Often folks just look at injector > >sizing as a function of BSFC, and totally miss the AE stuff. > >Or get cought up in the lean as possible mode, and then any > >variance in fuel fubar's things. Bruce > AE = ? Sorry, got lost here. Accleration Enrichment. > Thanks for your post(s) on this thread ... very informative. Welcome Bruce > Bob Tom Burlington, Ont., Canada ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 19:00:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:00:17 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:00:17 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Arnie responded with: Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? Greg Hermann wrote: > > > > >That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor > >of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > > > Uh Huh. Let's see you present how much it would cost in import duties, > registration fees, and insurance, Vette v. GTI in Europe. > > Greg > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 19:04:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:04:29 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:04:29 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve Not enough 400 KmH cars here so they're all waiting at the Post Offices to fill out all those miserable forms. A shop manual might provide helpful tips. Bruce From: "Peter Gargano" > So, there are no IAC experts out there? > Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Fri Dec 7 18:39:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:05:06 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:05:06 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve Bernd Felsche wrote: > > I've had the idle stabilizer in my Golf (it's an oscillating type) > out once every year of so for cleaning - I suspect that the Golf's IS (idle stabiliser) is a bit different to the GM IAC. Although I have not pulled one to pieces (yet, they don't seem repairable once the "rivets" in the side are removed) the IAC is a genuine rotary stepper that looks like it may use different lubrication for the end rotary bearing and for the pintel sliding bearing. I'm also a bit wary of using a solvent to flush out old lubricant without mechanically removing all built up contaminants on the bearing surfaces. So, there are no IAC experts out there? Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From wadejason@hotmail.com Fri Dec 7 19:02:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:22:53 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:22:53 -0300 From: "Jason Wade" Subject: Re: OBD 2 Connectors Junk yard _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 19:24:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:24:49 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:24:49 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Don't worry, it gets much worse, and makes less sense the longer you're here. Oh, and I did pick up my Intake Manifold from the machine shop today. Still has alot of work to be done to it, porting, checking for leaks, clean up, paint, etc.. Of course, this can't possibly work, we just had 2 days of people saying that it won't work. So far Smokey, and Jenkins have been alot closer to knowing the truth then most of the logic here. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. Copyrighted all rights reserved. Refrigerate after opening. From: "Gary Schaumberg" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Arnie responded with: > Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 19:25:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:25:15 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:25:15 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came > >> from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC > >> and DOHC has. > >> Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows > >> reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to > >> both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow > >> higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve > >> timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far > >> as street motors are concerned . > >Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, > >Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of > >technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and > >to set themselves apart from the crowd. > >Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already > >exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. > Perhaps I should have said "mass market" cars, rather than "street" cars. What's a "mass market" car? One that appeals to the great unwashed? You expect leading-edge technology in motorised shopping trolleys? The only "hi-tech" that appeals to the "masses" is cup holders and CD stackers. They don't have a clue what the "DOHC", "16V", "PORT INJECTED" and "TORQUE CONTROLLED" decals mean; nor do they care. BTW: I've seen those decals and their ilk on motorised shopping trolley for the past 5 to 10 years. Don't mix "mass market" and competition paradigms. They are at opposite ends of the scale. Take your average "mass market" car around a race or autocross circuit to anywhere near its limit and you'll find that it will expire very rapidly, if you don't lose tyres or off the car first. EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). That appeals to mass-market _buyers_. The number of new cars produced with carb'd engines is very small - production is restricted to developing countries. TBI is the LCD, and is diminishing as _buyers_ migrate to engines with port-injection due to better drivability and fuel economy. It'll take another 5 to 10 years before direct gasoline injection to reach the market penetration of port-injection. Partly because of fleet ageing, partly because of the cost reductions that come with development. The mass-market motivators for trickling down the technology are fuel economy and driveability. Performance helps, but is more a function of the total car package, which has become heavier due to legislated requirements, despite engineering efforts to minimise vehicle mass. > Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of > making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. > Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came > virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc > brakes in competition! So their chassis design was of no tangible benefit? > Greg (raced an Alfa Guilia Spider Abnormale and tuned a GTZ for > years, both of which were very quick indeed (especially the TZ), > but both of which also lost REGULARLY to pushrod motored Cobras--- > although NOT to Porsh*ts) (Also once had a pal who was a member of > Ecurie Ecosse, if you want to argue the particulars of Jags !) There's an Alfa locally that's unbeatable in the Sporting Car Club. It's only the when megabucks arrive that even have a chance of showing it up. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From krichar@ns.sympatico.ca Fri Dec 7 19:06:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:25:43 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:25:43 -0300 From: "Ken Richardson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Chevy 383 Stroker My Uncle has just built a 383 stroker for this '91 Camaro. The car use to have a 305 multi-port injected engine, speed density system. He installed a high volume intake system, headers, cam, injectors, etc. I'm going to burn him a new EPROM for the ECM but I don't think what I'm going to send him will fix his immediate problem. The problem.... When the engine warms up (ie. closed loop) it will not idle very smooth at all, it surges as in almost stalls then revs to 2000 RPM. It just keeps oscillating back and forth. It did this with the 305 chip as well as a new 350 chip. A cold engine runs fine. Ideas? Now, I'm going to send him a chip calibrated for the new injectors and cylinder displacement. After that we're going to work with the oxygen sensor to get the fuel mapping right. No problem, I can handle this, but I'm at a loss for the problem I mentioned above. Should I send him a calibration with closed loop disabled? I would rather not run the engine this way. Anybody here work with a stroker before? Thanks Ken R. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 19:43:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:43:32 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:43:32 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > Arnie responded with: > Greg Hermann wrote: > > >That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor > > >of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > > > > > Uh Huh. Let's see you present how much it would cost in import duties, > > registration fees, and insurance, Vette v. GTI in Europe. Greg: It costs as much to insure a GTI in Germany as it costs to buy a 'vette in the US. Well, it seems like it anyway! :-) > Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? IIRC, here's the gist: Start: Question about manifold with integral intercooler for a V6 twin-turbo. --> Suggestion to throttle the runners individually for throttle response --> Suggestion that it's overly complex and too complex to implement --> Description of simple construction and reference examples --> Suggestion that air-liquid intercooler was too esoteric --> Reference examples of high-performance cars using such in production --> Suggestion that such cars are irrelevant and "exotic" --> Reference to base technologies having been in use for over 25 years --> Suggestion that EFI was only brought about by EPA requirements ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 19:45:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:45:21 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 19:45:21 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Arnie responds: Bruce, I'm not offended. Actually, I'm amused, in sad sorta way. But, I'm confident you understand where I am coming from. Bruce wrote: > > Don't worry, it gets much worse, and makes less sense the longer you're > here. > > Oh, and I did pick up my Intake Manifold from the machine shop today. Still > has alot of work to be done to it, porting, checking for leaks, clean up, > paint, etc.. Of course, this can't possibly work, we just had 2 days of > people saying that it won't work. > So far Smokey, and Jenkins have been alot closer to knowing the truth > then most of the logic here. > Bruce > Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in > the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure > that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. > Copyrighted all rights reserved. > Refrigerate after opening. > > From: "Gary Schaumberg" > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Arnie responded with: > > Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > > discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 20:08:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:08:53 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:08:53 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >From: "Bernd Felsche" EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What did you say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to clean it. > > Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of > > making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! > Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? > At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the same degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 20:17:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:17:32 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:17:32 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Arnie the mathematician responds with: I did very well in geometry while in H.S. The term tangent comes to mind. A tangent waay out in the back 40. (I also grew up on a farm). Bernd Felsche wrote: > > Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Arnie responded with: > > > Greg Hermann wrote: > > > >That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor > > > >of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > > > > > > > Uh Huh. Let's see you present how much it would cost in import duties, > > > registration fees, and insurance, Vette v. GTI in Europe. > > Greg: It costs as much to insure a GTI in Germany as it costs to > buy a 'vette in the US. Well, it seems like it anyway! :-) > > > Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > > discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? > > IIRC, here's the gist: > > Start: Question about manifold with integral intercooler for a V6 twin-turbo. > --> Suggestion to throttle the runners individually for throttle response > --> Suggestion that it's overly complex and too complex to implement > --> Description of simple construction and reference examples > --> Suggestion that air-liquid intercooler was too esoteric > --> Reference examples of high-performance cars using such in production > --> Suggestion that such cars are irrelevant and "exotic" > --> Reference to base technologies having been in use for over 25 years > --> Suggestion that EFI was only brought about by EPA requirements > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Fri Dec 7 20:06:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:30:17 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:30:17 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: D8 of DIY WB Either are OK. The LM285-1.2 has a wider temperature range. Better for automotive use. BobR. Kazuhisa Nishishita wrote: > Thanks. but I typed wrong number. > LM285Z-1.2 or LM385Z-1.2? > > Kazu > > >The LM285Z-1.2 is correct. > > > >BobR. > > > >Kazuhisa Nishishita wrote: > > > >> Hi, I'm soldering the board. > >> I ordered LM285Z-1.2, as the Excel file lists. > >> However, the other column listed LM285Z. Which is > >> correct? Can I use LM285Z-1.2? > >> Thanks, > >> KAZU > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From leroy@sunflower.com Fri Dec 7 20:32:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:50:53 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 20:50:53 -0300 From: "Jim Sloan" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb works! I just wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this effort especially Steven and Robert. Also many thanks to Bruce and the little guys, whose posts I look forward to enthusiastically. Bruce does make me feel a little guilty for being a lurker, but it may be a good thing, since my primitive conception of how things work is often wrong. I'm excited, since this is my first real electronic project. It fired up without any snags. I used a heat sink from an injector driver from a dead ecm for U1. Now we'll see how far off my tuning has been. Many thanks. Jim Sloan leroy@sunflower.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 21:18:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:18:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:18:14 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > >From: "Bernd Felsche" > Various bits of snippage. > > > EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What > did you say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to > clean it. It's $450 (Australian), so not as costly as you think. It's an inflated price anyway for Oz; at least double the dealer cost of the part in Germany. I only ever paid for the one. What does an emission-compliant carb cost, that delivers a better fuel consumption, driveability and performance from cold start, to hot start, to hot run (let alone emisssions) and never requires adjustment? BTW: I get about 700km on 55 litres. > > > Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite > > > capable of making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as > > > well as EFI ! > > > Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? > > At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. > > If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the > same degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. > I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion > within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. Let's forget about _retail_prices_ because they are artificially inflated. There are huge total margins from manufacturer to retail. The idle stabiliser probably costs VDO less than $20 to make. I doubt very much that VW would have paid even double that, seeing that they would have ordered the units in the hundreds of thousands every few months. The opportunity for large margins in the after-market is not nearly so great. I'm not talking about fuzzy dice here. Productions runs are small so the initial cost is high. If you're pricing for the enthusiast market (i.e. not the pro-competition), then your retail price has to be somewhere near that of OEM. You can't therefore get a 500% markup from the part manufacturer to the wholesaler. Further down the food-chain, margins are susceptible to local market conditions; competition and market size. e.g. I could airfreight distributors from California, pay duties and taxes, and still make 100% on the items for retail to underprice the locally-sourced suppliers - who are only making 20% if they're lucky. There are economies of scale. For the "original parts" market, they can set their prices how they feel; based on what the market will bear. There's little correlation between cost and prices. Volkswagen would have paid much less than $1000 (US) for the entire injection system on my car. The "$1000" ECU has a PCB with $100 worth of parts (at retail component prices). A quick addition of retail prices on the EFI components adds up to in excess of $5000. A long block replacement lists at $13,000 (plus 10% tax) without EFI and ancillaries. I bought the whole car, new, for $27,000, including taxes at the then-higher rate. Retail prices for original replacement parts have almost no correlation with actual costs. They are numbers that have fallen out of a random profit generator driven by accountants. > Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. > Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. No. I don't have a clue about DCOE in particular. Oh, there's a bar of soap. Does it look anything like that? Solex, Mikuni and other Weber; yeah I've seen them and tweaked Solexes in my earlier VW. I won't flatter myself and call it "tuning" as it was only returning the components back to spec., but the result was a little better than before the exercise. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 21:24:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:24:37 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:24:37 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bernd Felsche wrote: >> Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: [snip] >>> Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are >>> discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? >> >> IIRC, here's the gist: >> >> Start: Question about manifold with integral intercooler for a V6 twin-turbo. >> --> Suggestion to throttle the runners individually for throttle response >> --> Suggestion that it's overly complex and too complex to implement >> --> Description of simple construction and reference examples >> --> Suggestion that air-liquid intercooler was too esoteric >> --> Reference examples of high-performance cars using such in production >> --> Suggestion that such cars are irrelevant and "exotic" >> --> Reference to base technologies having been in use for over 25 years >> --> Suggestion that EFI was only brought about by EPA requirements > Arnie the mathematician responds with: > I did very well in geometry while in H.S. The term tangent comes to > mind. A tangent waay out in the back 40. (I also grew up on a farm). Well, some people keep on introducing hyperbole or react acutely at the same time being obtuse. :-) How long does a normal conversation stay on the original topic? ... mmm. These nuts are nice. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 21:42:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:42:33 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:42:33 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At 11:24 AM 12/8/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: >Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> >> You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came >> >> from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC >> >> and DOHC has. > >> >> Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows >> >> reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to >> >> both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow >> >> higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve >> >> timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far >> >> as street motors are concerned . > >> >Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, >> >Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of >> >technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and >> >to set themselves apart from the crowd. > >> >Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already >> >exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. > >> Perhaps I should have said "mass market" cars, rather than "street" cars. > >What's a "mass market" car? One that appeals to the great unwashed? >You expect leading-edge technology in motorised shopping trolleys? >The only "hi-tech" that appeals to the "masses" is cup holders and >CD stackers. They don't have a clue what the "DOHC", "16V", "PORT >INJECTED" and "TORQUE CONTROLLED" decals mean; nor do they care. > >BTW: I've seen those decals and their ilk on motorised shopping >trolley for the past 5 to 10 years. > >Don't mix "mass market" and competition paradigms. I wasn't. Just was saying that both venues have artificial displacement restrictions. Of a different sort, but the same design restriction, nevertheless. They are at >opposite ends of the scale. Ailimentary, Watson. Take your average "mass market" car >around a race or autocross circuit to anywhere near its limit and >you'll find that it will expire very rapidly, if you don't lose >tyres or off the car first. This can be accomplished even more quickly by fastening a somewhat heavy trailer behind such a critter and then pointing it up a seven or eight mile long grade with 6 to 8 per cent gradient ! > >EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, >install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). No. It is simply the cheapest way to meet emission regs. That >appeals to mass-market _buyers_. What really appeals to them is getting the commie pigs to give them another "OK" sticker every year or two with minimal hassle (on top on minimal cost). The number of new cars produced >with carb'd engines is very small - production is restricted to >developing countries. Where emission regs and "inspections" are virtually non-existent. TBI is the LCD, and is diminishing as _buyers_ >migrate to engines with port-injection due to better drivability and >fuel economy. No. Port injection makes it possible to meet current cold start emission requirements. Plain and simple. TBI can't do it. > >It'll take another 5 to 10 years before direct gasoline injection to >reach the market penetration of port-injection. Partly because of >fleet ageing, partly because of the cost reductions that come with >development. And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This time mostly CAFE. Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with DCOE/IDA carbys in terms of BSFC !! Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! > >> Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of >> making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! > >Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? >At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. You knew perfectly well I was talking about competition engines in this one. You been taking debating lessons from the greenies or Slick Willie Klinton?? Gotta be one or the other ! > >> Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came >> virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc >> brakes in competition! > >So their chassis design was of no tangible benefit? Virtually none, or likely even a negative compared to the competition of their day. I spose you are going to try to tell me next that the Jag engine's twin cams helped it rev higher to make more power, in spite of its 4-3/16" stroke and con rod bolts that gave every evidence of having been made from used Tootsie Rolls ! > >> Greg (raced an Alfa Guilia Spider Abnormale and tuned a GTZ for >> years, both of which were very quick indeed (especially the TZ), >> but both of which also lost REGULARLY to pushrod motored Cobras--- >> although NOT to Porsh*ts) (Also once had a pal who was a member of >> Ecurie Ecosse, if you want to argue the particulars of Jags !) > >There's an Alfa locally that's unbeatable in the Sporting Car Club. >It's only the when megabucks arrive that even have a chance of >showing it up. Not too surprising. Must be some down there who do know what they're doing after all ! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 21:48:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:48:05 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:48:05 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At 9:46 PM 12/7/01, Gary Schaumberg wrote: >Arnie responds: > >Bruce, I'm not offended. Actually, I'm amused, in sad sorta way. But, >I'm confident you understand where I am coming from. > >Bruce wrote: >> >> Don't worry, it gets much worse, and makes less sense the longer you're >> here. >> WHAT--you want that I should change the subject line so as not to give some poor, clueless ignoramus some other reason to take pot shots at me after he runs out of technical "arguments"?? Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 21:57:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:57:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 21:57:14 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the same >degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. As long as the customer didn't complain of neck strain from so much better throttle response than EFI ever dreamed of !! > I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion >within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. >Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. >Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. >Bruce Are you kidding Bruce?? THAT would take some competence, rather than just a trip to typing & computer schools !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 22:02:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:02:18 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:02:18 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >What does an emission-compliant carb cost, that delivers a better >fuel consumption, driveability and performance from cold start, to >hot start, to hot run (let alone emisssions) and never requires >adjustment? > HEY--at least now, we are admitting that its emission requirments that drove things to EFI !! Funny how we switch arguments when it suits us, ain't it?? Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 22:04:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:04:02 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:04:02 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) >Well, some people keep on introducing hyperbole or react acutely >at the same time being obtuse. :-) Gee--ya did a better job of describing yerself than I could ever have!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From pichej@cablerocket.com Fri Dec 7 22:07:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:36:37 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:36:37 -0300 From: "Joe Piche" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Chevy 383 Stroker My ford pickup had the very same problem. It turned out to be a massive vacuum leak. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken Richardson" To: Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 3:06 PM Subject: Chevy 383 Stroker > My Uncle has just built a 383 stroker for this '91 Camaro. The car use to > have a 305 multi-port injected engine, speed density system. He installed a > high volume intake system, headers, cam, injectors, etc. I'm going to burn > him a new EPROM for the ECM but I don't think what I'm going to send him > will fix his immediate problem. The problem.... When the engine warms up > (ie. closed loop) it will not idle very smooth at all, it surges as in > almost stalls then revs to 2000 RPM. It just keeps oscillating back and > forth. It did this with the 305 chip as well as a new 350 chip. A cold > engine runs fine. Ideas? > > Now, I'm going to send him a chip calibrated for the new injectors and > cylinder displacement. After that we're going to work with the oxygen sensor > to get the fuel mapping right. No problem, I can handle this, but I'm at a > loss for the problem I mentioned above. Should I send him a calibration with > closed loop disabled? I would rather not run the engine this way. > > Anybody here work with a stroker before? > > Thanks > Ken R. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 22:37:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:37:28 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 22:37:28 -0800 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re:Stroker surge - DIY_EFI Digest V5 #919 Common cause of idle "surge" is mis-adjusted base idle throttle opening - The IAC cycles trying to compensate for it, and gets thoroughly confused. Was common on Toyota Nippondenso (L-Jetronic style) systems when DIY guys did their own adjustments without knowing what they were doing. Major mods could easily trigger this problem. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 23:15:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:15:37 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:15:37 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Bernd Felsche wrote: > > Arnie the mathematician responds with: > > > I did very well in geometry while in H.S. The term tangent comes to > > mind. A tangent waay out in the back 40. (I also grew up on a farm). > > Well, some people keep on introducing hyperbole or react acutely > at the same time being obtuse. :-) > And others, failing to see that that self imposed limits are integral to the continuous function of two sided conversation, seem content to introduce an infinite number of unrelated rationalizations into a thread. While an individual conversation should affect the exchange of information, in this situation and with respect to noise, the value of the conversation quickly dwindles to zero; invariably describing an unchanging and asymptotic condition which generally equals the maximum contribution of the poster when considered for the domain of the thread. But I could be wrong. Using the aforementioned hyperbole it just might be true that some people constantly introduce a coefficient of irrelevance which simply increases any noise level already present. The end result is still the same. The speed at which posts propogate may be higher, but there's no acceleration to the growth of knowledge. Total contribution is still zero. > How long does a normal conversation stay on the original topic? A normal conversation with whom? Shannen > > ... mmm. These nuts are nice. > > :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 23:20:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:20:56 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:20:56 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 11:24 AM 12/8/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: [snip] > >Don't mix "mass market" and competition paradigms. > I wasn't. Just was saying that both venues have artificial > displacement restrictions. Of a different sort, but the same > design restriction, nevertheless. The design restriction for mass-market is what people are prepared to pay for private transport. The design restriction for professional motorsport is how much money you can screw out of your sponsors/financiers on the promise that you'll win by pouring more money into the project. > >EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > >install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > > No. It is simply the cheapest way to meet emission regs. It _also_ does that. Buyers demand all the other tangible benefits that EFI delivers. Low cost of ownership through low fuel consumption and low maintenance is a huge motivator to buying EFI. > That > >appeals to mass-market _buyers_. > > What really appeals to them is getting the commie pigs to give > them another "OK" sticker every year or two with minimal hassle > (on top on minimal cost). You'd be surprised that no such annual inspections are required in the majority of places? > The number of new cars produced > >with carb'd engines is very small - production is restricted to > >developing countries. > > Where emission regs and "inspections" are virtually non-existent. And where buyers are undemanding of the mode of transport. They're happy that they don't have to walk 10 km a day, or get pushed off the roof of a bus every once in a while. > TBI is the LCD, and is diminishing as _buyers_ > >migrate to engines with port-injection due to better drivability and > >fuel economy. > > No. Port injection makes it possible to meet current cold start > emission requirements. Plain and simple. TBI can't do it. Must be news to Bosch and Magneti Marelli. Ever heard of Mono-jetronic? As used in Opel Corsa, VW Polo, SEAT Ibiza, etc? It sucks almost as badly as a carb setup when trying to start and drive it when it's cold. There are ways and means of complying with cold-start emission requirements. Fast-light cats aided by auxiliary air pumps are just two examples. > >It'll take another 5 to 10 years before direct gasoline injection to > >reach the market penetration of port-injection. Partly because of > >fleet ageing, partly because of the cost reductions that come with > >development. > > And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This > time mostly CAFE. So engineers looking to meet customer demands for lower fuel consumption with higher performance has nothing to do with it? CAFE means nothing in EU. How many DI non-EU models are there in the USA? Or to put it another way; why are only the Europeans and Japanese look like they're actually building cars with direct gasoline injection? Could it be that the US doesn't have suitable fuels available for the mass market? Goodness, if CAFE was so important, shouldn't the government mandate availability of suitable fuels? They haven't even ensured that low-sulphur diesel fuel is available for clean-burning diesels. > Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with > DCOE/IDA carbys in terms of BSFC !! > Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! And a carb allows subsequent re-condensation; significantly-more manifold wetting in mass-market cars than with port injection. That's a driveability issue as much as emissions. Emissions bug the government; driveability bugs the person actually driving and probably owning the car. > >> Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of > >> making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! > > > >Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? > >At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. > > You knew perfectly well I was talking about competition engines in > this one. You been taking debating lessons from the greenies or > Slick Willie Klinton?? Gotta be one or the other ! No. DCOE is mentioned in the same breath as mass-market. My definition of "perform" is also wider than yours. It's you guys who (never) voted for Slick Willie. > >> Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came > >> virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc > >> brakes in competition! > > > >So their chassis design was of no tangible benefit? > Virtually none, or likely even a negative compared to the > competition of their day. I spose you are going to try to tell me Ahh.. swing axles compared to what Jaguar had? > next that the Jag engine's twin cams helped it rev higher to make > more power, in spite of its 4-3/16" stroke and con rod bolts that > gave every evidence of having been made from used Tootsie Rolls ! A commodity which I've never seen. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 7 21:44:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:28:29 -0300 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:28:29 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! There is no guilt about being a lurker. Just support those that are trying to good things, and share when you do find out a neat thing. Just a shame a couple guys had to ruin so much for so many. Just wait until you see how easy things get using it. Your welcome Bruce From: "Jim Sloan" Subject: diy-wb works! > I just wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this effort especially > Steven and Robert. Also many thanks to Bruce and the little guys, whose > posts I look forward to enthusiastically. Bruce does make me feel a little > guilty for being a lurker, but it may be a good thing, since my primitive > conception of how things work is often wrong. > I'm excited, since this is my first real electronic project. It fired up > without any snags. I used a heat sink from an injector driver from a dead > ecm for U1. Now we'll see how far off my tuning has been. > Many thanks. > Jim Sloan > leroy@sunflower.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 23:33:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:33:30 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:33:30 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > > > > What are you, on freaking drugs? > > They are streetable cars. That's what was asked. Just because > they're espen$ive doesn't mean that they're not streetable. Nothing was asked. The original statement was "The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an OHV engine." The car you're talking about is not reasonably priced. > > And your 200mph nascars are equipped a full luxury cars as well, Nope. Pointless waste of arse warmers and walnut cupholders. > meet all emission and crash requirements? They meet the emissions requirements they're designed to meet. They hold up sufficiently in lap after lap of abuse. And the Bugatti? Statistically cars in that price range do not meet emissions requirements. The manufacturer simply pays the fines required by the government in the country where the car is sold. And I wonder how well the Bugatti will hold up in the same conditions "my" nascar racer is designed for. > They're air conditioned? Nope. And it gets pretty damn hot in those fire suits. But my personal car isn't air conditioned either so I don't consider that a necessary portion of the definition of a reasonably priced streetable car. > Leather seats? What has leather to do with "a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still driveable around town" ? > They go around real corners too? Yeah... Those turns at the end of the track? They don't really exist. Those boys run for 200 straight miles and everything is done with camera tricks. Last race in the Poconos found the boys finishing in New York. Was ok though, since it was a straight line from there to the next race. > And along normal, > bumpy roads? Yep, you can drive those cars along normal, bumpy roads. In fact, the road I'm speaking about was resurfaced for the first time since 1988, so the cars running the course were driven along 90 miles of normal, bumpy roads. Here's a link to the race page. http://www.silverstateclassic.com/home.htm A look through previous years' race reslts shows that former stock cars dominate the unlimited speed class, topping Porsche CTRs, twin turbos, and other exotic cars. Some time spent reading about the race and the participants should give you an appreciation of how adaptable the old stock cars are. > You can drive them down to the corner shop? I work at a corner shop (literally and figuratively) where race cars are built and repaired. We fix them right along side VW's. Really. We even keep parts in stock for 'em. > > The Veyron will be a proper, road-going car. It will not be repairable at the corner shop, it will not be reasonably priced, and it may not even be found in this country. It does not represent a good argument that the best performing reasonably priced cars are not using OHV engines. And it is no less specialized than the nascar cars. Fewer than .0000001% of the world population will own one, they will not be produced in larger volume than the nascar cars, and as yet they are nothing more than a promise of performance. The nascar racer should be considered in this comparison. > It's a bit dark at the moment. (1 a.m.) With this comment I'm beginning to gain some insight into Bernd Felsch. > > > > What's a reasonable > > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > > driveable around town? > > > > $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. > > ?? $150k US won't buy you one. It will. You're wrong. $150k US will buy an emissions legal car that meets US crashworthiness specifications, exceeds federal braking requirements, comes with computer aided handling and traction control, leather seats, air conditioning, cd player, and all sorts of other nonsense. And it's made in the US. And it approaches speeds close to 400km/hr. *And* it sports an OHV engine. **And** it's design actually has some relation to the original subject line "intake manifold construction." Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? Shannen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 23:43:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:43:52 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:43:52 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >What does an emission-compliant carb cost, that delivers a better > >fuel consumption, driveability and performance from cold start, to > >hot start, to hot run (let alone emisssions) and never requires > >adjustment? > HEY--at least now, we are admitting that its emission requirments that > drove things to EFI !! Quote selectively, and you can prove anything you like. Ignore the other factors if it's convenient to you. Remember how I said early on in this discussion that (real) Engineers have a compulsion to improve things? Reducing emissions is one of those things that can be improved. It doesn't really need government requirements to make that happen. Regulations do help the Engineers _justify_ to the beancounters the need to put the more-advanced technology on the mass market. > Funny how we switch arguments when it suits us, ain't it?? Let's see; the average joker puts their carb'd car in a workshop for 2 hours of tuneup every 5000 km... That's adding like 2 cents a km to the running cost of the car, before we consider that the carb engine would consume between 20% and 50% more fuel for the same duty. Drive 30,000km a year and EFI saves around 1200 litres in fuel a year (for a car like mine, yours may average more than 8 l/100km) and 4 extra days without car). That's well over $1000 EFI's saving me every year. Low emissions don't _sell_ cars. Not for the masses. It's low costs to buy, and low costs to own. Fuel and maintenance are significant expenses. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 7 23:54:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:54:27 -0800 Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2001 23:54:27 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Shannen Durphey tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > > > > > > What are you, on freaking drugs? > > > > They are streetable cars. That's what was asked. Just because > > they're espen$ive doesn't mean that they're not streetable. > Nothing was asked. The original statement was "The best > performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an > OHV engine." > The car you're talking about is not reasonably priced. What's a reasonable price for a streetable car that'll do more than 400kmh? To put it another way; if you were "worth" $500 million, would the Veyron seem to be reasonably-priced at a million Euro? > > And your 200mph nascars are equipped a full luxury cars as well, > Nope. Pointless waste of arse warmers and walnut cupholders. > > meet all emission and crash requirements? > They meet the emissions requirements they're designed to meet. > They hold up sufficiently in lap after lap of abuse. And the > Bugatti? Statistically cars in that price range do not meet > emissions requirements. The manufacturer simply pays the fines > required by the government in the country where the car is sold. Bugatti Veyron will exceed requirements of Euro-4 > And I wonder how well the Bugatti will hold up in the same > conditions "my" nascar racer is designed for. > > They're air conditioned? > Nope. And it gets pretty damn hot in those fire suits. But my > personal car isn't air conditioned either so I don't consider that > a necessary portion of the definition of a reasonably priced > streetable car. > > Leather seats? > What has leather to do with "a car capable of speeds close to > 400kmh and still driveable around town" ? It adds mass and underscores that it's a car designed for everyday use. > > They go around real corners too? > Yeah... Those turns at the end of the track? They don't really > exist. Those boys run for 200 straight miles and everything is > done with camera tricks. Last race in the Poconos found the boys > finishing in New York. Was ok though, since it was a straight > line from there to the next race. > > And along normal, bumpy roads? > Yep, you can drive those cars along normal, bumpy roads. In fact, > the road I'm speaking about was resurfaced for the first time > since 1988, so the cars running the course were driven along 90 > miles of normal, bumpy roads. > Here's a link to the race page. > http://www.silverstateclassic.com/home.htm > A look through previous years' race reslts shows that former stock > cars dominate the unlimited speed class, topping Porsche CTRs, > twin turbos, and other exotic cars. Some time spent reading about > the race and the participants should give you an appreciation of > how adaptable the old stock cars are. > > You can drive them down to the corner shop? > I work at a corner shop (literally and figuratively) where race > cars are built and repaired. We fix them right along side VW's. > Really. We even keep parts in stock for 'em. > > The Veyron will be a proper, road-going car. > > It will not be repairable at the corner shop, it will not be > reasonably priced, and it may not even be found in this country. Take a look in Bill Gates' garage in 2003. > It does not represent a good argument that the best performing > reasonably priced cars are not using OHV engines. > And it is no less specialized than the nascar cars. Fewer than > .0000001% of the world population will own one, they will not be > produced in larger volume than the nascar cars, and as yet they > are nothing more than a promise of performance. The nascar racer > should be considered in this comparison. > > It's a bit dark at the moment. (1 a.m.) > With this comment I'm beginning to gain some insight into Bernd Felsch. Timezones? I was asked the colour of the sky. You ask, you get an answer that may be more correct than what you counted on. > > > > > What's a reasonable > > > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > > > driveable around town? > > > > > > $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. > > > > ?? $150k US won't buy you one. > It will. You're wrong. $150k US will buy an emissions legal car I didn't say the bit your quoted. You've lost the attribution. > that meets US crashworthiness specifications, exceeds federal > braking requirements, comes with computer aided handling and > traction control, leather seats, air conditioning, cd player, and > all sorts of other nonsense. And it's made in the US. And it > approaches speeds close to 400km/hr. *And* it sports an OHV > engine. **And** it's design actually has some relation to the > original subject line "intake manifold construction." > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? Forgive me if I don't care. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Sat Dec 8 00:01:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:35:31 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:35:31 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Arnie responded with: Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? Greg Hermann wrote: > > > > >That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor > >of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > > > Uh Huh. Let's see you present how much it would cost in import duties, > registration fees, and insurance, Vette v. GTI in Europe. > > Greg > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 00:04:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:38:55 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:38:55 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve Not enough 400 KmH cars here so they're all waiting at the Post Offices to fill out all those miserable forms. A shop manual might provide helpful tips. Bruce From: "Peter Gargano" > So, there are no IAC experts out there? > Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 00:24:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:39:54 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:39:54 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Don't worry, it gets much worse, and makes less sense the longer you're here. Oh, and I did pick up my Intake Manifold from the machine shop today. Still has alot of work to be done to it, porting, checking for leaks, clean up, paint, etc.. Of course, this can't possibly work, we just had 2 days of people saying that it won't work. So far Smokey, and Jenkins have been alot closer to knowing the truth then most of the logic here. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. Copyrighted all rights reserved. Refrigerate after opening. From: "Gary Schaumberg" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Arnie responded with: > Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 8 00:24:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:48:52 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:48:52 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came > >> from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC > >> and DOHC has. > >> Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows > >> reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to > >> both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow > >> higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve > >> timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far > >> as street motors are concerned . > >Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, > >Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of > >technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and > >to set themselves apart from the crowd. > >Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already > >exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. > Perhaps I should have said "mass market" cars, rather than "street" cars. What's a "mass market" car? One that appeals to the great unwashed? You expect leading-edge technology in motorised shopping trolleys? The only "hi-tech" that appeals to the "masses" is cup holders and CD stackers. They don't have a clue what the "DOHC", "16V", "PORT INJECTED" and "TORQUE CONTROLLED" decals mean; nor do they care. BTW: I've seen those decals and their ilk on motorised shopping trolley for the past 5 to 10 years. Don't mix "mass market" and competition paradigms. They are at opposite ends of the scale. Take your average "mass market" car around a race or autocross circuit to anywhere near its limit and you'll find that it will expire very rapidly, if you don't lose tyres or off the car first. EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). That appeals to mass-market _buyers_. The number of new cars produced with carb'd engines is very small - production is restricted to developing countries. TBI is the LCD, and is diminishing as _buyers_ migrate to engines with port-injection due to better drivability and fuel economy. It'll take another 5 to 10 years before direct gasoline injection to reach the market penetration of port-injection. Partly because of fleet ageing, partly because of the cost reductions that come with development. The mass-market motivators for trickling down the technology are fuel economy and driveability. Performance helps, but is more a function of the total car package, which has become heavier due to legislated requirements, despite engineering efforts to minimise vehicle mass. > Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of > making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. > Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came > virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc > brakes in competition! So their chassis design was of no tangible benefit? > Greg (raced an Alfa Guilia Spider Abnormale and tuned a GTZ for > years, both of which were very quick indeed (especially the TZ), > but both of which also lost REGULARLY to pushrod motored Cobras--- > although NOT to Porsh*ts) (Also once had a pal who was a member of > Ecurie Ecosse, if you want to argue the particulars of Jags !) There's an Alfa locally that's unbeatable in the Sporting Car Club. It's only the when megabucks arrive that even have a chance of showing it up. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 8 00:42:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:57:27 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:57:27 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > Arnie responded with: > Greg Hermann wrote: > > >That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor > > >of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > > > > > Uh Huh. Let's see you present how much it would cost in import duties, > > registration fees, and insurance, Vette v. GTI in Europe. Greg: It costs as much to insure a GTI in Germany as it costs to buy a 'vette in the US. Well, it seems like it anyway! :-) > Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? IIRC, here's the gist: Start: Question about manifold with integral intercooler for a V6 twin-turbo. --> Suggestion to throttle the runners individually for throttle response --> Suggestion that it's overly complex and too complex to implement --> Description of simple construction and reference examples --> Suggestion that air-liquid intercooler was too esoteric --> Reference examples of high-performance cars using such in production --> Suggestion that such cars are irrelevant and "exotic" --> Reference to base technologies having been in use for over 25 years --> Suggestion that EFI was only brought about by EPA requirements ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Sat Dec 8 00:46:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:58:25 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 00:58:25 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Arnie responds: Bruce, I'm not offended. Actually, I'm amused, in sad sorta way. But, I'm confident you understand where I am coming from. Bruce wrote: > > Don't worry, it gets much worse, and makes less sense the longer you're > here. > > Oh, and I did pick up my Intake Manifold from the machine shop today. Still > has alot of work to be done to it, porting, checking for leaks, clean up, > paint, etc.. Of course, this can't possibly work, we just had 2 days of > people saying that it won't work. > So far Smokey, and Jenkins have been alot closer to knowing the truth > then most of the logic here. > Bruce > Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in > the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure > that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. > Copyrighted all rights reserved. > Refrigerate after opening. > > From: "Gary Schaumberg" > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Arnie responded with: > > Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > > discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 01:23:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:23:14 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:23:14 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Bernd Felsche wrote: > To put it another way; if you were "worth" $500 million, would the > Veyron seem to be reasonably-priced at a million Euro? No, Bernd, it would probably not. I'm a "build it, don't buy it" type. I will likely never be worth $500 million, and I'm not interested in debating what I'd consider valuable if I were. It ain't gonna happen. But I don't have to be worth $500 million to see that there is a much better value than the Bugatti. 2 > > Bugatti Veyron will exceed requirements of Euro-4 Great. That would be a good way for a maker of an expensive car to show they do not feel they are above government laws. > > It adds mass But it doesn't hold any weight. > > > > It's a bit dark at the moment. (1 a.m.) > > With this comment I'm beginning to gain some insight into Bernd Felsch. > > Timezones? Personality. > > Forgive me if I don't care. Well you sure as he-- didn't ask if we cared before you started down this road. You asked the question about reasonable price for a level of performance. I've found it and stated it. I can see you're enamored of the Bugatti But it's an example of a car built to flaunt extravagance and wealth and Bugatti uses performance as a major portion of the justification for the cost. The US car is an example of a car built to provide a certain level of performance and the price justifies the work that went into development and the work that goes into manufacturing. Shannen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 01:08:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:26:25 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:26:25 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What did you say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to clean it. > > Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of > > making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! > Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? > At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the same degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Sat Dec 8 01:18:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:34:26 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 01:34:26 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Arnie the mathematician responds with: I did very well in geometry while in H.S. The term tangent comes to mind. A tangent waay out in the back 40. (I also grew up on a farm). Bernd Felsche wrote: > > Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > > Arnie responded with: > > > Greg Hermann wrote: > > > >That must be the reason why Corvettes outsold Golf GTIs by a factor > > > >of 1000:1 in Europe. Ohhh... hang on... the other way around. > > > > > > > Uh Huh. Let's see you present how much it would cost in import duties, > > > registration fees, and insurance, Vette v. GTI in Europe. > > Greg: It costs as much to insure a GTI in Germany as it costs to > buy a 'vette in the US. Well, it seems like it anyway! :-) > > > Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > > discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? > > IIRC, here's the gist: > > Start: Question about manifold with integral intercooler for a V6 twin-turbo. > --> Suggestion to throttle the runners individually for throttle response > --> Suggestion that it's overly complex and too complex to implement > --> Description of simple construction and reference examples > --> Suggestion that air-liquid intercooler was too esoteric > --> Reference examples of high-performance cars using such in production > --> Suggestion that such cars are irrelevant and "exotic" > --> Reference to base technologies having been in use for over 25 years > --> Suggestion that EFI was only brought about by EPA requirements > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 8 02:23:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:47:56 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:47:56 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bernd Felsche wrote: >> Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: [snip] >>> Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are >>> discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? >> >> IIRC, here's the gist: >> >> Start: Question about manifold with integral intercooler for a V6 twin-turbo. >> --> Suggestion to throttle the runners individually for throttle response >> --> Suggestion that it's overly complex and too complex to implement >> --> Description of simple construction and reference examples >> --> Suggestion that air-liquid intercooler was too esoteric >> --> Reference examples of high-performance cars using such in production >> --> Suggestion that such cars are irrelevant and "exotic" >> --> Reference to base technologies having been in use for over 25 years >> --> Suggestion that EFI was only brought about by EPA requirements > Arnie the mathematician responds with: > I did very well in geometry while in H.S. The term tangent comes to > mind. A tangent waay out in the back 40. (I also grew up on a farm). Well, some people keep on introducing hyperbole or react acutely at the same time being obtuse. :-) How long does a normal conversation stay on the original topic? ... mmm. These nuts are nice. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 8 02:17:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:47:56 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:47:56 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > >From: "Bernd Felsche" > Various bits of snippage. > > > EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What > did you say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to > clean it. It's $450 (Australian), so not as costly as you think. It's an inflated price anyway for Oz; at least double the dealer cost of the part in Germany. I only ever paid for the one. What does an emission-compliant carb cost, that delivers a better fuel consumption, driveability and performance from cold start, to hot start, to hot run (let alone emisssions) and never requires adjustment? BTW: I get about 700km on 55 litres. > > > Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite > > > capable of making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as > > > well as EFI ! > > > Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? > > At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. > > If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the > same degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. > I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion > within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. Let's forget about _retail_prices_ because they are artificially inflated. There are huge total margins from manufacturer to retail. The idle stabiliser probably costs VDO less than $20 to make. I doubt very much that VW would have paid even double that, seeing that they would have ordered the units in the hundreds of thousands every few months. The opportunity for large margins in the after-market is not nearly so great. I'm not talking about fuzzy dice here. Productions runs are small so the initial cost is high. If you're pricing for the enthusiast market (i.e. not the pro-competition), then your retail price has to be somewhere near that of OEM. You can't therefore get a 500% markup from the part manufacturer to the wholesaler. Further down the food-chain, margins are susceptible to local market conditions; competition and market size. e.g. I could airfreight distributors from California, pay duties and taxes, and still make 100% on the items for retail to underprice the locally-sourced suppliers - who are only making 20% if they're lucky. There are economies of scale. For the "original parts" market, they can set their prices how they feel; based on what the market will bear. There's little correlation between cost and prices. Volkswagen would have paid much less than $1000 (US) for the entire injection system on my car. The "$1000" ECU has a PCB with $100 worth of parts (at retail component prices). A quick addition of retail prices on the EFI components adds up to in excess of $5000. A long block replacement lists at $13,000 (plus 10% tax) without EFI and ancillaries. I bought the whole car, new, for $27,000, including taxes at the then-higher rate. Retail prices for original replacement parts have almost no correlation with actual costs. They are numbers that have fallen out of a random profit generator driven by accountants. > Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. > Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. No. I don't have a clue about DCOE in particular. Oh, there's a bar of soap. Does it look anything like that? Solex, Mikuni and other Weber; yeah I've seen them and tweaked Solexes in my earlier VW. I won't flatter myself and call it "tuning" as it was only returning the components back to spec., but the result was a little better than before the exercise. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 02:45:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:50:56 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:50:56 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At 11:24 AM 12/8/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: >Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> >> You are wrong, in part, Moe. Multi valve on street engines came >> >> from EPA (and CAFE) rules, every bit as much as EFI and ALSO SOHC >> >> and DOHC has. > >> >> Multi valves make higher valve velocities possible--which allows >> >> reasonable lift values with short duration--directly related to >> >> both emissions and CAFE-- and SOHC and DOHC not only tend to allow >> >> higher valve velocities, but also facilitate variable valve >> >> timing--which are also emissions and CAFE induced features as far >> >> as street motors are concerned . > >> >Which must come as a hell of a shock to the likes of Alfa Romeo, >> >Porsche, Jaguar, Mercedes, etc. who used those particular bits of >> >technology to gain a competitive edge (in more ways than one) and >> >to set themselves apart from the crowd. > >> >Engineers tend to like to make something better than what already >> >exists. Well, Engineers worth their salt. > >> Perhaps I should have said "mass market" cars, rather than "street" cars. > >What's a "mass market" car? One that appeals to the great unwashed? >You expect leading-edge technology in motorised shopping trolleys? >The only "hi-tech" that appeals to the "masses" is cup holders and >CD stackers. They don't have a clue what the "DOHC", "16V", "PORT >INJECTED" and "TORQUE CONTROLLED" decals mean; nor do they care. > >BTW: I've seen those decals and their ilk on motorised shopping >trolley for the past 5 to 10 years. > >Don't mix "mass market" and competition paradigms. I wasn't. Just was saying that both venues have artificial displacement restrictions. Of a different sort, but the same design restriction, nevertheless. They are at >opposite ends of the scale. Ailimentary, Watson. Take your average "mass market" car >around a race or autocross circuit to anywhere near its limit and >you'll find that it will expire very rapidly, if you don't lose >tyres or off the car first. This can be accomplished even more quickly by fastening a somewhat heavy trailer behind such a critter and then pointing it up a seven or eight mile long grade with 6 to 8 per cent gradient ! > >EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, >install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). No. It is simply the cheapest way to meet emission regs. That >appeals to mass-market _buyers_. What really appeals to them is getting the commie pigs to give them another "OK" sticker every year or two with minimal hassle (on top on minimal cost). The number of new cars produced >with carb'd engines is very small - production is restricted to >developing countries. Where emission regs and "inspections" are virtually non-existent. TBI is the LCD, and is diminishing as _buyers_ >migrate to engines with port-injection due to better drivability and >fuel economy. No. Port injection makes it possible to meet current cold start emission requirements. Plain and simple. TBI can't do it. > >It'll take another 5 to 10 years before direct gasoline injection to >reach the market penetration of port-injection. Partly because of >fleet ageing, partly because of the cost reductions that come with >development. And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This time mostly CAFE. Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with DCOE/IDA carbys in terms of BSFC !! Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! > >> Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of >> making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! > >Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? >At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. You knew perfectly well I was talking about competition engines in this one. You been taking debating lessons from the greenies or Slick Willie Klinton?? Gotta be one or the other ! > >> Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came >> virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc >> brakes in competition! > >So their chassis design was of no tangible benefit? Virtually none, or likely even a negative compared to the competition of their day. I spose you are going to try to tell me next that the Jag engine's twin cams helped it rev higher to make more power, in spite of its 4-3/16" stroke and con rod bolts that gave every evidence of having been made from used Tootsie Rolls ! > >> Greg (raced an Alfa Guilia Spider Abnormale and tuned a GTZ for >> years, both of which were very quick indeed (especially the TZ), >> but both of which also lost REGULARLY to pushrod motored Cobras--- >> although NOT to Porsh*ts) (Also once had a pal who was a member of >> Ecurie Ecosse, if you want to argue the particulars of Jags !) > >There's an Alfa locally that's unbeatable in the Sporting Car Club. >It's only the when megabucks arrive that even have a chance of >showing it up. Not too surprising. Must be some down there who do know what they're doing after all ! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 02:50:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:56:15 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 02:56:15 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers At 9:46 PM 12/7/01, Gary Schaumberg wrote: >Arnie responds: > >Bruce, I'm not offended. Actually, I'm amused, in sad sorta way. But, >I'm confident you understand where I am coming from. > >Bruce wrote: >> >> Don't worry, it gets much worse, and makes less sense the longer you're >> here. >> WHAT--you want that I should change the subject line so as not to give some poor, clueless ignoramus some other reason to take pot shots at me after he runs out of technical "arguments"?? Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 02:59:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:08:34 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:08:34 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the same >degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. As long as the customer didn't complain of neck strain from so much better throttle response than EFI ever dreamed of !! > I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion >within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. >Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. >Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. >Bruce Are you kidding Bruce?? THAT would take some competence, rather than just a trip to typing & computer schools !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 03:04:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:16:44 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:16:44 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers >What does an emission-compliant carb cost, that delivers a better >fuel consumption, driveability and performance from cold start, to >hot start, to hot run (let alone emisssions) and never requires >adjustment? > HEY--at least now, we are admitting that its emission requirments that drove things to EFI !! Funny how we switch arguments when it suits us, ain't it?? Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 03:06:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:17:13 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:17:13 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) >Well, some people keep on introducing hyperbole or react acutely >at the same time being obtuse. :-) Gee--ya did a better job of describing yerself than I could ever have!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 03:31:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:31:37 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:31:37 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A Uhhh Bruce, you must have missed the part about not remorgaging the house. LS1 coils would be $35 a piece (at jobber cost). What might be another suggestion to look at? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 7:40 PM Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > FAST's eDIST. Need a distributor with a cam sync signal (MSD), and then 8 > LS1 coils > Bruce > > > > > I'm working up a super charged EFI 377 sb chevy. Thinking about using HEI > + > > MSD.(7 pin GM module) Any opinions on this or a better set up that won't > > make me remorgage the house? > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clare@snyder.on.ca Sat Dec 8 03:37:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:52:25 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 03:52:25 -0300 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re:Stroker surge - DIY_EFI Digest V5 #919 Common cause of idle "surge" is mis-adjusted base idle throttle opening - The IAC cycles trying to compensate for it, and gets thoroughly confused. Was common on Toyota Nippondenso (L-Jetronic style) systems when DIY guys did their own adjustments without knowing what they were doing. Major mods could easily trigger this problem. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 04:22:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:22:51 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:22:51 -0800 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Sorry, I just had to make a comment. Bernd Felsche wrote: > > EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > Bruce wrote: > Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What did you > say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to clean it. That part is a bit to bad, only the second owner should need to replace it. The same thing with air flow sensors. That is also an extremely overpriced spare. This is only a way to beat the customer for a bit more money. I am sure that the company that makes the engine management system includes this when they set the price for the EMS of each car. Jörgen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Sat Dec 8 04:15:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:30:13 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:30:13 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Bernd Felsche wrote: > > Arnie the mathematician responds with: > > > I did very well in geometry while in H.S. The term tangent comes to > > mind. A tangent waay out in the back 40. (I also grew up on a farm). > > Well, some people keep on introducing hyperbole or react acutely > at the same time being obtuse. :-) > And others, failing to see that that self imposed limits are integral to the continuous function of two sided conversation, seem content to introduce an infinite number of unrelated rationalizations into a thread. While an individual conversation should affect the exchange of information, in this situation and with respect to noise, the value of the conversation quickly dwindles to zero; invariably describing an unchanging and asymptotic condition which generally equals the maximum contribution of the poster when considered for the domain of the thread. But I could be wrong. Using the aforementioned hyperbole it just might be true that some people constantly introduce a coefficient of irrelevance which simply increases any noise level already present. The end result is still the same. The speed at which posts propogate may be higher, but there's no acceleration to the growth of knowledge. Total contribution is still zero. > How long does a normal conversation stay on the original topic? A normal conversation with whom? Shannen > > ... mmm. These nuts are nice. > > :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 8 04:20:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:30:16 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:30:16 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 11:24 AM 12/8/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: [snip] > >Don't mix "mass market" and competition paradigms. > I wasn't. Just was saying that both venues have artificial > displacement restrictions. Of a different sort, but the same > design restriction, nevertheless. The design restriction for mass-market is what people are prepared to pay for private transport. The design restriction for professional motorsport is how much money you can screw out of your sponsors/financiers on the promise that you'll win by pouring more money into the project. > >EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > >install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > > No. It is simply the cheapest way to meet emission regs. It _also_ does that. Buyers demand all the other tangible benefits that EFI delivers. Low cost of ownership through low fuel consumption and low maintenance is a huge motivator to buying EFI. > That > >appeals to mass-market _buyers_. > > What really appeals to them is getting the commie pigs to give > them another "OK" sticker every year or two with minimal hassle > (on top on minimal cost). You'd be surprised that no such annual inspections are required in the majority of places? > The number of new cars produced > >with carb'd engines is very small - production is restricted to > >developing countries. > > Where emission regs and "inspections" are virtually non-existent. And where buyers are undemanding of the mode of transport. They're happy that they don't have to walk 10 km a day, or get pushed off the roof of a bus every once in a while. > TBI is the LCD, and is diminishing as _buyers_ > >migrate to engines with port-injection due to better drivability and > >fuel economy. > > No. Port injection makes it possible to meet current cold start > emission requirements. Plain and simple. TBI can't do it. Must be news to Bosch and Magneti Marelli. Ever heard of Mono-jetronic? As used in Opel Corsa, VW Polo, SEAT Ibiza, etc? It sucks almost as badly as a carb setup when trying to start and drive it when it's cold. There are ways and means of complying with cold-start emission requirements. Fast-light cats aided by auxiliary air pumps are just two examples. > >It'll take another 5 to 10 years before direct gasoline injection to > >reach the market penetration of port-injection. Partly because of > >fleet ageing, partly because of the cost reductions that come with > >development. > > And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This > time mostly CAFE. So engineers looking to meet customer demands for lower fuel consumption with higher performance has nothing to do with it? CAFE means nothing in EU. How many DI non-EU models are there in the USA? Or to put it another way; why are only the Europeans and Japanese look like they're actually building cars with direct gasoline injection? Could it be that the US doesn't have suitable fuels available for the mass market? Goodness, if CAFE was so important, shouldn't the government mandate availability of suitable fuels? They haven't even ensured that low-sulphur diesel fuel is available for clean-burning diesels. > Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with > DCOE/IDA carbys in terms of BSFC !! > Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! And a carb allows subsequent re-condensation; significantly-more manifold wetting in mass-market cars than with port injection. That's a driveability issue as much as emissions. Emissions bug the government; driveability bugs the person actually driving and probably owning the car. > >> Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of > >> making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! > > > >Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? > >At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. > > You knew perfectly well I was talking about competition engines in > this one. You been taking debating lessons from the greenies or > Slick Willie Klinton?? Gotta be one or the other ! No. DCOE is mentioned in the same breath as mass-market. My definition of "perform" is also wider than yours. It's you guys who (never) voted for Slick Willie. > >> Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came > >> virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc > >> brakes in competition! > > > >So their chassis design was of no tangible benefit? > Virtually none, or likely even a negative compared to the > competition of their day. I spose you are going to try to tell me Ahh.. swing axles compared to what Jaguar had? > next that the Jag engine's twin cams helped it rev higher to make > more power, in spite of its 4-3/16" stroke and con rod bolts that > gave every evidence of having been made from used Tootsie Rolls ! A commodity which I've never seen. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 04:54:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:54:29 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:54:29 -0800 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > That part is a bit to bad, only the second owner should need to replace it. > The same thing with air flow sensors. That is also an extremely overpriced > spare. This is only a way to beat the customer for a bit more money. I am > sure that the company that makes the engine management system includes this > when they set the price for the EMS of each car. > > Jörgen You are right, when I worked at a tier 1 supplier we would sell hotwire sensors for around $10 to the OEMs. Almost makes you want to start a parts business...... Igor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Sat Dec 8 04:33:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:55:10 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:55:10 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > > > > What are you, on freaking drugs? > > They are streetable cars. That's what was asked. Just because > they're espen$ive doesn't mean that they're not streetable. Nothing was asked. The original statement was "The best performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an OHV engine." The car you're talking about is not reasonably priced. > > And your 200mph nascars are equipped a full luxury cars as well, Nope. Pointless waste of arse warmers and walnut cupholders. > meet all emission and crash requirements? They meet the emissions requirements they're designed to meet. They hold up sufficiently in lap after lap of abuse. And the Bugatti? Statistically cars in that price range do not meet emissions requirements. The manufacturer simply pays the fines required by the government in the country where the car is sold. And I wonder how well the Bugatti will hold up in the same conditions "my" nascar racer is designed for. > They're air conditioned? Nope. And it gets pretty damn hot in those fire suits. But my personal car isn't air conditioned either so I don't consider that a necessary portion of the definition of a reasonably priced streetable car. > Leather seats? What has leather to do with "a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still driveable around town" ? > They go around real corners too? Yeah... Those turns at the end of the track? They don't really exist. Those boys run for 200 straight miles and everything is done with camera tricks. Last race in the Poconos found the boys finishing in New York. Was ok though, since it was a straight line from there to the next race. > And along normal, > bumpy roads? Yep, you can drive those cars along normal, bumpy roads. In fact, the road I'm speaking about was resurfaced for the first time since 1988, so the cars running the course were driven along 90 miles of normal, bumpy roads. Here's a link to the race page. http://www.silverstateclassic.com/home.htm A look through previous years' race reslts shows that former stock cars dominate the unlimited speed class, topping Porsche CTRs, twin turbos, and other exotic cars. Some time spent reading about the race and the participants should give you an appreciation of how adaptable the old stock cars are. > You can drive them down to the corner shop? I work at a corner shop (literally and figuratively) where race cars are built and repaired. We fix them right along side VW's. Really. We even keep parts in stock for 'em. > > The Veyron will be a proper, road-going car. It will not be repairable at the corner shop, it will not be reasonably priced, and it may not even be found in this country. It does not represent a good argument that the best performing reasonably priced cars are not using OHV engines. And it is no less specialized than the nascar cars. Fewer than .0000001% of the world population will own one, they will not be produced in larger volume than the nascar cars, and as yet they are nothing more than a promise of performance. The nascar racer should be considered in this comparison. > It's a bit dark at the moment. (1 a.m.) With this comment I'm beginning to gain some insight into Bernd Felsch. > > > > What's a reasonable > > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > > driveable around town? > > > > $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. > > ?? $150k US won't buy you one. It will. You're wrong. $150k US will buy an emissions legal car that meets US crashworthiness specifications, exceeds federal braking requirements, comes with computer aided handling and traction control, leather seats, air conditioning, cd player, and all sorts of other nonsense. And it's made in the US. And it approaches speeds close to 400km/hr. *And* it sports an OHV engine. **And** it's design actually has some relation to the original subject line "intake manifold construction." Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? Shannen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 8 04:43:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:55:12 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 04:55:12 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >What does an emission-compliant carb cost, that delivers a better > >fuel consumption, driveability and performance from cold start, to > >hot start, to hot run (let alone emisssions) and never requires > >adjustment? > HEY--at least now, we are admitting that its emission requirments that > drove things to EFI !! Quote selectively, and you can prove anything you like. Ignore the other factors if it's convenient to you. Remember how I said early on in this discussion that (real) Engineers have a compulsion to improve things? Reducing emissions is one of those things that can be improved. It doesn't really need government requirements to make that happen. Regulations do help the Engineers _justify_ to the beancounters the need to put the more-advanced technology on the mass market. > Funny how we switch arguments when it suits us, ain't it?? Let's see; the average joker puts their carb'd car in a workshop for 2 hours of tuneup every 5000 km... That's adding like 2 cents a km to the running cost of the car, before we consider that the carb engine would consume between 20% and 50% more fuel for the same duty. Drive 30,000km a year and EFI saves around 1200 litres in fuel a year (for a car like mine, yours may average more than 8 l/100km) and 4 extra days without car). That's well over $1000 EFI's saving me every year. Low emissions don't _sell_ cars. Not for the masses. It's low costs to buy, and low costs to own. Fuel and maintenance are significant expenses. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 8 04:53:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 05:07:21 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 05:07:21 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Shannen Durphey tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > > Bugatti Veyron. You got the $2 million? Bugatti's taking orders. > > > > > > What are you, on freaking drugs? > > > > They are streetable cars. That's what was asked. Just because > > they're espen$ive doesn't mean that they're not streetable. > Nothing was asked. The original statement was "The best > performing Reasonably priced car in the world today still uses an > OHV engine." > The car you're talking about is not reasonably priced. What's a reasonable price for a streetable car that'll do more than 400kmh? To put it another way; if you were "worth" $500 million, would the Veyron seem to be reasonably-priced at a million Euro? > > And your 200mph nascars are equipped a full luxury cars as well, > Nope. Pointless waste of arse warmers and walnut cupholders. > > meet all emission and crash requirements? > They meet the emissions requirements they're designed to meet. > They hold up sufficiently in lap after lap of abuse. And the > Bugatti? Statistically cars in that price range do not meet > emissions requirements. The manufacturer simply pays the fines > required by the government in the country where the car is sold. Bugatti Veyron will exceed requirements of Euro-4 > And I wonder how well the Bugatti will hold up in the same > conditions "my" nascar racer is designed for. > > They're air conditioned? > Nope. And it gets pretty damn hot in those fire suits. But my > personal car isn't air conditioned either so I don't consider that > a necessary portion of the definition of a reasonably priced > streetable car. > > Leather seats? > What has leather to do with "a car capable of speeds close to > 400kmh and still driveable around town" ? It adds mass and underscores that it's a car designed for everyday use. > > They go around real corners too? > Yeah... Those turns at the end of the track? They don't really > exist. Those boys run for 200 straight miles and everything is > done with camera tricks. Last race in the Poconos found the boys > finishing in New York. Was ok though, since it was a straight > line from there to the next race. > > And along normal, bumpy roads? > Yep, you can drive those cars along normal, bumpy roads. In fact, > the road I'm speaking about was resurfaced for the first time > since 1988, so the cars running the course were driven along 90 > miles of normal, bumpy roads. > Here's a link to the race page. > http://www.silverstateclassic.com/home.htm > A look through previous years' race reslts shows that former stock > cars dominate the unlimited speed class, topping Porsche CTRs, > twin turbos, and other exotic cars. Some time spent reading about > the race and the participants should give you an appreciation of > how adaptable the old stock cars are. > > You can drive them down to the corner shop? > I work at a corner shop (literally and figuratively) where race > cars are built and repaired. We fix them right along side VW's. > Really. We even keep parts in stock for 'em. > > The Veyron will be a proper, road-going car. > > It will not be repairable at the corner shop, it will not be > reasonably priced, and it may not even be found in this country. Take a look in Bill Gates' garage in 2003. > It does not represent a good argument that the best performing > reasonably priced cars are not using OHV engines. > And it is no less specialized than the nascar cars. Fewer than > .0000001% of the world population will own one, they will not be > produced in larger volume than the nascar cars, and as yet they > are nothing more than a promise of performance. The nascar racer > should be considered in this comparison. > > It's a bit dark at the moment. (1 a.m.) > With this comment I'm beginning to gain some insight into Bernd Felsch. Timezones? I was asked the colour of the sky. You ask, you get an answer that may be more correct than what you counted on. > > > > > What's a reasonable > > > > > price for a car capable of speeds close to 400kmh and still > > > > > driveable around town? > > > > > > $150k US dollars for the "Buy it, don't build it" crowd. > > > > ?? $150k US won't buy you one. > It will. You're wrong. $150k US will buy an emissions legal car I didn't say the bit your quoted. You've lost the attribution. > that meets US crashworthiness specifications, exceeds federal > braking requirements, comes with computer aided handling and > traction control, leather seats, air conditioning, cd player, and > all sorts of other nonsense. And it's made in the US. And it > approaches speeds close to 400km/hr. *And* it sports an OHV > engine. **And** it's design actually has some relation to the > original subject line "intake manifold construction." > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? Forgive me if I don't care. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 06:11:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:11:20 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:11:20 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Just was saying that both venues have artificial >> displacement restrictions. Of a different sort, but the same >> design restriction, nevertheless. > >The design restriction for mass-market is what people are prepared >to pay for private transport. And confiscatory displacement taxes aren't a part of that equation or a design restraint?? Get real !! Such taxes are nothing more than "social engineers" trying to act like real ones because somebody was foolish enough to allow it thus ! The design restriction for >professional motorsport is how much money you can screw out of your >sponsors/financiers on the promise that you'll win by pouring more >money into the project. Just as the limit of how much money the above mentioned "social engineers" can screw out of the public before they get executed !! > >> >EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, >> >install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). >> >> No. It is simply the cheapest way to meet emission regs. > >It _also_ does that. Buyers demand all the other tangible benefits >that EFI delivers. Don't be naive! > >It sucks almost as badly as a carb setup when trying to start and >drive it when it's cold. There are ways and means of complying with >cold-start emission requirements. Fast-light cats aided by auxiliary >air pumps are just two examples. > >> >It'll take another 5 to 10 years before direct gasoline injection to >> >reach the market penetration of port-injection. Partly because of >> >fleet ageing, partly because of the cost reductions that come with >> >development. >> >> And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This >> time mostly CAFE. > >So engineers looking to meet customer demands for lower fuel >consumption with higher performance has nothing to do with it? > >CAFE means nothing in EU. How many DI non-EU models are there in the >USA? Or to put it another way; why are only the Europeans and >Japanese look like they're actually building cars with direct >gasoline injection? > >Could it be that the US doesn't have suitable fuels available for >the mass market? > >Goodness, if CAFE was so important, shouldn't the government mandate >availability of suitable fuels? They haven't even ensured that >low-sulphur diesel fuel is available for clean-burning diesels. > >> Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with >> DCOE/IDA carbys in terms of BSFC !! > >> Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! > >And a carb allows subsequent re-condensation; significantly-more >manifold wetting in mass-market cars than with port injection. >That's a driveability issue as much as emissions. Emissions bug the >government; driveability bugs the person actually driving and >probably owning the car. > >> >> Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of >> >> making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! >> > >> >Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? >> >At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. >> >> You knew perfectly well I was talking about competition engines in >> this one. You been taking debating lessons from the greenies or >> Slick Willie Klinton?? Gotta be one or the other ! > >No. DCOE is mentioned in the same breath as mass-market. My >definition of "perform" is also wider than yours. > >It's you guys who (never) voted for Slick Willie. > >> >> Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came >> >> virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc >> >> brakes in competition! >> > >> >So their chassis design was of no tangible benefit? > >> Virtually none, or likely even a negative compared to the >> competition of their day. I spose you are going to try to tell me > >Ahh.. swing axles compared to what Jaguar had? I must admit a certain fondness for Hotchkiss/leaf spring rears, but to claim that they are sophisticated is, to say the least, unusual !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 06:11:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:11:29 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:11:29 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A Going to a junk yard, and hunting thru ads. Developing personal contacts, maybe even friends that will help scout things out for you. You don't have to buy everything new. IMO, you first get all the support systems in place, THEN build the engine (actually develope the game plan first). Bruce From: "elcamino73" Subject: Re: MSD 6A > Uhhh Bruce, you must have missed the part about not remorgaging the house. > LS1 coils would be $35 a piece (at jobber cost). What might be another > suggestion to look at? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > FAST's eDIST. Need a distributor with a cam sync signal (MSD), and then 8 > > LS1 coils > > Bruce > > > I'm working up a super charged EFI 377 sb chevy. Thinking about using > HEI + MSD.(7 pin GM module) Any opinions on this or a better set up that won't > > > make me remorgage the house? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 06:15:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:15:59 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:15:59 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >Quote selectively, and you can prove anything you like. > >Ignore the other factors if it's convenient to you. > Ahhh-- An admission that the greenies taught you how to debate! A maxim straight from their manual !! Now that we have established what you are, adios, MF !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 06:18:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:18:26 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:18:26 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Jörgen Karlsson" Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Sorry, I just had to make a comment. > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > > > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > Bruce wrote: > > Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What did you > > say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to clean it. > That part is a bit to bad, only the second owner should need to replace it. > The same thing with air flow sensors. That is also an extremely overpriced > spare. This is only a way to beat the customer for a bit more money. I am > sure that the company that makes the engine management system includes this > when they set the price for the EMS of each car. > Jörgen So we just ignore selective bits of the conversation?. He was saying they were reasonably priced, and then in another posting mentions $450, for an idle speed controller. What ever the market up is what the mark up is, don't state things as being of resonable cost, when they aren't. Markup is part of the cost, so be it. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 06:20:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:20:53 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:20:53 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Igor Dorrestijn" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > That part is a bit to bad, only the second owner should need to replace > it. The same thing with air flow sensors. That is also an extremely overpriced > > spare. This is only a way to beat the customer for a bit more money. I am > > sure that the company that makes the engine management system includes > this when they set the price for the EMS of each car. > > Jörgen > You are right, when I worked at a tier 1 supplier we would sell hotwire > sensors for around $10 to the OEMs. Almost makes you want to start a parts > business...... > Igor Geesh, kind of ignoring what they had to spend to make that $10 aren't you?. Have you bought a cup of coffee?. Talk about a *mark up*. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Sat Dec 8 06:22:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:35:59 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:35:59 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Bernd Felsche wrote: > To put it another way; if you were "worth" $500 million, would the > Veyron seem to be reasonably-priced at a million Euro? No, Bernd, it would probably not. I'm a "build it, don't buy it" type. I will likely never be worth $500 million, and I'm not interested in debating what I'd consider valuable if I were. It ain't gonna happen. But I don't have to be worth $500 million to see that there is a much better value than the Bugatti. 2 > > Bugatti Veyron will exceed requirements of Euro-4 Great. That would be a good way for a maker of an expensive car to show they do not feel they are above government laws. > > It adds mass But it doesn't hold any weight. > > > > It's a bit dark at the moment. (1 a.m.) > > With this comment I'm beginning to gain some insight into Bernd Felsch. > > Timezones? Personality. > > Forgive me if I don't care. Well you sure as he-- didn't ask if we cared before you started down this road. You asked the question about reasonable price for a level of performance. I've found it and stated it. I can see you're enamored of the Bugatti But it's an example of a car built to flaunt extravagance and wealth and Bugatti uses performance as a major portion of the justification for the cost. The US car is an example of a car built to provide a certain level of performance and the price justifies the work that went into development and the work that goes into manufacturing. Shannen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 06:37:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:37:12 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:37:12 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Greg Hermann" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the same > >degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. > As long as the customer didn't complain of neck strain from so much better > throttle response than EFI ever dreamed of !! > > I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion > >within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. > >Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. > >Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. > >Bruce > Are you kidding Bruce?? > THAT would take some competence, rather than just a trip to typing & > computer schools !! > Greg Yes, it was a baited guestion. I was curious if he had any actual experience in a subject he was professing to know. I guess lieing like that is acceptable in some circles. Thou it might be out of ignorance. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 06:38:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:38:10 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:38:10 -0800 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! I'm still waiting (as patiently as a 4-year old :) for my spot on the leftovers list so I can purchase both the DIY-WB board and components. I have been looking up and cross-referencing a few things lately that may be of use though: The NTK UEGO is available through Napaonline being resold by Echlin with part number ECHOS791. Cost is $139. Borg Warner also resells the sensor with part number OS903. That guy is about the same price through carparts.com. If anybody has found the sensor recently for anything cheaper than this can you contact me off list plz? I was talking with an engines guy from NASCAR-land. He said they use exactly this same sensor with the NTK driver box (its ~400 and I guess its only real difference from DIY-WB is a more elaborate heater circuit). They calibrate each sensor when they get it into their hands, but I'm absolutely amazed at how exact of A/F's they're looking at. He said the sensors all come in within 0.1 A/F of each other without any calibration! That's amazingly tight tolerance, IMHO. They are generally tuning and looking at changes under 0.05 A/F on the dyno - I'm surprised they get repeatable results down to that tight an A/F. I'd be more than happy with a 0.5 A/F resolution. Anyway, he said they get about 100 hours of life out of the sensors and then their output falls off. They do some recalibrating in that timespan of course. This is in a normal leaded fuel, so I'm guessing about 4 grams of lead per gallon. I haven't really noticed anything brought up about calibrating sensors. I guess they do drift some in leaded fuels and they don't do it consistently either. Some sensors are stable over their lifespan and others start drifting right away. Has this topic been visited at all? I think it would be very easy to do without a lab bench and to just calibrate a stoich point using a regular switching O2 sensor in the same stream as the UEGO. I guess I need to do some more research on this calibration topic to know exactly what is entailed and necessary. Kevin >There is no guilt about being a lurker. Just support those that are trying >to good things, and share when you do find out a neat thing. Just a shame >a couple guys had to ruin so much for so many. >Just wait until you see how easy things get using it. >Your welcome >Bruce > >From: "Jim Sloan" >Subject: diy-wb works! > > I just wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this effort >especially > > Steven and Robert. Also many thanks to Bruce and the little guys, whose > > posts I look forward to enthusiastically. Bruce does make me feel a >little > > guilty for being a lurker, but it may be a good thing, since my >primitive > > conception of how things work is often wrong. > > I'm excited, since this is my first real electronic project. It fired >up > > without any snags. I used a heat sink from an injector driver from a >dead > > ecm for U1. Now we'll see how far off my tuning has been. > > Many thanks. > > Jim Sloan > > leroy@sunflower.com > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 06:41:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:41:04 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:41:04 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: PRV engine Hello Huw, this is the later 4V engine. It has Cosworth Pistons and seems to have very strong (and heavy, 833g) rods of unknown manufacturer. Do you want to share some details of the engine of your friend ? Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Huw Scourfield [mailto:huw.scourfield@lineone.net] Gesendet: Freitag, 7. Dezember 2001 18:49 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Is this the 2V per cylinder PRV or the later 4V one, I have a Volvo version under the bench in my workshop, know someone who runs one at 30 psi boost, pretty impressive! Huw ----- Original Message ----- From: Rausch, Bernd To: Sent: 05 December 2001 14:00 Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Vibration is a point I did not think about before. > Does anyone on the list run an air/liquid intercooler and can confirm > the sizing information from Spearco ? I thought that an a/l coolder is > more effective and smaller in size than an air/air cooler. > > The engine is a Renault/Peugeot V6 3L 24V, with Garrett GT twin > ballbearing turbos (GT25 Turbine, T3-60 compressor). max RPM is 7200, > boost will be about 1.2-1.5bar. The ECU is a Pectel T6M. > > Bernd > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Kevin _ [mailto:kiggly@hotmail.com] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2001 05:52 > An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > > > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > > >To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing > >off the plenum as well as the runners? > > KART cars last year (and probably this year too) used an extra throttle > that's on the plenum and electronically controlled to limit boost. I > guess > they found they could react faster there to limit a spike event than > they > could with controlling the wastegate. I'm guessing they also have a > good > spike wanting to naturally happen after <100ms shift (I don't know for > sure > what their shift times are). > > >Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to > >fill that volume as well as that of the runners. > > If you do a throttle before all that volume like you were saying, its > really > going to have terrible throttle response. > > >OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already > >filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners > >sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, > >the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening > >of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure > >hasn't bled out through the turbo. > > > >Which system will have less lag? > > The system with 6 throttle plates will have less lag. It should also > have > much, much better throttle response. You will have to make a plenum of > air > pressure from all 6 runners past the throttles though to get a MAP > pressure. > This can just be 6 lines tee'd together, just keep the lines as short > as > possible and use, probably, 1/8" or 3/16" diameter hoses. > > >A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate > >throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. > >In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little > >advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical > >setups). > > You can't use a slide throttle on a street car though. There is > terribly > inconsistent flow through them at part throttle. I liked the stratus > touring car that had barrel throttles though, those were cool as hell! > They > split at the middle and rolled away (like double-doors opening) to make > a > completely smooth runner at WOT. Slide throttles are your best bet by > far. > > >The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. > >The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. > >Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be > >around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. > > 70mm??? For what, if you're going to have 100%VE at 12000 rpm? What > rpm > will the motor go to? I'm guessing you'd need somewhere in the low 50mm > > range. Smaller is better as long as its not a restriction because if > you go > too big the throttles just end up becoming an on/off switch. For a 2L > NA > engine going to 8500 rpm and making ~300hp, we found that 52mm was the > smallest that we didn't lose any hp. Anything bigger than that didn't > gain > any hp at all and just made the engine more difficult to drive. > > >One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very > >durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. > >You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by > >chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just > >the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. > > > >No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air > >distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that > >requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. > > You'll have to be VERY careful about thermal expansion of the engine. > This > is without a doubt the most difficult part of this entire system. You > need > to make a setup that holds the butterflies aligned within the trumpets > or > else they will bind up. This seems trivial, but it really requires some > > attention. I would put a pair of ball bearings on each butterfly and > join > the butterflies from cylinder-to-cylinder with fittings that allow some > axial growth. http://www.zeromax.com has some neat couplings that can > get > this job done well. I haven't used them, but they really look like the > perfect part for this application. > > Just wondering though, but why don't you just make a normal-ish intake > manifold and mount the intercooler away from the engine? This is > normally > much easier to do and you don't have to worry so much about heat soak > from > the engine getting the IC hot. You're also talking about mounting > something > big, heavy, and with very little thermal expansion (as long as you keep > the > water cool that is) on top of a somewhat high vibration environment that > > goes through wild temperature swings, expansions, and deflections. Its > just > a recipe for a part thats going to be difficult to make last very long. > > If you go through and make it, I'd love to see some pictures! Just > curious > also though, what rpm range, boost range, and displacement are you > planning > for this V6? I believe you mentioned a 650hp goal... > > Kevin > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 06:48:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:48:11 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 06:48:11 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > >From: "Bernd Felsche" > Various bits of snippage. > > > EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > > > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > > Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What > > did you say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to > > clean it. > It's $450 (Australian), so not as costly as you think. It's an > inflated price anyway for Oz; at least double the dealer cost of the > part in Germany. I only ever paid for the one. Wiggle, wiggle. Again we, ramble off into the AU economy. > What does an emission-compliant carb cost, that delivers a better > fuel consumption, driveability and performance from cold start, to > hot start, to hot run (let alone emisssions) and never requires > adjustment? Tell me about this never requires adjustment EFI, that you want me to compare it to. > BTW: I get about 700km on 55 litres. I get 703 snotmiles on 52 dwarfickes > > > > Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite > > > > capable of making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as > > > > well as EFI ! > > > Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? > > > At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. > > If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the > > same degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. > > I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion > > within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. > Let's forget about _retail_prices_ because they are artificially > inflated. There are huge total margins from manufacturer to retail. > The idle stabiliser probably costs VDO less than $20 to make. I > doubt very much that VW would have paid even double that, seeing > that they would have ordered the units in the hundreds of thousands > every few months. You logic is really lacking. You make comments contray to your own statements, that is really laughable. > The opportunity for large margins in the after-market is not nearly > so great. I'm not talking about fuzzy dice here. Productions runs > are small so the initial cost is high. If you're pricing for the > enthusiast market (i.e. not the pro-competition), then your retail > price has to be somewhere near that of OEM. You can't therefore get > a 500% markup from the part manufacturer to the wholesaler. > Further down the food-chain, margins are susceptible to local market > conditions; competition and market size. e.g. I could airfreight > distributors from California, pay duties and taxes, and still make > 100% on the items for retail to underprice the locally-sourced > suppliers - who are only making 20% if they're lucky. > There are economies of scale. For the "original parts" market, they > can set their prices how they feel; based on what the market will > bear. There's little correlation between cost and prices. You made the statement, and now you trying to cover your silliness with more off subject silly crap. > Volkswagen would have paid much less than $1000 (US) for the entire > injection system on my car. The "$1000" ECU has a PCB with $100 > worth of parts (at retail component prices). A quick addition of > retail prices on the EFI components adds up to in excess of $5000. > A long block replacement lists at $13,000 (plus 10% tax) without EFI > and ancillaries. > I bought the whole car, new, for $27,000, including taxes at the > then-higher rate. > Retail prices for original replacement parts have almost no > correlation with actual costs. They are numbers that have fallen out > of a random profit generator driven by accountants. Again, your lack of appreciation for what happens to just be the REAL World is showing. > > Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. > > Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. > No. I don't have a clue about DCOE in particular. > Oh, there's a bar of soap. Does it look anything like that? Oh so you are absolutely clueless, and yet feel free to comment on subject matter that you again have no clues about. Thanks for admitting again you have no clue about what you profess to talk about, makes me curious if you have any clues about the subjects you comment on. > Solex, Mikuni and other Weber; yeah I've seen them and tweaked > Solexes in my earlier VW. I won't flatter myself and call it > "tuning" as it was only returning the components back to spec., but > the result was a little better than before the exercise. More ramblings of the poorly informed. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 07:10:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 07:10:49 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 07:10:49 -0800 From: "Jurgen Hartwig" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) Sounds like a few of you guys need to get laid. jay ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 08:20:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 08:20:31 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 08:20:31 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Actually the sensors are calibrated at the factory. There is a resistor in the connector that is tied into the DIY-WB output circuit. There were some posts listing cal gases that can be used for calibration and testing purposes. And yes, lead will kill an O2 sensor about as fast as anything, except maybe silicone BobR. Kevin _ wrote: > I'm still waiting (as patiently as a 4-year old :) for my spot on the > leftovers list so I can purchase both the DIY-WB board and components. I > have been looking up and cross-referencing a few things lately that may be > of use though: > > The NTK UEGO is available through Napaonline being resold by Echlin with > part number ECHOS791. Cost is $139. Borg Warner also resells the sensor > with part number OS903. That guy is about the same price through > carparts.com. If anybody has found the sensor recently for anything cheaper > than this can you contact me off list plz? > > I was talking with an engines guy from NASCAR-land. He said they use > exactly this same sensor with the NTK driver box (its ~400 and I guess its > only real difference from DIY-WB is a more elaborate heater circuit). They > calibrate each sensor when they get it into their hands, but I'm absolutely > amazed at how exact of A/F's they're looking at. He said the sensors all > come in within 0.1 A/F of each other without any calibration! That's > amazingly tight tolerance, IMHO. They are generally tuning and looking at > changes under 0.05 A/F on the dyno - I'm surprised they get repeatable > results down to that tight an A/F. I'd be more than happy with a 0.5 A/F > resolution. Anyway, he said they get about 100 hours of life out of the > sensors and then their output falls off. They do some recalibrating in that > timespan of course. This is in a normal leaded fuel, so I'm guessing about > 4 grams of lead per gallon. > > I haven't really noticed anything brought up about calibrating sensors. I > guess they do drift some in leaded fuels and they don't do it consistently > either. Some sensors are stable over their lifespan and others start > drifting right away. Has this topic been visited at all? I think it would > be very easy to do without a lab bench and to just calibrate a stoich point > using a regular switching O2 sensor in the same stream as the UEGO. I guess > I need to do some more research on this calibration topic to know exactly > what is entailed and necessary. > > Kevin > > >There is no guilt about being a lurker. Just support those that are trying > >to good things, and share when you do find out a neat thing. Just a shame > >a couple guys had to ruin so much for so many. > >Just wait until you see how easy things get using it. > >Your welcome > >Bruce > > > >From: "Jim Sloan" > >Subject: diy-wb works! > > > I just wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this effort > >especially > > > Steven and Robert. Also many thanks to Bruce and the little guys, whose > > > posts I look forward to enthusiastically. Bruce does make me feel a > >little > > > guilty for being a lurker, but it may be a good thing, since my > >primitive > > > conception of how things work is often wrong. > > > I'm excited, since this is my first real electronic project. It fired > >up > > > without any snags. I used a heat sink from an injector driver from a > >dead > > > ecm for U1. Now we'll see how far off my tuning has been. > > > Many thanks. > > > Jim Sloan > > > leroy@sunflower.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 08:31:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 08:52:36 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 08:52:36 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A Uhhh Bruce, you must have missed the part about not remorgaging the house. LS1 coils would be $35 a piece (at jobber cost). What might be another suggestion to look at? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 7:40 PM Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > FAST's eDIST. Need a distributor with a cam sync signal (MSD), and then 8 > LS1 coils > Bruce > > > > > I'm working up a super charged EFI 377 sb chevy. Thinking about using HEI > + > > MSD.(7 pin GM module) Any opinions on this or a better set up that won't > > make me remorgage the house? > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 09:03:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:03:03 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:03:03 -0800 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! My understanding was the production sensors all came with the same cal resistor. The $1000 sensor (or whatever it costs) that is sold to go along with the lab-grade boxes like the Horiba (sp?) and the like are individually calibrated. I thought the Honda production version was more generic. Can anybody confirm or deny this? I'll check through the archives about cal gases. And what do you mean "kill an O2 sensor about as fast as anything" ? I think 100 hours is a fantastic lifespan for a sensor in leaded gas! I know it doesn't sound like much time, but that makes this sensor one of the cheaper parts of maintaining a race car. I had used narrow-band switching sensors in the past just to see if I was rich or lean and then EGT to make a guess at A/F. I never got more than a few hours out of a narrow-band sensor in a leaded environment before output began falling. Kevin >Actually the sensors are calibrated at the factory. There is a resistor >in the connector that is tied into the DIY-WB output circuit. There >were some posts listing cal gases that can be used for calibration >and testing purposes. And yes, lead will kill an O2 sensor about as >fast as anything, except maybe silicone > >BobR. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jorgen.m.karlsson@home.se Sat Dec 8 09:22:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:40:08 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 09:40:08 -0300 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Sorry, I just had to make a comment. Bernd Felsche wrote: > > EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > Bruce wrote: > Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What did you > say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to clean it. That part is a bit to bad, only the second owner should need to replace it. The same thing with air flow sensors. That is also an extremely overpriced spare. This is only a way to beat the customer for a bit more money. I am sure that the company that makes the engine management system includes this when they set the price for the EMS of each car. Jörgen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 10:03:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:03:17 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:03:17 -0800 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Interesting conversation! Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, dirty air cleaner, varying oxygenate content in the fuel, etc? I don't really know what DCOE carbs are, are they electronically controlled or something? Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Dorrestijn@corps.nl Sat Dec 8 09:53:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:05:53 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:05:53 -0300 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > That part is a bit to bad, only the second owner should need to replace it. > The same thing with air flow sensors. That is also an extremely overpriced > spare. This is only a way to beat the customer for a bit more money. I am > sure that the company that makes the engine management system includes this > when they set the price for the EMS of each car. > > Jörgen You are right, when I worked at a tier 1 supplier we would sell hotwire sensors for around $10 to the OEMs. Almost makes you want to start a parts business...... Igor ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 10:42:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:42:06 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 10:42:06 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) ROTFLMAO!!!! Right on!! Only reason I am staying on this list right now is the HOPE that an occasional pearl of wisdom goes by (rarely), and to keep tabs on the DIY-WB successes and stories. In spite of that, S/N ratio is worst I have seen in 15 years of internet newsgroups and mailing lists... Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Jurgen Hartwig > Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 10:12 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) > > > Sounds like a few of you guys need to get laid. > > jay > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 11:02:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:02:15 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:02:15 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) From: "Jon Davis" Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of design. > dirty air cleaner, That's why they have recommended service intervals. >varying > oxygenate content in the fuel, etc? The fuels are still brewed to be compatible with carbs. With a feedback system, your more prone for troubles (when they tamper with the oxygen content of a fuel), then with something as simple as a carb. And, in case you haven't noticed, **they** are making a deliberate effort to brew fuels that discourage their use in carb'd vehicles, since the spin Dr.s have convinced so many that EFI is always better then carbs. > I don't really know what DCOE carbs are, > are they electronically controlled or something? No electronics. Just a fully calibratible (?) devise, unlike Holleys, and a few others that limit what you can adjust. Carburetion is a science, and wayyyyy to few people actually bother to try and understand how they work, so they automaticlly dismissed. Being newer can mean better, but it's not a universal truth. Bruce > Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 11:10:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:10:13 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:10:13 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) Hello Jurgen, I have to agree. Referring to the charter I find the following snippet: Charter: This mailing-list is *strictly* dedicated to the discussion of topics related to EFI design and modification. I would like to see discussion on control algorithms, hardware, electronics, and sensor/sensor-interface designs. Additionally, modification and adaptations of OEM ECU's would also be welcomed. >From my short time on the list I get the impression that genuine questions about EFI design take a back seat to chest beating. It is nothing but rude to the listmaster, who is good enough to put up and maintain the list, to disregard the rules so blatantly. If you want to flame me, it would be great if you could do it off the list. Sunday, December 09, 2001, 2:11:39 AM, you wrote: JH> Sounds like a few of you guys need to get laid. JH> jay JH> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- JH> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) JH> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 11:18:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:37:19 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:37:19 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > >Quote selectively, and you can prove anything you like. > >Ignore the other factors if it's convenient to you. > Ahhh-- An admission that the greenies taught you how to debate! A maxim straight from their manual !! Now that we have established what you are, adios, MF !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 11:14:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:37:24 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:37:24 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Just was saying that both venues have artificial >> displacement restrictions. Of a different sort, but the same >> design restriction, nevertheless. > >The design restriction for mass-market is what people are prepared >to pay for private transport. And confiscatory displacement taxes aren't a part of that equation or a design restraint?? Get real !! Such taxes are nothing more than "social engineers" trying to act like real ones because somebody was foolish enough to allow it thus ! The design restriction for >professional motorsport is how much money you can screw out of your >sponsors/financiers on the promise that you'll win by pouring more >money into the project. Just as the limit of how much money the above mentioned "social engineers" can screw out of the public before they get executed !! > >> >EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, >> >install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). >> >> No. It is simply the cheapest way to meet emission regs. > >It _also_ does that. Buyers demand all the other tangible benefits >that EFI delivers. Don't be naive! > >It sucks almost as badly as a carb setup when trying to start and >drive it when it's cold. There are ways and means of complying with >cold-start emission requirements. Fast-light cats aided by auxiliary >air pumps are just two examples. > >> >It'll take another 5 to 10 years before direct gasoline injection to >> >reach the market penetration of port-injection. Partly because of >> >fleet ageing, partly because of the cost reductions that come with >> >development. >> >> And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This >> time mostly CAFE. > >So engineers looking to meet customer demands for lower fuel >consumption with higher performance has nothing to do with it? > >CAFE means nothing in EU. How many DI non-EU models are there in the >USA? Or to put it another way; why are only the Europeans and >Japanese look like they're actually building cars with direct >gasoline injection? > >Could it be that the US doesn't have suitable fuels available for >the mass market? > >Goodness, if CAFE was so important, shouldn't the government mandate >availability of suitable fuels? They haven't even ensured that >low-sulphur diesel fuel is available for clean-burning diesels. > >> Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with >> DCOE/IDA carbys in terms of BSFC !! > >> Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! > >And a carb allows subsequent re-condensation; significantly-more >manifold wetting in mass-market cars than with port injection. >That's a driveability issue as much as emissions. Emissions bug the >government; driveability bugs the person actually driving and >probably owning the car. > >> >> Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite capable of >> >> making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as well as EFI ! >> > >> >Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? >> >At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. >> >> You knew perfectly well I was talking about competition engines in >> this one. You been taking debating lessons from the greenies or >> Slick Willie Klinton?? Gotta be one or the other ! > >No. DCOE is mentioned in the same breath as mass-market. My >definition of "perform" is also wider than yours. > >It's you guys who (never) voted for Slick Willie. > >> >> Also, not to mention that Jag's competitive advantage came >> >> virtually entirely from being the first to adopt the use of disc >> >> brakes in competition! >> > >> >So their chassis design was of no tangible benefit? > >> Virtually none, or likely even a negative compared to the >> competition of their day. I spose you are going to try to tell me > >Ahh.. swing axles compared to what Jaguar had? I must admit a certain fondness for Hotchkiss/leaf spring rears, but to claim that they are sophisticated is, to say the least, unusual !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 11:11:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:37:25 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:37:25 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A Going to a junk yard, and hunting thru ads. Developing personal contacts, maybe even friends that will help scout things out for you. You don't have to buy everything new. IMO, you first get all the support systems in place, THEN build the engine (actually develope the game plan first). Bruce From: "elcamino73" Subject: Re: MSD 6A > Uhhh Bruce, you must have missed the part about not remorgaging the house. > LS1 coils would be $35 a piece (at jobber cost). What might be another > suggestion to look at? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > FAST's eDIST. Need a distributor with a cam sync signal (MSD), and then 8 > > LS1 coils > > Bruce > > > I'm working up a super charged EFI 377 sb chevy. Thinking about using > HEI + MSD.(7 pin GM module) Any opinions on this or a better set up that won't > > > make me remorgage the house? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 11:18:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:37:33 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:37:33 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Jörgen Karlsson" Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Sorry, I just had to make a comment. > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > > > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > Bruce wrote: > > Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What did you > > say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to clean it. > That part is a bit to bad, only the second owner should need to replace it. > The same thing with air flow sensors. That is also an extremely overpriced > spare. This is only a way to beat the customer for a bit more money. I am > sure that the company that makes the engine management system includes this > when they set the price for the EMS of each car. > Jörgen So we just ignore selective bits of the conversation?. He was saying they were reasonably priced, and then in another posting mentions $450, for an idle speed controller. What ever the market up is what the mark up is, don't state things as being of resonable cost, when they aren't. Markup is part of the cost, so be it. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 11:20:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:39:52 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:39:52 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Igor Dorrestijn" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > That part is a bit to bad, only the second owner should need to replace > it. The same thing with air flow sensors. That is also an extremely overpriced > > spare. This is only a way to beat the customer for a bit more money. I am > > sure that the company that makes the engine management system includes > this when they set the price for the EMS of each car. > > Jörgen > You are right, when I worked at a tier 1 supplier we would sell hotwire > sensors for around $10 to the OEMs. Almost makes you want to start a parts > business...... > Igor Geesh, kind of ignoring what they had to spend to make that $10 aren't you?. Have you bought a cup of coffee?. Talk about a *mark up*. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From kiggly@hotmail.com Sat Dec 8 11:37:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:48:40 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:48:40 -0300 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! I'm still waiting (as patiently as a 4-year old :) for my spot on the leftovers list so I can purchase both the DIY-WB board and components. I have been looking up and cross-referencing a few things lately that may be of use though: The NTK UEGO is available through Napaonline being resold by Echlin with part number ECHOS791. Cost is $139. Borg Warner also resells the sensor with part number OS903. That guy is about the same price through carparts.com. If anybody has found the sensor recently for anything cheaper than this can you contact me off list plz? I was talking with an engines guy from NASCAR-land. He said they use exactly this same sensor with the NTK driver box (its ~400 and I guess its only real difference from DIY-WB is a more elaborate heater circuit). They calibrate each sensor when they get it into their hands, but I'm absolutely amazed at how exact of A/F's they're looking at. He said the sensors all come in within 0.1 A/F of each other without any calibration! That's amazingly tight tolerance, IMHO. They are generally tuning and looking at changes under 0.05 A/F on the dyno - I'm surprised they get repeatable results down to that tight an A/F. I'd be more than happy with a 0.5 A/F resolution. Anyway, he said they get about 100 hours of life out of the sensors and then their output falls off. They do some recalibrating in that timespan of course. This is in a normal leaded fuel, so I'm guessing about 4 grams of lead per gallon. I haven't really noticed anything brought up about calibrating sensors. I guess they do drift some in leaded fuels and they don't do it consistently either. Some sensors are stable over their lifespan and others start drifting right away. Has this topic been visited at all? I think it would be very easy to do without a lab bench and to just calibrate a stoich point using a regular switching O2 sensor in the same stream as the UEGO. I guess I need to do some more research on this calibration topic to know exactly what is entailed and necessary. Kevin >There is no guilt about being a lurker. Just support those that are trying >to good things, and share when you do find out a neat thing. Just a shame >a couple guys had to ruin so much for so many. >Just wait until you see how easy things get using it. >Your welcome >Bruce > From: "Jim Sloan" >Subject: diy-wb works! > > I just wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this effort >especially > > Steven and Robert. Also many thanks to Bruce and the little guys, whose > > posts I look forward to enthusiastically. Bruce does make me feel a >little > > guilty for being a lurker, but it may be a good thing, since my >primitive > > conception of how things work is often wrong. > > I'm excited, since this is my first real electronic project. It fired >up > > without any snags. I used a heat sink from an injector driver from a >dead > > ecm for U1. Now we'll see how far off my tuning has been. > > Many thanks. > > Jim Sloan > > leroy@sunflower.com > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 11:37:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:50:20 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:50:20 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Greg Hermann" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the same > >degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. > As long as the customer didn't complain of neck strain from so much better > throttle response than EFI ever dreamed of !! > > I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion > >within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. > >Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. > >Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. > >Bruce > Are you kidding Bruce?? > THAT would take some competence, rather than just a trip to typing & > computer schools !! > Greg Yes, it was a baited guestion. I was curious if he had any actual experience in a subject he was professing to know. I guess lieing like that is acceptable in some circles. Thou it might be out of ignorance. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Sat Dec 8 11:40:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:51:50 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:51:50 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: PRV engine Hello Huw, this is the later 4V engine. It has Cosworth Pistons and seems to have very strong (and heavy, 833g) rods of unknown manufacturer. Do you want to share some details of the engine of your friend ? Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Huw Scourfield [mailto:huw.scourfield@lineone.net] Gesendet: Freitag, 7. Dezember 2001 18:49 An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Betreff: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers Is this the 2V per cylinder PRV or the later 4V one, I have a Volvo version under the bench in my workshop, know someone who runs one at 30 psi boost, pretty impressive! Huw ----- Original Message ----- From: Rausch, Bernd To: Sent: 05 December 2001 14:00 Subject: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > Vibration is a point I did not think about before. > Does anyone on the list run an air/liquid intercooler and can confirm > the sizing information from Spearco ? I thought that an a/l coolder is > more effective and smaller in size than an air/air cooler. > > The engine is a Renault/Peugeot V6 3L 24V, with Garrett GT twin > ballbearing turbos (GT25 Turbine, T3-60 compressor). max RPM is 7200, > boost will be about 1.2-1.5bar. The ECU is a Pectel T6M. > > Bernd > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Kevin _ [mailto:kiggly@hotmail.com] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 5. Dezember 2001 05:52 > An: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Betreff: Re: AW: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > > > > > > Heck, then make it a 7 butterfly system. Or even 8. > > > >To what end? Idle control? Throttle re-opening response by closing > >off the plenum as well as the runners? > > KART cars last year (and probably this year too) used an extra throttle > that's on the plenum and electronically controlled to limit boost. I > guess > they found they could react faster there to limit a spike event than > they > could with controlling the wastegate. I'm guessing they also have a > good > spike wanting to naturally happen after <100ms shift (I don't know for > sure > what their shift times are). > > >Opening the throttle to a large plenum will require the turbo to > >fill that volume as well as that of the runners. > > If you do a throttle before all that volume like you were saying, its > really > going to have terrible throttle response. > > >OTOH, if you instead throttle the runners, the 'plenum' is already > >filled with high-pressure charge and starts to fill the runners > >sooner from the reservoir in the 'plenum'. As the throttles close, > >the reservoir accumulates some pressure and a subsequent re-opening > >of the throttles can benefit from the store if the over-pressure > >hasn't bled out through the turbo. > > > >Which system will have less lag? > > The system with 6 throttle plates will have less lag. It should also > have > much, much better throttle response. You will have to make a plenum of > air > pressure from all 6 runners past the throttles though to get a MAP > pressure. > This can just be 6 lines tee'd together, just keep the lines as short > as > possible and use, probably, 1/8" or 3/16" diameter hoses. > > >A great number of successful competition vehicles do use separate > >throttles; typically slide-throttles because they can afford them. > >In terms of flow at part-throttle, the slide-throttle offers little > >advantage at much greater risk of sticking (or leaking in typical > >setups). > > You can't use a slide throttle on a street car though. There is > terribly > inconsistent flow through them at part throttle. I liked the stratus > touring car that had barrel throttles though, those were cool as hell! > They > split at the middle and rolled away (like double-doors opening) to make > a > completely smooth runner at WOT. Slide throttles are your best bet by > far. > > >The shafts will have to be thin to minimise obstruction at WOT. > >The shaft has to be 'machined' to attach the butterflies. > >Given the flow rate and engine capacity, each runner would be > >around 70 mm diameter with a similar size of throttle plate. > > 70mm??? For what, if you're going to have 100%VE at 12000 rpm? What > rpm > will the motor go to? I'm guessing you'd need somewhere in the low 50mm > > range. Smaller is better as long as its not a restriction because if > you go > too big the throttles just end up becoming an on/off switch. For a 2L > NA > engine going to 8500 rpm and making ~300hp, we found that 52mm was the > smallest that we didn't lose any hp. Anything bigger than that didn't > gain > any hp at all and just made the engine more difficult to drive. > > >One could run the shafts on bare aluminium, but that's not very > >durable. If the runners are close together, 4 bushes is sufficient. > >You'd gain nothing (except profit) by using ball bearings or by > >chroming the shaft. More bearings than necessary increases not just > >the expense of the bearings, but also aggravates alignment. > > > >No seals are required on the shafts as the shafts are inside the air > >distribution box. The only part of the throttle actuation that > >requires a seal is the Bowden cable entry. > > You'll have to be VERY careful about thermal expansion of the engine. > This > is without a doubt the most difficult part of this entire system. You > need > to make a setup that holds the butterflies aligned within the trumpets > or > else they will bind up. This seems trivial, but it really requires some > > attention. I would put a pair of ball bearings on each butterfly and > join > the butterflies from cylinder-to-cylinder with fittings that allow some > axial growth. http://www.zeromax.com has some neat couplings that can > get > this job done well. I haven't used them, but they really look like the > perfect part for this application. > > Just wondering though, but why don't you just make a normal-ish intake > manifold and mount the intercooler away from the engine? This is > normally > much easier to do and you don't have to worry so much about heat soak > from > the engine getting the IC hot. You're also talking about mounting > something > big, heavy, and with very little thermal expansion (as long as you keep > the > water cool that is) on top of a somewhat high vibration environment that > > goes through wild temperature swings, expansions, and deflections. Its > just > a recipe for a part thats going to be difficult to make last very long. > > If you go through and make it, I'd love to see some pictures! Just > curious > also though, what rpm range, boost range, and displacement are you > planning > for this V6? I believe you mentioned a 650hp goal... > > Kevin > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 11:48:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:56:21 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 11:56:21 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > >From: "Bernd Felsche" > Various bits of snippage. > > > EFI is appealing in mass market because it is CHEAP to build, > > > install and maintain (over the nominal life of the car). > > Ya, them $450 idle speed controllers are a real money saver. What > > did you say earlier one every 2 years until you figured out how to > > clean it. > It's $450 (Australian), so not as costly as you think. It's an > inflated price anyway for Oz; at least double the dealer cost of the > part in Germany. I only ever paid for the one. Wiggle, wiggle. Again we, ramble off into the AU economy. > What does an emission-compliant carb cost, that delivers a better > fuel consumption, driveability and performance from cold start, to > hot start, to hot run (let alone emisssions) and never requires > adjustment? Tell me about this never requires adjustment EFI, that you want me to compare it to. > BTW: I get about 700km on 55 litres. I get 703 snotmiles on 52 dwarfickes > > > > Not to mention that competent engineer/tuners are quite > > > > capable of making Weber DCOE/IDA carbys perform at least as > > > > well as EFI ! > > > Under all nominal operating conditions? On all sorts of cars? > > > At a price the customer can afford? I very much doubt that. > > If a car can have DCOE(s) put on it, I'll bet I can tune it to the > > same degree of customer satisfaction as any oem EFI. > > I'd venture a guess, that item by item I could do a DCOE conversion > > within the funding of retail replacement prices for an entire EFI. > Let's forget about _retail_prices_ because they are artificially > inflated. There are huge total margins from manufacturer to retail. > The idle stabiliser probably costs VDO less than $20 to make. I > doubt very much that VW would have paid even double that, seeing > that they would have ordered the units in the hundreds of thousands > every few months. You logic is really lacking. You make comments contray to your own statements, that is really laughable. > The opportunity for large margins in the after-market is not nearly > so great. I'm not talking about fuzzy dice here. Productions runs > are small so the initial cost is high. If you're pricing for the > enthusiast market (i.e. not the pro-competition), then your retail > price has to be somewhere near that of OEM. You can't therefore get > a 500% markup from the part manufacturer to the wholesaler. > Further down the food-chain, margins are susceptible to local market > conditions; competition and market size. e.g. I could airfreight > distributors from California, pay duties and taxes, and still make > 100% on the items for retail to underprice the locally-sourced > suppliers - who are only making 20% if they're lucky. > There are economies of scale. For the "original parts" market, they > can set their prices how they feel; based on what the market will > bear. There's little correlation between cost and prices. You made the statement, and now you trying to cover your silliness with more off subject silly crap. > Volkswagen would have paid much less than $1000 (US) for the entire > injection system on my car. The "$1000" ECU has a PCB with $100 > worth of parts (at retail component prices). A quick addition of > retail prices on the EFI components adds up to in excess of $5000. > A long block replacement lists at $13,000 (plus 10% tax) without EFI > and ancillaries. > I bought the whole car, new, for $27,000, including taxes at the > then-higher rate. > Retail prices for original replacement parts have almost no > correlation with actual costs. They are numbers that have fallen out > of a random profit generator driven by accountants. Again, your lack of appreciation for what happens to just be the REAL World is showing. > > Doubt it all you want, but just happens to be true. > > Have you ever really *tuned* a DCOE?. > No. I don't have a clue about DCOE in particular. > Oh, there's a bar of soap. Does it look anything like that? Oh so you are absolutely clueless, and yet feel free to comment on subject matter that you again have no clues about. Thanks for admitting again you have no clue about what you profess to talk about, makes me curious if you have any clues about the subjects you comment on. > Solex, Mikuni and other Weber; yeah I've seen them and tweaked > Solexes in my earlier VW. I won't flatter myself and call it > "tuning" as it was only returning the components back to spec., but > the result was a little better than before the exercise. More ramblings of the poorly informed. Bruce Note: The sender is not responsible for your interest or lack thereof in the contents of this posting. The Warning is included in part to ensure that people who ARE NOT LIKE ME are in no way offended or disadvantaged. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jhartwig@midsouth.rr.com Sat Dec 8 12:11:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 12:24:37 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 12:24:37 -0300 From: "Jurgen Hartwig" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) Sounds like a few of you guys need to get laid. jay ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 12:36:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 12:36:29 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 12:36:29 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) At 1:06 PM 12/8/01, Jon Davis wrote: >Interesting conversation! > >Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like >temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, dirty air cleaner, varying >oxygenate content in the fuel, etc? By changing the main jets. Takes less than five minutes on a pair of DCOEs. Although, replacing a dirty air filter is the recommended procedure for curing that one in most instances. I don't really know what DCOE carbs are, Not that good at Italian, but DCOE is pretty much an acronym for dual choke, horizontal, die cast. In that order. (O = Orizontale ???) >are they electronically controlled or something? Nope--to quote John Passini, there are three secrets to them. Precision, precision, and precision. I would be inclined to add _utterly_uncompromised_ engineering and design to Mr. Passini's list of qualites, with the exception that some of the older Weber dual throat side drafts (DCO3's) were sand cast out of an ally alloy which was resistant to corrosion by both methanol and nitro methane-- sand cast because said alloy is not particularly friendly to die casting processes--- Then again, the DCOE's use sealed ball bearings to carry their throttle shafts, whereas the DCO3's only used good old (replaceable) bronze bushings--- :-) Greg > >Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 12:57:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 12:57:57 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 12:57:57 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! The cal resistor varies a great deal on a sensor to sensor basis. Else we would not have bothered to use it in the UEGO controller circuit. The sensors vary as much as +- 15% at the end points. The facory reads each sensor at a rich point and a lean point, then selects the proper calibration resistor. Well, I agree, relative to use in leaded fuels: 100 hrs is good. Relative to unleaded fuels, not so good. BobR. Kevin _ wrote: > My understanding was the production sensors all came with the same cal > resistor. The $1000 sensor (or whatever it costs) that is sold to go along > with the lab-grade boxes like the Horiba (sp?) and the like are individually > calibrated. I thought the Honda production version was more generic. Can > anybody confirm or deny this? > > I'll check through the archives about cal gases. > > And what do you mean "kill an O2 sensor about as fast as anything" ? I > think 100 hours is a fantastic lifespan for a sensor in leaded gas! I know > it doesn't sound like much time, but that makes this sensor one of the > cheaper parts of maintaining a race car. I had used narrow-band switching > sensors in the past just to see if I was rich or lean and then EGT to make a > guess at A/F. I never got more than a few hours out of a narrow-band sensor > in a leaded environment before output began falling. > > Kevin > > >Actually the sensors are calibrated at the factory. There is a resistor > >in the connector that is tied into the DIY-WB output circuit. There > >were some posts listing cal gases that can be used for calibration > >and testing purposes. And yes, lead will kill an O2 sensor about as > >fast as anything, except maybe silicone > > > >BobR. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 13:11:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:11:46 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:11:46 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! For years, cars were exported to countries that used NB O2 sensors, and were run on leaded fuel. Without knowing the application, it's rather hard to estimate life expectancy, but there is no reason not to use the WB to just get in the neighborhood, and then remove it. There was mention of a sheild at one time which min the exposure of the sensor slightly. Bruce > > And what do you mean "kill an O2 sensor about as fast as anything" ? I > > think 100 hours is a fantastic lifespan for a sensor in leaded gas! I know > > it doesn't sound like much time, but that makes this sensor one of the > > cheaper parts of maintaining a race car. I had used narrow-band switching > > sensors in the past just to see if I was rich or lean and then EGT to make a > > guess at A/F. I never got more than a few hours out of a narrow-band sensor > > in a leaded environment before output began falling. > > Kevin ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 13:20:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:20:50 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:20:50 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) Related, covers alot of ground. To try and understand or compare EFI, it helps to understand what your trying to accomplish, the study of carburetion is one such way, to understand the whys of EFI and it can lead to the understandings of what why and how things are done. Like you said, short time, and impression. Sometimes in these seemimgly tangent rants there are some items worth noting. Worst case scenario, there is the delete key, and ignore thread option (in some systems) Bruce From: "Bob - Uni" Subject: Re[2]: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) > I have to agree. Referring to the charter I find the following > snippet: > Charter: > This mailing-list is *strictly* dedicated to the discussion > of topics related to EFI design and modification. I would like > to see discussion on control algorithms, hardware, electronics, > and sensor/sensor-interface designs. Additionally, modification > and adaptations of OEM ECU's would also be welcomed. > From my short time on the list I get the impression that genuine > questions about EFI design take a back seat to chest beating. It is > nothing but rude to the listmaster, who is good enough to put up and > maintain the list, to disregard the rules so blatantly. > If you want to flame me, it would be great if you could do it off the > list. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Sat Dec 8 13:23:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:42:50 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:42:50 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Actually the sensors are calibrated at the factory. There is a resistor in the connector that is tied into the DIY-WB output circuit. There were some posts listing cal gases that can be used for calibration and testing purposes. And yes, lead will kill an O2 sensor about as fast as anything, except maybe silicone BobR. Kevin _ wrote: > I'm still waiting (as patiently as a 4-year old :) for my spot on the > leftovers list so I can purchase both the DIY-WB board and components. I > have been looking up and cross-referencing a few things lately that may be > of use though: > > The NTK UEGO is available through Napaonline being resold by Echlin with > part number ECHOS791. Cost is $139. Borg Warner also resells the sensor > with part number OS903. That guy is about the same price through > carparts.com. If anybody has found the sensor recently for anything cheaper > than this can you contact me off list plz? > > I was talking with an engines guy from NASCAR-land. He said they use > exactly this same sensor with the NTK driver box (its ~400 and I guess its > only real difference from DIY-WB is a more elaborate heater circuit). They > calibrate each sensor when they get it into their hands, but I'm absolutely > amazed at how exact of A/F's they're looking at. He said the sensors all > come in within 0.1 A/F of each other without any calibration! That's > amazingly tight tolerance, IMHO. They are generally tuning and looking at > changes under 0.05 A/F on the dyno - I'm surprised they get repeatable > results down to that tight an A/F. I'd be more than happy with a 0.5 A/F > resolution. Anyway, he said they get about 100 hours of life out of the > sensors and then their output falls off. They do some recalibrating in that > timespan of course. This is in a normal leaded fuel, so I'm guessing about > 4 grams of lead per gallon. > > I haven't really noticed anything brought up about calibrating sensors. I > guess they do drift some in leaded fuels and they don't do it consistently > either. Some sensors are stable over their lifespan and others start > drifting right away. Has this topic been visited at all? I think it would > be very easy to do without a lab bench and to just calibrate a stoich point > using a regular switching O2 sensor in the same stream as the UEGO. I guess > I need to do some more research on this calibration topic to know exactly > what is entailed and necessary. > > Kevin > > >There is no guilt about being a lurker. Just support those that are trying > >to good things, and share when you do find out a neat thing. Just a shame > >a couple guys had to ruin so much for so many. > >Just wait until you see how easy things get using it. > >Your welcome > >Bruce > > > >From: "Jim Sloan" > >Subject: diy-wb works! > > > I just wanted to thank everyone that contributed to this effort > >especially > > > Steven and Robert. Also many thanks to Bruce and the little guys, whose > > > posts I look forward to enthusiastically. Bruce does make me feel a > >little > > > guilty for being a lurker, but it may be a good thing, since my > >primitive > > > conception of how things work is often wrong. > > > I'm excited, since this is my first real electronic project. It fired > >up > > > without any snags. I used a heat sink from an injector driver from a > >dead > > > ecm for U1. Now we'll see how far off my tuning has been. > > > Many thanks. > > > Jim Sloan > > > leroy@sunflower.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 13:55:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:55:14 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 13:55:14 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > I'd be more than happy with a 0.5 A/F > resolution. THou, please don't get this mixed up with a lab grade unit. This is meant as a tuning AID, nothing more. And you never tune to get a particular AFR. > I think it would > be very easy to do without a lab bench and to just calibrate a stoich point > using a regular switching O2 sensor in the same stream as the UEGO. I guess > I need to do some more research on this calibration topic to know exactly > what is entailed and necessary. trouble is that most oems, swing the AFR across stoich, and average about 14.7:1, they don't try and maintain a perfect Stoich mixture. Lots of achives stuff about the way and wherefores Bruce > Kevin ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From kiggly@hotmail.com Sat Dec 8 14:02:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 14:20:17 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 14:20:17 -0300 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! My understanding was the production sensors all came with the same cal resistor. The $1000 sensor (or whatever it costs) that is sold to go along with the lab-grade boxes like the Horiba (sp?) and the like are individually calibrated. I thought the Honda production version was more generic. Can anybody confirm or deny this? I'll check through the archives about cal gases. And what do you mean "kill an O2 sensor about as fast as anything" ? I think 100 hours is a fantastic lifespan for a sensor in leaded gas! I know it doesn't sound like much time, but that makes this sensor one of the cheaper parts of maintaining a race car. I had used narrow-band switching sensors in the past just to see if I was rich or lean and then EGT to make a guess at A/F. I never got more than a few hours out of a narrow-band sensor in a leaded environment before output began falling. Kevin >Actually the sensors are calibrated at the factory. There is a resistor >in the connector that is tied into the DIY-WB output circuit. There >were some posts listing cal gases that can be used for calibration >and testing purposes. And yes, lead will kill an O2 sensor about as >fast as anything, except maybe silicone > >BobR. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 14:24:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 14:24:14 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 14:24:14 -0800 From: romans@starstream.net (romans, mark) MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB proboscis Does anyone have any pictures of the old egor proboscis? I need to fab something up to use on carb'd applications! LET THE FUN BEGIN! Mark ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jfdavis@epix.net Sat Dec 8 15:06:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:16:14 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:16:14 -0300 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Interesting conversation! Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, dirty air cleaner, varying oxygenate content in the fuel, etc? I don't really know what DCOE carbs are, are they electronically controlled or something? Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 15:24:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:24:25 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:24:25 -0800 From: "TVS" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DCOE/DHLA Ver. Efi > By changing the main jets. Takes less than five minutes on a pair of DCOEs. > Although, replacing a dirty air filter is the recommended procedure for > curing that one in most instances. Just to add my 2p's worth, I believe Lotus where one of the last to use Dellorto carbs before being forced to go to EFi due to catalytic converters becoming mandatory. I believe this is also the reason why Mini's went EFi as well. I think the cat. can be legally removed from all carby Minis as they will still pass the less stringent emission tests. "The last carburettors Dell'Orto produced were the unique "tri-jet" DHLA45's for Lotus, which as well as an idle and main circuit, has a power jet circuit for extra enrichment at high revs. This system was also fitted to the Lotus Esprit Turbo carburettors, which can hold up to 30-PSI boost pressure." Copied from http://www.racecar.co.uk/dellorto/cars.htm --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.303 / Virus Database: 164 - Release Date: 24/11/01 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 15:33:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:33:58 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:33:58 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Kevin _ wrote: > > If anybody has found the sensor recently for anything cheaper > than this can you contact me off list plz? The Parts Bin = US$117.78 (plus free UPS shipping in continental US) http://catalog.eautopartscatalog.com/partsbin/quote.jsp?product=36531-P07-003&Submit=GO&partner=partsbin&action=search&cart=&partnerSession=++&usemake= Peter (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 15:57:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:57:33 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 15:57:33 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve I believe that for carbon and the like that carb cleaner is much more suited to the job. I don't believe that brake cleaner is more aggressive. (Check the contents out on the back of the cans) I'll use it when just the opposite results are desired ---- Original Message ----- From: "Bernd Felsche" To: Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 9:37 AM Subject: Re: gm idle valve > Peter Gargano tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Ludis Langens wrote: > > > > > > It is a stepper motor. > > > I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating > > these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get > > "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than > > cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? > > I've had the idle stabilizer in my Golf (it's an oscillating type) > out once every year of so for cleaning - after buying a replacement > after two year ($450!!). So I thought it worthwhile to try to keep > it clean. The replacement valve has held up now for about 8 years. > > First of all; clean the bugger. A good soaking in carby cleaner. > (Some people say brake cleaner is better; it might clean faster but > seems way too agressive.) Send an apprentice down to the corner shop > and buy a Magnum Classic icecream. Enjoy. > > Then use the paddle to scrape away any deposits that remain in the > valve and flush again. A few drops of engine oil on the valve > certainly won't hurt. Just a few. Too much oil will attract all > sorts of buildup. > > I'm trying a secret formulation that supposedly works better than > engine oil and doesn't develop into a sticky surface in a short time. > It's NOT silicone-based, or PTFE. I'll see what it's like in another > few months. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Sat Dec 8 15:26:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:03:58 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:03:58 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) ROTFLMAO!!!! Right on!! Only reason I am staying on this list right now is the HOPE that an occasional pearl of wisdom goes by (rarely), and to keep tabs on the DIY-WB successes and stories. In spite of that, S/N ratio is worst I have seen in 15 years of internet newsgroups and mailing lists... Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Jurgen Hartwig > Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 10:12 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) > > > Sounds like a few of you guys need to get laid. > > jay > > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Sat Dec 8 14:01:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:19:06 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:19:06 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) Hello Jurgen, I have to agree. Referring to the charter I find the following snippet: Charter: This mailing-list is *strictly* dedicated to the discussion of topics related to EFI design and modification. I would like to see discussion on control algorithms, hardware, electronics, and sensor/sensor-interface designs. Additionally, modification and adaptations of OEM ECU's would also be welcomed. >From my short time on the list I get the impression that genuine questions about EFI design take a back seat to chest beating. It is nothing but rude to the listmaster, who is good enough to put up and maintain the list, to disregard the rules so blatantly. If you want to flame me, it would be great if you could do it off the list. Sunday, December 09, 2001, 2:11:39 AM, you wrote: JH> Sounds like a few of you guys need to get laid. JH> jay JH> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- JH> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) JH> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 16:02:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:19:41 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:19:41 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) From: "Jon Davis" Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of design. > dirty air cleaner, That's why they have recommended service intervals. >varying > oxygenate content in the fuel, etc? The fuels are still brewed to be compatible with carbs. With a feedback system, your more prone for troubles (when they tamper with the oxygen content of a fuel), then with something as simple as a carb. And, in case you haven't noticed, **they** are making a deliberate effort to brew fuels that discourage their use in carb'd vehicles, since the spin Dr.s have convinced so many that EFI is always better then carbs. > I don't really know what DCOE carbs are, > are they electronically controlled or something? No electronics. Just a fully calibratible (?) devise, unlike Holleys, and a few others that limit what you can adjust. Carburetion is a science, and wayyyyy to few people actually bother to try and understand how they work, so they automaticlly dismissed. Being newer can mean better, but it's not a universal truth. Bruce > Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 16:20:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:20:42 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 16:20:42 -0800 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: NTC thermistor sensors Does anyone know the usual way in which ECMs measure the resistance of the NTC thermistors? The most straightforward methods I can think of would be to apply a constant current [or voltage] and measure the resulting voltage [or current]. It seems that the constant-current method would expand the high end of the range and compress the low end, and the opposite for constant-voltage. The usual thermistor varies from about 50 ohms to 50k ohms exponentially, right? I guess it depends on whether you are interested in the low-end range of temps or the high-end. Anyway, does anyone have any experience on this issue from reverse-engineering ECMs? Also, is there a "standard thermistor" curve such as with thermocouples? What I would like to do is piggy-back some of the sensors currently in use by the stock ECM -- make their signals available for datalogging or dash-display while not affecting the readings that the computer sees. If the ECM supplies a test current and measures resulting voltage, then this should be rather easy with an op-amp buffer. If the ECM applies a test voltage and measures current, then a current mirror would seem appropriate. However, if the test current varies (to aid linearity or dynamic range) then it would seem that a full "resistance mirror" op-amp circuit might be necessary. Any advice? Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 17:01:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:01:05 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:01:05 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: NTC thermistor sensors Brian Dessent wrote: > > ... does anyone have any experience on this issue from > reverse-engineering ECMs? Ludis has schematics for GM ECMs inputs - here's the 1227165's (or the Australian 1227808's) input circuitry: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/1227165sheet2.gif Look near the centre of the schematic - to the right and down a bit. Note that for the coolant temp CTS# signal, the ECM controls CTSHI so that either a 348 ohm resistor, or a 348 + 3650 ohm resistor (total = 3998 ohms) is in series with the sensor. The ECM then uses two tables, for each of the series resistors, to look up the calculated temperature from the A/D value read at CTS (CTS goes to an A/D converter). This scheme allows greater accuracy at each end of the sensor's resistance range with the 8 bits of A/D accuracy use on that ECM. Note that more A/D bits of accuracy may not solve the problem when using a single series resistor, as noise then may become a factor at each end of the resistance range. Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 17:28:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:28:14 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:28:14 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB proboscis 12" pre sensor, and 10" aft of 1 3/4" muffler pipe works. The one **problem** is that on some cars with long exhuast systems, is that the air is soo colded by the time they get there that they *chill* the sensor enough to turn it off. On one LT1 that I worked on it did that. On the GN with a single shorter pipe things were fine. If it the light blinks off, and display goes to 2.5 on the sensor output, you'll need another sample point Bruce From: "romans, mark" Subject: WB proboscis > Does anyone have any pictures of the old egor proboscis? > I need to fab something up to use on carb'd applications! > LET THE FUN BEGIN! > Mark ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 17:40:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:40:59 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:40:59 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Which is pirated from the DIY-WB. Clever wording. Wiggle, wiggle Bruce (Charging $20 for a $3+ board, hahahaha) And another public thank you for killing off at least 2 projects that were to be freebies. From: "Peter Gargano" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > Peter > (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having > an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it > with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 17:49:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:49:02 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:49:02 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: DCOE/DHLA Ver. Efi > >"The last carburettors Dell'Orto produced were the unique "tri-jet" DHLA45's >for Lotus, which as well as an idle and main circuit, has a power jet >circuit for extra enrichment at high revs. This system was also fitted to >the Lotus Esprit Turbo carburettors, which can hold up to 30-PSI boost >pressure." > >Copied from http://www.racecar.co.uk/dellorto/cars.htm The concept of having a "power" circuit in a DCOE/DHLA type carb was not unique to the DHLA45 Lotus carbys. In a DCOE, there are two separate and distinct high speed/high load enrichment functions: The pump jets act as a high speed enrichment bleed. How much fuel you get from them is controlled by the size of the pump jets, and when it comes in and the shape of the delivery curve is controlled by the size of the chokes in concert with the mass of the weights above the ball check valves in the pump circuit. The area of the passages in the auxiliary venturii acts in concert with the throttle butterfly position to dampen the intake pulses to the main jet wells--thus at wide open throttle, when the pulses are not damped by the throttle butterflies, a smaller aux venturi passageway damps the pulses more than a large one. More damping gives a leaner mixture. Thus, the A/F ratio at WOT can be adjusted vs. the A/F mixture from the main circuit at part throttle. Moral-- There's a _LOT_ more to tuning DCOE's than meets the eye (or than the average club racer knows) !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 17:49:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:49:12 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 17:49:12 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Excuse me that was dated material, it's 3 projects that were buried because of Peter's actions. Bruce From: "Bruce" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > Which is pirated from the DIY-WB. > Clever wording. > Wiggle, wiggle > Bruce > (Charging $20 for a $3+ board, hahahaha) > And another public thank you for killing off at least 2 projects that > were to be freebies. > From: "Peter Gargano" > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Peter > > (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having > > an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it > > with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 18:03:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:03:19 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:03:19 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve elcamino73 tapped away at the keyboard with: > I believe that for carbon and the like that carb cleaner is much > more suited to the job. I don't believe that brake cleaner is > more aggressive. (Check the contents out on the back of the cans) > I'll use it when just the opposite results are desired Stuff like hydroflouric acid in the brake cleaner I had. Pretty aggressive by any standard. Carb cleaner is mainly low-density HCs. > ---- Original Message ----- > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Peter Gargano tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > > Ludis Langens wrote: > > > > > > > > It is a stepper motor. > > > > > I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating > > > these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get > > > "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than > > > cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? > > > > I've had the idle stabilizer in my Golf (it's an oscillating type) > > out once every year of so for cleaning - after buying a replacement > > after two year ($450!!). So I thought it worthwhile to try to keep > > it clean. The replacement valve has held up now for about 8 years. > > > > First of all; clean the bugger. A good soaking in carby cleaner. > > (Some people say brake cleaner is better; it might clean faster but > > seems way too agressive.) Send an apprentice down to the corner shop > > and buy a Magnum Classic icecream. Enjoy. [snip] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 17:39:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:09:24 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:09:24 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) At 1:06 PM 12/8/01, Jon Davis wrote: >Interesting conversation! > >Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like >temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, dirty air cleaner, varying >oxygenate content in the fuel, etc? By changing the main jets. Takes less than five minutes on a pair of DCOEs. Although, replacing a dirty air filter is the recommended procedure for curing that one in most instances. I don't really know what DCOE carbs are, Not that good at Italian, but DCOE is pretty much an acronym for dual choke, horizontal, die cast. In that order. (O = Orizontale ???) >are they electronically controlled or something? Nope--to quote John Passini, there are three secrets to them. Precision, precision, and precision. I would be inclined to add _utterly_uncompromised_ engineering and design to Mr. Passini's list of qualites, with the exception that some of the older Weber dual throat side drafts (DCO3's) were sand cast out of an ally alloy which was resistant to corrosion by both methanol and nitro methane-- sand cast because said alloy is not particularly friendly to die casting processes--- Then again, the DCOE's use sealed ball bearings to carry their throttle shafts, whereas the DCO3's only used good old (replaceable) bronze bushings--- :-) Greg > >Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Sat Dec 8 18:00:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:09:52 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:09:52 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! The cal resistor varies a great deal on a sensor to sensor basis. Else we would not have bothered to use it in the UEGO controller circuit. The sensors vary as much as +- 15% at the end points. The facory reads each sensor at a rich point and a lean point, then selects the proper calibration resistor. Well, I agree, relative to use in leaded fuels: 100 hrs is good. Relative to unleaded fuels, not so good. BobR. Kevin _ wrote: > My understanding was the production sensors all came with the same cal > resistor. The $1000 sensor (or whatever it costs) that is sold to go along > with the lab-grade boxes like the Horiba (sp?) and the like are individually > calibrated. I thought the Honda production version was more generic. Can > anybody confirm or deny this? > > I'll check through the archives about cal gases. > > And what do you mean "kill an O2 sensor about as fast as anything" ? I > think 100 hours is a fantastic lifespan for a sensor in leaded gas! I know > it doesn't sound like much time, but that makes this sensor one of the > cheaper parts of maintaining a race car. I had used narrow-band switching > sensors in the past just to see if I was rich or lean and then EGT to make a > guess at A/F. I never got more than a few hours out of a narrow-band sensor > in a leaded environment before output began falling. > > Kevin > > >Actually the sensors are calibrated at the factory. There is a resistor > >in the connector that is tied into the DIY-WB output circuit. There > >were some posts listing cal gases that can be used for calibration > >and testing purposes. And yes, lead will kill an O2 sensor about as > >fast as anything, except maybe silicone > > > >BobR. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 18:16:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:16:26 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:16:26 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: NTC thermistor sensors Brian Dessent tapped away at the keyboard with: > Does anyone know the usual way in which ECMs measure the > resistance of the NTC thermistors? The most straightforward > methods I can think of would be to apply a constant current [or > voltage] and measure the resulting voltage [or current]. It seems > that the constant-current method would expand the high end of the > range and compress the low end, and the opposite for > constant-voltage. The usual thermistor varies from about 50 ohms > to 50k ohms exponentially, right? I guess it depends on whether > you are interested in the low-end range of temps or the high-end. Thermistors vary. The Digifant ECU for example, measures the NTC resistance using a constant voltage applied across a resistor in series with the thermistor. Open- and closed-circuit conditons are then easy to detect - used to set CO, idle speed and basic timing in Digifant servicing. > Anyway, does anyone have any experience on this issue from > reverse-engineering ECMs? Also, is there a "standard thermistor" > curve such as with thermocouples? What I would like to do is Yep... there are standard curves. R = A e ^ (B/T) A and B are the thermistor-specific coefficients. T is temperature in Kelvin R is resistance in Ohms. If they're not documented (e.g. in a service manual), you can determine A and B from 3 or more measurements using a curve fit. > piggy-back some of the sensors currently in use by the stock ECM > -- make their signals available for datalogging or dash-display > while not affecting the readings that the computer sees. If the > ECM supplies a test current and measures resulting voltage, then > this should be rather easy with an op-amp buffer. If the ECM > applies a test voltage and measures current, then a current mirror > would seem appropriate. However, if the test current varies (to > aid linearity or dynamic range) then it would seem that a full > "resistance mirror" op-amp circuit might be necessary. Any > advice? With Digifant (and probably most other Bosch setups) you'll only have to buffer the voltage to make use of the thermistor for your own purposes. The voltage will of course disappear when the engine is switched off, so that method is unsuitable for controling under-bonnet temperatures after shutdown. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 18:17:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:17:49 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:17:49 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the subject line. Hardly any effort, is it? Bernd Felsche wrote: > > Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Bernd Felsche wrote: > >> Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > [snip] > >>> Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > >>> discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? > >> > >> IIRC, here's the gist: > >> > >> Start: Question about manifold with integral intercooler for a V6 twin-turbo. > >> --> Suggestion to throttle the runners individually for throttle response > >> --> Suggestion that it's overly complex and too complex to implement > >> --> Description of simple construction and reference examples > >> --> Suggestion that air-liquid intercooler was too esoteric > >> --> Reference examples of high-performance cars using such in production > >> --> Suggestion that such cars are irrelevant and "exotic" > >> --> Reference to base technologies having been in use for over 25 years > >> --> Suggestion that EFI was only brought about by EPA requirements > > > Arnie the mathematician responds with: > > > I did very well in geometry while in H.S. The term tangent comes to > > mind. A tangent waay out in the back 40. (I also grew up on a farm). > > Well, some people keep on introducing hyperbole or react acutely > at the same time being obtuse. :-) > > How long does a normal conversation stay on the original topic? > > ... mmm. These nuts are nice. > > :-) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 18:20:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:20:27 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:20:27 -0800 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DCOE tuning, was Spark plugs Bruce, Greg, and Bill Please include me in off-list discussions regarding DCOE tuning in the future. I promise to be quiet and listen, 'cause I don't really have too much advise to offer except the "everybody knows" trick of air corrector jet vs. main jet ratio of 3:1 for tuning high rpm vs. low rpm mixture. I'd just be interested in getting info on these wonderful carbs, but you're absolutely right - the name of the list includes EFI in the title, so carburator related topics should be avoided I guess. Matt Dupuis dupuis10@telusplanet.net > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Greg Hermann > Sent: December 7, 2001 11:20 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Spark plugs > > > At 1:01 PM 12/7/01, Bruce wrote: > >Nothing a soldering gun, some solder / flux, drills and a thumb vise > >wouldn't cure. Getta DCOE right, and just use the *EFI* for > ignition work. > >Trick is getting it right. . > >Bruce > > > > > > > >From: > >Subject: RE: Spark plugs > >> I suspect I will have to live with the fouling until I get EFI running > >> as the current DCOE is seriously rich at low RPM (i.e. in traffic). Not > >> my choice I hasten to add. > > > Bill-- > > I suspect that Bruce and I, between us, could help you through getting the > DCOE _"RIGHT"_ . This oughtta be done off list, though. > > If you think "source code" is black magic, you haven't been around much > DCOE/IDA tuning !! > > Definitely something only to be shared with the "annointed" !! :-) > > Greg > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 18:11:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:22:09 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:22:09 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! For years, cars were exported to countries that used NB O2 sensors, and were run on leaded fuel. Without knowing the application, it's rather hard to estimate life expectancy, but there is no reason not to use the WB to just get in the neighborhood, and then remove it. There was mention of a sheild at one time which min the exposure of the sensor slightly. Bruce > > And what do you mean "kill an O2 sensor about as fast as anything" ? I > > think 100 hours is a fantastic lifespan for a sensor in leaded gas! I know > > it doesn't sound like much time, but that makes this sensor one of the > > cheaper parts of maintaining a race car. I had used narrow-band switching > > sensors in the past just to see if I was rich or lean and then EGT to make a > > guess at A/F. I never got more than a few hours out of a narrow-band sensor > > in a leaded environment before output began falling. > > Kevin ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 18:20:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:28:44 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:28:44 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) Related, covers alot of ground. To try and understand or compare EFI, it helps to understand what your trying to accomplish, the study of carburetion is one such way, to understand the whys of EFI and it can lead to the understandings of what why and how things are done. Like you said, short time, and impression. Sometimes in these seemimgly tangent rants there are some items worth noting. Worst case scenario, there is the delete key, and ignore thread option (in some systems) Bruce From: "Bob - Uni" Subject: Re[2]: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) > I have to agree. Referring to the charter I find the following > snippet: > Charter: > This mailing-list is *strictly* dedicated to the discussion > of topics related to EFI design and modification. I would like > to see discussion on control algorithms, hardware, electronics, > and sensor/sensor-interface designs. Additionally, modification > and adaptations of OEM ECU's would also be welcomed. > From my short time on the list I get the impression that genuine > questions about EFI design take a back seat to chest beating. It is > nothing but rude to the listmaster, who is good enough to put up and > maintain the list, to disregard the rules so blatantly. > If you want to flame me, it would be great if you could do it off the > list. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 18:48:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:48:16 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:48:16 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bernd Felsche" To: Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 9:02 PM Subject: Re: gm idle valve > elcamino73 tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > I believe that for carbon and the like that carb cleaner is much > > more suited to the job. I don't believe that brake cleaner is > > more aggressive. (Check the contents out on the back of the cans) > > I'll use it when just the opposite results are desired > > Stuff like hydroflouric acid in the brake cleaner I had. > Pretty aggressive by any standard. Carb cleaner is mainly > low-density HCs. > CAS#127-18-4 (perchloroethylene) and 124-38-9 (carbon dioxide) are the two main ingredients in the most common brake cleaner. Which is basically what your dry cleaner uses to "DRYCLEAN" your suites. I'm not sure what you are using. Carb cleaner has always been harder on hands, paint, plastic and any wire insulating varnish. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 18:50:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:50:59 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 18:50:59 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! What were those projects Bruce? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 8:49 PM Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Excuse me that was dated material, it's 3 projects that were buried because > of Peter's actions. > Bruce > > > From: "Bruce" > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Which is pirated from the DIY-WB. > > Clever wording. > > Wiggle, wiggle > > Bruce > > (Charging $20 for a $3+ board, hahahaha) > > And another public thank you for killing off at least 2 projects that > > were to be freebies. > > > From: "Peter Gargano" > > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > > Peter > > > (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having > > > an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it > > > with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 18:55:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:10:04 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:10:04 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > I'd be more than happy with a 0.5 A/F > resolution. THou, please don't get this mixed up with a lab grade unit. This is meant as a tuning AID, nothing more. And you never tune to get a particular AFR. > I think it would > be very easy to do without a lab bench and to just calibrate a stoich point > using a regular switching O2 sensor in the same stream as the UEGO. I guess > I need to do some more research on this calibration topic to know exactly > what is entailed and necessary. trouble is that most oems, swing the AFR across stoich, and average about 14.7:1, they don't try and maintain a perfect Stoich mixture. Lots of achives stuff about the way and wherefores Bruce > Kevin ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 19:14:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:14:49 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:14:49 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Datalogging RPM signal Anyone have any pointers on how to log the rpm signal with the dataq or B&B "cheap person" data acquisition boards? I figure you can either use an inductive pickup or possibly intercept the signal to the ECU/DME. Problem is that I am an electronics idiot, and I have no idea what form that signal usually takes and/or how to intercept and capture it. What I really want to be able to do is log AFR/O2 volts for the WB with RPM (and possibly MAF and TPS which are simple voltage signals) to review after tuning runs, dyno pulls, or runs down the strip. Anyone got any advice? Thanks, Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 19:16:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:16:09 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:16:09 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) The same can be said for editing the whole message, so the headers, and trailing statement aren't a waste of bandwidth. Bruce From: "Gary Schaumberg" Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > subject > line. Hardly any effort, is it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 19:29:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:29:39 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:29:39 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! An ionization detonation detection devise, and a complete and working source code for GM ecm, the third I don't have the authors permission to publicly yak about. Bruce From: "elcamino73" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > What were those projects Bruce? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Excuse me that was dated material, it's 3 projects that were buried > because > > of Peter's actions. > > Bruce > > From: "Bruce" > > > Which is pirated from the DIY-WB. > > > Clever wording. > > > Wiggle, wiggle > > > Bruce > > > (Charging $20 for a $3+ board, hahahaha) > > > And another public thank you for killing off at least 2 projects > > > that were to be freebies. > > > > > From: "Peter Gargano" > > > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > > > Peter > > > > (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having > > > > an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it > > > > with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From romans@starstream.net Sat Dec 8 19:22:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:33:09 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 19:33:09 -0300 From: romans@starstream.net (romans, mark) MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB proboscis Does anyone have any pictures of the old egor proboscis? I need to fab something up to use on carb'd applications! LET THE FUN BEGIN! Mark ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 20:20:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:20:23 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:20:23 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? A smiling Arnie adds: I'm gonna say this cuz I'm an outspoken kraut. Shannen, I like style! Shannen Durphey wrote: > > Forgive me if I don't care. > Well you sure as he-- didn't ask if we cared before you started down this road. > > You asked the question about reasonable price for a level of performance. I've > found it and stated it. I can see you're enamored of the Bugatti But it's an > example of a car built to flaunt extravagance and wealth and Bugatti uses > performance as a major portion of the justification for the cost. The US car is > an example of a car built to provide a certain level of performance and the > price justifies the work that went into development and the work that goes into > manufacturing. > > Shannen > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From tkmvs@bigfoot.com Sat Dec 8 20:23:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:41:38 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:41:38 -0300 From: "TVS" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DCOE/DHLA Ver. Efi > By changing the main jets. Takes less than five minutes on a pair of DCOEs. > Although, replacing a dirty air filter is the recommended procedure for > curing that one in most instances. Just to add my 2p's worth, I believe Lotus where one of the last to use Dellorto carbs before being forced to go to EFi due to catalytic converters becoming mandatory. I believe this is also the reason why Mini's went EFi as well. I think the cat. can be legally removed from all carby Minis as they will still pass the less stringent emission tests. "The last carburettors Dell'Orto produced were the unique "tri-jet" DHLA45's for Lotus, which as well as an idle and main circuit, has a power jet circuit for extra enrichment at high revs. This system was also fitted to the Lotus Esprit Turbo carburettors, which can hold up to 30-PSI boost pressure." Copied from http://www.racecar.co.uk/dellorto/cars.htm --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.303 / Virus Database: 164 - Release Date: 24/11/01 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Sat Dec 8 20:37:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:44:52 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:44:52 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Kevin _ wrote: > > If anybody has found the sensor recently for anything cheaper > than this can you contact me off list plz? The Parts Bin = US$117.78 (plus free UPS shipping in continental US) http://catalog.eautopartscatalog.com/partsbin/quote.jsp?product=36531-P07-003&Submit=GO&partner=partsbin&action=search&cart=&partnerSession=++&usemake= Peter (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 20:49:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:49:36 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 20:49:36 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) A tuckered Arnie quips: Not much time leftover after getting through these off subject line posts. :) Jurgen Hartwig wrote: > > Sounds like a few of you guys need to get laid. > > jay > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 20:56:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 21:15:48 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 21:15:48 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve I believe that for carbon and the like that carb cleaner is much more suited to the job. I don't believe that brake cleaner is more aggressive. (Check the contents out on the back of the cans) I'll use it when just the opposite results are desired ---- Original Message ----- From: "Bernd Felsche" To: Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 9:37 AM Subject: Re: gm idle valve > Peter Gargano tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Ludis Langens wrote: > > > > > > It is a stepper motor. > > > I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating > > these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get > > "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than > > cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? > > I've had the idle stabilizer in my Golf (it's an oscillating type) > out once every year of so for cleaning - after buying a replacement > after two year ($450!!). So I thought it worthwhile to try to keep > it clean. The replacement valve has held up now for about 8 years. > > First of all; clean the bugger. A good soaking in carby cleaner. > (Some people say brake cleaner is better; it might clean faster but > seems way too agressive.) Send an apprentice down to the corner shop > and buy a Magnum Classic icecream. Enjoy. > > Then use the paddle to scrape away any deposits that remain in the > valve and flush again. A few drops of engine oil on the valve > certainly won't hurt. Just a few. Too much oil will attract all > sorts of buildup. > > I'm trying a secret formulation that supposedly works better than > engine oil and doesn't develop into a sticky surface in a short time. > It's NOT silicone-based, or PTFE. I'll see what it's like in another > few months. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From brian@dessent.net Sat Dec 8 21:20:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 21:34:16 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 21:34:16 -0300 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: NTC thermistor sensors Does anyone know the usual way in which ECMs measure the resistance of the NTC thermistors? The most straightforward methods I can think of would be to apply a constant current [or voltage] and measure the resulting voltage [or current]. It seems that the constant-current method would expand the high end of the range and compress the low end, and the opposite for constant-voltage. The usual thermistor varies from about 50 ohms to 50k ohms exponentially, right? I guess it depends on whether you are interested in the low-end range of temps or the high-end. Anyway, does anyone have any experience on this issue from reverse-engineering ECMs? Also, is there a "standard thermistor" curve such as with thermocouples? What I would like to do is piggy-back some of the sensors currently in use by the stock ECM -- make their signals available for datalogging or dash-display while not affecting the readings that the computer sees. If the ECM supplies a test current and measures resulting voltage, then this should be rather easy with an op-amp buffer. If the ECM applies a test voltage and measures current, then a current mirror would seem appropriate. However, if the test current varies (to aid linearity or dynamic range) then it would seem that a full "resistance mirror" op-amp circuit might be necessary. Any advice? Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 22:12:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:12:28 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:12:28 -0800 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Bruce wrote: > > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like > > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, > > They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of design. Why does an airplane have a mixture lever then? AFAIK the carbs in airplanes still work using a venturi, yet they require you to lean the mixture at altitude. As you lean, there is a noticable increase in power (until you go too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric pressure variations. Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Sat Dec 8 22:04:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:17:16 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:17:16 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: NTC thermistor sensors Brian Dessent wrote: > > ... does anyone have any experience on this issue from > reverse-engineering ECMs? Ludis has schematics for GM ECMs inputs - here's the 1227165's (or the Australian 1227808's) input circuitry: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/1227165sheet2.gif Look near the centre of the schematic - to the right and down a bit. Note that for the coolant temp CTS# signal, the ECM controls CTSHI so that either a 348 ohm resistor, or a 348 + 3650 ohm resistor (total = 3998 ohms) is in series with the sensor. The ECM then uses two tables, for each of the series resistors, to look up the calculated temperature from the A/D value read at CTS (CTS goes to an A/D converter). This scheme allows greater accuracy at each end of the sensor's resistance range with the 8 bits of A/D accuracy use on that ECM. Note that more A/D bits of accuracy may not solve the problem when using a single series resistor, as noise then may become a factor at each end of the resistance range. Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 22:17:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:17:50 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:17:50 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Off Topic Arnie replied: I agree. My mistake. Bruce wrote: > > The same can be said for editing the whole message, so the headers, and > trailing statement aren't a waste of bandwidth. > Bruce > > From: "Gary Schaumberg" > Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > > Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > > subject > > line. Hardly any effort, is it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 22:28:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:42:21 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:42:21 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB proboscis 12" pre sensor, and 10" aft of 1 3/4" muffler pipe works. The one **problem** is that on some cars with long exhuast systems, is that the air is soo colded by the time they get there that they *chill* the sensor enough to turn it off. On one LT1 that I worked on it did that. On the GN with a single shorter pipe things were fine. If it the light blinks off, and display goes to 2.5 on the sensor output, you'll need another sample point Bruce From: "romans, mark" Subject: WB proboscis > Does anyone have any pictures of the old egor proboscis? > I need to fab something up to use on carb'd applications! > LET THE FUN BEGIN! > Mark ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 22:46:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:46:23 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:46:23 -0800 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: killed projects (was Re: diy-wb works!) Make that 4 projects. I designed, programmed and built a prototype of a trip computer. I have been using it in my car for almost a year now. My original intent was to give it to the diy, efi332 and SER mailing lists. I scrapped the idea because I became disgusted with the attitudes on the diy list... (Peter is only indirectly to blame). JD ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 8:49 PM Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Excuse me that was dated material, it's 3 projects that were buried because > of Peter's actions. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 22:40:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:54:01 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:54:01 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Which is pirated from the DIY-WB. Clever wording. Wiggle, wiggle Bruce (Charging $20 for a $3+ board, hahahaha) And another public thank you for killing off at least 2 projects that were to be freebies. From: "Peter Gargano" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > Peter > (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having > an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it > with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 22:51:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:58:55 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:58:55 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: DCOE/DHLA Ver. Efi > >"The last carburettors Dell'Orto produced were the unique "tri-jet" DHLA45's >for Lotus, which as well as an idle and main circuit, has a power jet >circuit for extra enrichment at high revs. This system was also fitted to >the Lotus Esprit Turbo carburettors, which can hold up to 30-PSI boost >pressure." > >Copied from http://www.racecar.co.uk/dellorto/cars.htm The concept of having a "power" circuit in a DCOE/DHLA type carb was not unique to the DHLA45 Lotus carbys. In a DCOE, there are two separate and distinct high speed/high load enrichment functions: The pump jets act as a high speed enrichment bleed. How much fuel you get from them is controlled by the size of the pump jets, and when it comes in and the shape of the delivery curve is controlled by the size of the chokes in concert with the mass of the weights above the ball check valves in the pump circuit. The area of the passages in the auxiliary venturii acts in concert with the throttle butterfly position to dampen the intake pulses to the main jet wells--thus at wide open throttle, when the pulses are not damped by the throttle butterflies, a smaller aux venturi passageway damps the pulses more than a large one. More damping gives a leaner mixture. Thus, the A/F ratio at WOT can be adjusted vs. the A/F mixture from the main circuit at part throttle. Moral-- There's a _LOT_ more to tuning DCOE's than meets the eye (or than the average club racer knows) !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 8 22:49:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:58:58 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:58:58 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Excuse me that was dated material, it's 3 projects that were buried because of Peter's actions. Bruce From: "Bruce" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > Which is pirated from the DIY-WB. > Clever wording. > Wiggle, wiggle > Bruce > (Charging $20 for a $3+ board, hahahaha) > And another public thank you for killing off at least 2 projects that > were to be freebies. > From: "Peter Gargano" > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Peter > > (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having > > an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it > > with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 23:09:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:09:13 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:09:13 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb works! Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have offered to try and give electronic support to it. There is work afoot here to get a WB bar graph board made. If it turns out, guys like Steven C and others will get a complimentary working unit. Bruce Roe On Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:29:10 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > > An ionization detonation detection devise, and a > complete and working source code for GM ecm, > the third I don't have the authors permission to > publicly yak about. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 8 23:02:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:16:08 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:16:08 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve elcamino73 tapped away at the keyboard with: > I believe that for carbon and the like that carb cleaner is much > more suited to the job. I don't believe that brake cleaner is > more aggressive. (Check the contents out on the back of the cans) > I'll use it when just the opposite results are desired Stuff like hydroflouric acid in the brake cleaner I had. Pretty aggressive by any standard. Carb cleaner is mainly low-density HCs. > ---- Original Message ----- > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Peter Gargano tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > > > Ludis Langens wrote: > > > > > > > > It is a stepper motor. > > > > > I've often wondered what the correct procedure for re-lubricating > > > these Idle Air Conttrol (IAC) valves is? I've recently had two get > > > "sticky" and I've just swapped them for newer ones, rather than > > > cleaning and lubing. Anyone got some well tried tips? > > > > I've had the idle stabilizer in my Golf (it's an oscillating type) > > out once every year of so for cleaning - after buying a replacement > > after two year ($450!!). So I thought it worthwhile to try to keep > > it clean. The replacement valve has held up now for about 8 years. > > > > First of all; clean the bugger. A good soaking in carby cleaner. > > (Some people say brake cleaner is better; it might clean faster but > > seems way too agressive.) Send an apprentice down to the corner shop > > and buy a Magnum Classic icecream. Enjoy. [snip] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 8 23:15:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:30:14 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:30:14 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: NTC thermistor sensors Brian Dessent tapped away at the keyboard with: > Does anyone know the usual way in which ECMs measure the > resistance of the NTC thermistors? The most straightforward > methods I can think of would be to apply a constant current [or > voltage] and measure the resulting voltage [or current]. It seems > that the constant-current method would expand the high end of the > range and compress the low end, and the opposite for > constant-voltage. The usual thermistor varies from about 50 ohms > to 50k ohms exponentially, right? I guess it depends on whether > you are interested in the low-end range of temps or the high-end. Thermistors vary. The Digifant ECU for example, measures the NTC resistance using a constant voltage applied across a resistor in series with the thermistor. Open- and closed-circuit conditons are then easy to detect - used to set CO, idle speed and basic timing in Digifant servicing. > Anyway, does anyone have any experience on this issue from > reverse-engineering ECMs? Also, is there a "standard thermistor" > curve such as with thermocouples? What I would like to do is Yep... there are standard curves. R = A e ^ (B/T) A and B are the thermistor-specific coefficients. T is temperature in Kelvin R is resistance in Ohms. If they're not documented (e.g. in a service manual), you can determine A and B from 3 or more measurements using a curve fit. > piggy-back some of the sensors currently in use by the stock ECM > -- make their signals available for datalogging or dash-display > while not affecting the readings that the computer sees. If the > ECM supplies a test current and measures resulting voltage, then > this should be rather easy with an op-amp buffer. If the ECM > applies a test voltage and measures current, then a current mirror > would seem appropriate. However, if the test current varies (to > aid linearity or dynamic range) then it would seem that a full > "resistance mirror" op-amp circuit might be necessary. Any > advice? With Digifant (and probably most other Bosch setups) you'll only have to buffer the voltage to make use of the thermistor for your own purposes. The voltage will of course disappear when the engine is switched off, so that method is unsuitable for controling under-bonnet temperatures after shutdown. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dupuis10@telusplanet.net Sat Dec 8 23:18:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:32:09 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:32:09 -0300 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DCOE tuning, was Spark plugs Bruce, Greg, and Bill Please include me in off-list discussions regarding DCOE tuning in the future. I promise to be quiet and listen, 'cause I don't really have too much advise to offer except the "everybody knows" trick of air corrector jet vs. main jet ratio of 3:1 for tuning high rpm vs. low rpm mixture. I'd just be interested in getting info on these wonderful carbs, but you're absolutely right - the name of the list includes EFI in the title, so carburator related topics should be avoided I guess. Matt Dupuis dupuis10@telusplanet.net > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Greg Hermann > Sent: December 7, 2001 11:20 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Spark plugs > > > At 1:01 PM 12/7/01, Bruce wrote: > >Nothing a soldering gun, some solder / flux, drills and a thumb vise > >wouldn't cure. Getta DCOE right, and just use the *EFI* for > ignition work. > >Trick is getting it right. . > >Bruce > > > > > > > >From: > >Subject: RE: Spark plugs > >> I suspect I will have to live with the fouling until I get EFI running > >> as the current DCOE is seriously rich at low RPM (i.e. in traffic). Not > >> my choice I hasten to add. > > > Bill-- > > I suspect that Bruce and I, between us, could help you through getting the > DCOE _"RIGHT"_ . This oughtta be done off list, though. > > If you think "source code" is black magic, you haven't been around much > DCOE/IDA tuning !! > > Definitely something only to be shared with the "annointed" !! :-) > > Greg > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Sat Dec 8 23:18:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:32:25 -0300 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:32:25 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the subject line. Hardly any effort, is it? Bernd Felsche wrote: > > Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Bernd Felsche wrote: > >> Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > [snip] > >>> Guys I'm confused. Please help me out. What does the topic you are > >>> discussing have to do with manifold construction or intercoolers? > >> > >> IIRC, here's the gist: > >> > >> Start: Question about manifold with integral intercooler for a V6 twin-turbo. > >> --> Suggestion to throttle the runners individually for throttle response > >> --> Suggestion that it's overly complex and too complex to implement > >> --> Description of simple construction and reference examples > >> --> Suggestion that air-liquid intercooler was too esoteric > >> --> Reference examples of high-performance cars using such in production > >> --> Suggestion that such cars are irrelevant and "exotic" > >> --> Reference to base technologies having been in use for over 25 years > >> --> Suggestion that EFI was only brought about by EPA requirements > > > Arnie the mathematician responds with: > > > I did very well in geometry while in H.S. The term tangent comes to > > mind. A tangent waay out in the back 40. (I also grew up on a farm). > > Well, some people keep on introducing hyperbole or react acutely > at the same time being obtuse. :-) > > How long does a normal conversation stay on the original topic? > > ... mmm. These nuts are nice. > > :-) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 23:47:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:47:14 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:47:14 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > offered to try and give electronic support to it. To right, ION is NOT dead. Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 8 23:55:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:55:30 -0800 Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2001 23:55:30 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Sensor Question Hello All, I am at the stage of starting to do a rough overall design for the micro and code to be used in my EFI project. So for I have made a short list of the sensors that I think I will/may need to use, being: MAP Water Temp Cam Angle TPS Battery Voltage Air Temp EGO I basically came up with this list after looking at what most other computers use, and what they use them for, my aim being to have a computer that can compare to mid market kind of computers. Can anyone suggest any that I may have left some important ones off the list, or included ones that arent worth the hassle (with regard to the quality of the finished product)? -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 23:48:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:03:25 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:03:25 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: gm idle valve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bernd Felsche" To: Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 9:02 PM Subject: Re: gm idle valve > elcamino73 tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > I believe that for carbon and the like that carb cleaner is much > > more suited to the job. I don't believe that brake cleaner is > > more aggressive. (Check the contents out on the back of the cans) > > I'll use it when just the opposite results are desired > > Stuff like hydroflouric acid in the brake cleaner I had. > Pretty aggressive by any standard. Carb cleaner is mainly > low-density HCs. > CAS#127-18-4 (perchloroethylene) and 124-38-9 (carbon dioxide) are the two main ingredients in the most common brake cleaner. Which is basically what your dry cleaner uses to "DRYCLEAN" your suites. I'm not sure what you are using. Carb cleaner has always been harder on hands, paint, plastic and any wire insulating varnish. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Sat Dec 8 23:51:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:04:17 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:04:17 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! What were those projects Bruce? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 8:49 PM Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Excuse me that was dated material, it's 3 projects that were buried because > of Peter's actions. > Bruce > > > From: "Bruce" > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Which is pirated from the DIY-WB. > > Clever wording. > > Wiggle, wiggle > > Bruce > > (Charging $20 for a $3+ board, hahahaha) > > And another public thank you for killing off at least 2 projects that > > were to be freebies. > > > From: "Peter Gargano" > > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > > Peter > > > (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having > > > an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it > > > with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Sat Dec 8 23:59:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:24:59 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:24:59 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Datalogging RPM signal Anyone have any pointers on how to log the rpm signal with the dataq or B&B "cheap person" data acquisition boards? I figure you can either use an inductive pickup or possibly intercept the signal to the ECU/DME. Problem is that I am an electronics idiot, and I have no idea what form that signal usually takes and/or how to intercept and capture it. What I really want to be able to do is log AFR/O2 volts for the WB with RPM (and possibly MAF and TPS which are simple voltage signals) to review after tuning runs, dyno pulls, or runs down the strip. Anyone got any advice? Thanks, Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sun Dec 9 00:16:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:26:31 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:26:31 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) The same can be said for editing the whole message, so the headers, and trailing statement aren't a waste of bandwidth. Bruce From: "Gary Schaumberg" Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > subject > line. Hardly any effort, is it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sun Dec 9 00:29:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:39:26 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 00:39:26 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! An ionization detonation detection devise, and a complete and working source code for GM ecm, the third I don't have the authors permission to publicly yak about. Bruce From: "elcamino73" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > What were those projects Bruce? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Excuse me that was dated material, it's 3 projects that were buried > because > > of Peter's actions. > > Bruce > > From: "Bruce" > > > Which is pirated from the DIY-WB. > > > Clever wording. > > > Wiggle, wiggle > > > Bruce > > > (Charging $20 for a $3+ board, hahahaha) > > > And another public thank you for killing off at least 2 projects > > > that were to be freebies. > > > > > From: "Peter Gargano" > > > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > > > Peter > > > > (I have no association with The Parts Bin other than currently having > > > > an order of 10 sensors in transit, for Australians who hope to use it > > > > with the at-cost Oz-DIY-PCB - some time before Xmas!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Sun Dec 9 01:21:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 01:34:53 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 01:34:53 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? A smiling Arnie adds: I'm gonna say this cuz I'm an outspoken kraut. Shannen, I like style! Shannen Durphey wrote: > > Forgive me if I don't care. > Well you sure as he-- didn't ask if we cared before you started down this road. > > You asked the question about reasonable price for a level of performance. I've > found it and stated it. I can see you're enamored of the Bugatti But it's an > example of a car built to flaunt extravagance and wealth and Bugatti uses > performance as a major portion of the justification for the cost. The US car is > an example of a car built to provide a certain level of performance and the > price justifies the work that went into development and the work that goes into > manufacturing. > > Shannen > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Sun Dec 9 01:50:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 02:01:39 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 02:01:39 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Intake manifold construction (blah, blah, blah) A tuckered Arnie quips: Not much time leftover after getting through these off subject line posts. :) Jurgen Hartwig wrote: > > Sounds like a few of you guys need to get laid. > > jay > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 03:01:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 03:01:46 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 03:01:46 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! I would give financial support to it. > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > > There is work afoot here to get a WB bar graph board > made. If it turns out, guys like Steven C and others will > get a complimentary working unit. > > Bruce Roe > > > > > > > An ionization detonation detection devise, and a > > complete and working source code for GM ecm, > > the third I don't have the authors permission to > > publicly yak about. > > Bruce > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jfdavis@epix.net Sun Dec 9 03:15:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 03:30:24 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 03:30:24 -0300 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Bruce wrote: > > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like > > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, > > They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of design. Why does an airplane have a mixture lever then? AFAIK the carbs in airplanes still work using a venturi, yet they require you to lean the mixture at altitude. As you lean, there is a noticable increase in power (until you go too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric pressure variations. Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Sun Dec 9 03:18:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 03:34:21 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 03:34:21 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Off Topic Arnie replied: I agree. My mistake. Bruce wrote: > > The same can be said for editing the whole message, so the headers, and > trailing statement aren't a waste of bandwidth. > Bruce > > From: "Gary Schaumberg" > Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > > Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > > subject > > line. Hardly any effort, is it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jfdavis@epix.net Sun Dec 9 03:49:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 04:05:32 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 04:05:32 -0300 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: killed projects (was Re: diy-wb works!) Make that 4 projects. I designed, programmed and built a prototype of a trip computer. I have been using it in my car for almost a year now. My original intent was to give it to the diy, efi332 and SER mailing lists. I scrapped the idea because I became disgusted with the attitudes on the diy list... (Peter is only indirectly to blame). JD ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 8:49 PM Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > Excuse me that was dated material, it's 3 projects that were buried because > of Peter's actions. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Sun Dec 9 04:42:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 04:21:44 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 04:21:44 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb works! Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have offered to try and give electronic support to it. There is work afoot here to get a WB bar graph board made. If it turns out, guys like Steven C and others will get a complimentary working unit. Bruce Roe On Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:29:10 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > > An ionization detonation detection devise, and a > complete and working source code for GM ecm, > the third I don't have the authors permission to > publicly yak about. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Sun Dec 9 05:00:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 05:07:01 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 05:07:01 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Sensor Question Hello All, I am at the stage of starting to do a rough overall design for the micro and code to be used in my EFI project. So for I have made a short list of the sensors that I think I will/may need to use, being: MAP Water Temp Cam Angle TPS Battery Voltage Air Temp EGO I basically came up with this list after looking at what most other computers use, and what they use them for, my aim being to have a computer that can compare to mid market kind of computers. Can anyone suggest any that I may have left some important ones off the list, or included ones that arent worth the hassle (with regard to the quality of the finished product)? -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Sun Dec 9 04:51:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 05:15:14 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 05:15:14 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > offered to try and give electronic support to it. To right, ION is NOT dead. Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 05:30:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 05:30:23 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 05:30:23 -0800 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. I don't live in the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. Mos. PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 05:30:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 05:30:25 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 05:30:25 -0800 From: "Con Torrisi" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: What display for DIY WB Hi everyone, After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture meter with limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see what display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? Thanks Con Torrisi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 06:01:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:01:20 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:01:20 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) From: "Jon Davis" Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Bruce wrote: > > > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like > > > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, > > They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of > design. > Why does an airplane have a mixture lever then? AFAIK the carbs in airplanes > still work using a venturi, yet they require you to lean the mixture at > altitude. As you lean, there is a noticable increase in power (until you go > too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric pressure > variations. > Jon Davis Apples and Oranges. Aviation stuff is designed to be as fail safe as possible, ie simple. I have yet to see a DCOE (that fact has been edited out) in aviation use, and I'd doubt that it was properly tuned to begin with. That and the basic principal that pilots like to be in total control. I've also noticed a far number of aircraft that allow mixture control, but ignore ignition. The few aircraft carbs, that I've looked at were at best primitive, interesting as far as being able to work inverted, but that's all. Just to get back to EFI: There are a number of EFI's that are MAP systems, that other then at start up never reference to Baro., other then some special cases. The correction is only do to the exhuast back pressure change, and depending on altitude might just be a minor issue, as you climb then it will get more meaningful, as far as US roads, I don't think many get over 6K'. Go to a high enough altitude, and it's engine design / application that is the ruling matter. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 06:16:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:16:08 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:16:08 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! The guy behind it would rather keep it to himself rather then see folks *cash in*, and make a profit off of his work. It's just that simple. While so many took exception to the Users Agreement, all they managed to do was ruin it for others (and themselves). Still amazes me the short sightedness of so many seemingly bright folks. Bruce From: Subject: diy-wb works! > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > Bruce Roe ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 06:18:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:18:27 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:18:27 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Is this one a shared version, or another *at cost* one?. Bruce From: "Peter Gargano" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > To right, ION is NOT dead. > Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 06:37:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:37:09 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:37:09 -0800 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Greg Hermann wrote: > And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This time > mostly CAFE. > > Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with DCOE/IDA > carbys in terms of BSFC !! > Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). Mos. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 06:48:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:48:49 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 06:48:49 -0800 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Bruce, I'd like to suggest adding a switch so the bar graph can be turned into a dot graph. I find at night sometimes the bar graph is pretty bright and I think the dot would be easier to look at. I, myself have no idea how a bright-dim control could be easily added but the bar-dot change is just one little switch. I would love to be able to buy a pcb. I bread boarded it on perf board and got it to fit in a 1"x2"x6" box. So far I've dropped it several times and had it fly off the dash a few times and it hasn't shorted out. Purely luck :} A pcb based display would be much more "shockable" than bread boarded. It works absolutely great after I figured out all my flub ups. Thanks for the design, I'd have never figured it out. Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 2:42 AM Subject: diy-wb works! > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > > There is work afoot here to get a WB bar graph board > made. If it turns out, guys like Steven C and others will > get a complimentary working unit. > > Bruce Roe > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:29:10 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > > > > > An ionization detonation detection devise, and a > > complete and working source code for GM ecm, > > the third I don't have the authors permission to > > publicly yak about. > > Bruce > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 07:41:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 07:41:21 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 07:41:21 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Sensor Question At 7:00 PM 12/9/01, Bob - Uni wrote: >Hello All, > >I am at the stage of starting to do a rough overall design for the >micro and code to be used in my EFI project. So for I have made a >short list of the sensors that I think I will/may need to use, being: >MAP >Water Temp >Cam Angle >TPS >Battery Voltage >Air Temp >EGO >I basically came up with this list after looking at what most other >computers use, and what they use them for, my aim being to have a >computer that can compare to mid market kind of computers. Can anyone >suggest any that I may have left some important ones off the list, or >included ones that arent worth the hassle (with regard to the quality >of the finished product)? > >-- >Best regards, > Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au I didn't see crank angle on your list. Some others worthy of consideration: Exhaust back pressure Atmospheric pressure Fuel rail pressure Fuel Temp EGT Use a WB O2, _NOT_ just an EGO--and it's often best just to use WBO2 during tuning only. Saves a lot of money on sensors, allows use of leaded fuels, etc. All depends on how anal a tuner you are/want to become. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 07:50:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 07:50:13 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 07:50:13 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) At 1:15 AM 12/9/01, Jon Davis wrote: >Bruce wrote: > >> > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like >> > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, >> >> They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of >design. > >Why does an airplane have a mixture lever then? AFAIK the carbs in airplanes >still work using a venturi, yet they require you to lean the mixture at >altitude. As you lean, there is a noticable increase in power (until you go >too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric pressure >variations. > >Jon Davis You are correct, Jon, they don't. Main jet diameter needs to vary with the fourth root of the air density ratio in order to maintain constant A/F ratio from a carby. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 07:55:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 07:55:19 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 07:55:19 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: ION EYES At 6:02 AM 12/9/01, elcamino73 wrote: >I would give financial support to it. I'm in if it goes forward, any way I can help. Greg > > > >> Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have >> offered to try and give electronic support to it. >> >> There is work afoot here to get a WB bar graph board >> made. If it turns out, guys like Steven C and others will >> get a complimentary working unit. >> >> Bruce Roe ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 08:05:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 08:05:30 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 08:05:30 -0800 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal One suggestion would be to wrap a few turns of 18 gauge wire around the #1 plug wire, then feed this signal into one of the unused inputs on the WB-LCD. Logging the 2 channels would give you RPM in sync with AFR. It would take a little playing to get the configuration right, but something like this should work. Bill Stephen Andersen wrote: > > Anyone have any pointers on how to log the rpm signal with the > dataq or B&B "cheap person" data acquisition boards? > > I figure you can either use an inductive pickup or possibly > intercept the signal to the ECU/DME. Problem is that I am > an electronics idiot, and I have no idea what form that signal > usually takes and/or how to intercept and capture it. > > What I really want to be able to do is log AFR/O2 volts for the > WB with RPM (and possibly MAF and TPS which are simple voltage > signals) to review after tuning runs, dyno pulls, or runs > down the strip. > > Anyone got any advice? > > Thanks, > Steve > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 08:13:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 08:13:55 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 08:13:55 -0800 From: "Trey Keifer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: What display for DIY WB I was wondering the same thing, from what I can tell (and I'm sure others can correct me if wrong) you can only use a volt meter to pull out the value for the correct A/F ratio. I'm actually looking into adapting the schematic to work with an Autometer ultra-lite A/F meter that I purchased for another (now defunct) project. -------------- Trey Keifer -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Con Torrisi Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 5:31 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: What display for DIY WB Hi everyone, After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture meter with limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see what display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? Thanks Con Torrisi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 08:17:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 08:17:03 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 08:17:03 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 1:37 AM 12/10/01, Mos wrote: >On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Greg Hermann wrote: > >> And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This time >> mostly CAFE. >> >> Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with DCOE/IDA >> carbys in terms of BSFC !! >> Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! > >So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better >atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a >generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > >Mos. You catch on quickly!! DCOE's have _such_ good atomization that you can let off the choke about 5 to 10 seconds after a seriously cold start. Most carbys are not that good, and port injectors are not even close. Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack of good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as opposed to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has _closed_ . What this does is let the latent heat of the fuel (as well as of any injected water, SHHHH!!) act as an internal coolant during the compression stroke. Internal cooling during the compression stroke reduces the negative work needed during that stroke, reduces the peak temp of the cycle and the EGT, reduces the peak pressures during the cycle, and reduces heat rejection to the water jackets significantly as well. The temperature/pressure reductions can get pretty significant when you are working with methanol fuel and/or a significant amount of H2O injection. And there is _NO_ net loss in power, in fact there is a gain. Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the fuel throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion (also more power and efficiency here). All of which add up to improvements in power, efficiency, as well as mechanical durability (lower pressures and temps do that!) as a direct result of better fuel atomization. Industrial oil burner practice backs up these points--the lowest cost, efficiency burners use mechanical atomization, next step up is compressed air atomization, and the highest step is steam atomization. And boilers don't even get cycle efficiency benefits that Otto cycle engines get from improvements in fuel atomization! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 08:02:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 08:26:04 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 08:26:04 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! I would give financial support to it. > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > > There is work afoot here to get a WB bar graph board > made. If it turns out, guys like Steven C and others will > get a complimentary working unit. > > Bruce Roe > > > > > > > An ionization detonation detection devise, and a > > complete and working source code for GM ecm, > > the third I don't have the authors permission to > > publicly yak about. > > Bruce > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 09:56:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 09:56:44 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 09:56:44 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: NTC thermistor sensors GM ECMs use a two resistor voltage divider that is read with an ADC. One resistor to +5 v, the NTC resistor being the other to ground. The lower the NTC resistance, the lower the voltage. BobR. Brian Dessent wrote: > Does anyone know the usual way in which ECMs measure the resistance of > the NTC thermistors? The most straightforward methods I can think of > would be to apply a constant current [or voltage] and measure the > resulting voltage [or current]. It seems that the constant-current > method would expand the high end of the range and compress the low end, > and the opposite for constant-voltage. The usual thermistor varies from > about 50 ohms to 50k ohms exponentially, right? I guess it depends on > whether you are interested in the low-end range of temps or the > high-end. > > Anyway, does anyone have any experience on this issue from > reverse-engineering ECMs? Also, is there a "standard thermistor" curve > such as with thermocouples? What I would like to do is piggy-back some > of the sensors currently in use by the stock ECM -- make their signals > available for datalogging or dash-display while not affecting the > readings that the computer sees. If the ECM supplies a test current and > measures resulting voltage, then this should be rather easy with an > op-amp buffer. If the ECM applies a test voltage and measures current, > then a current mirror would seem appropriate. However, if the test > current varies (to aid linearity or dynamic range) then it would seem > that a full "resistance mirror" op-amp circuit might be necessary. Any > advice? > > Brian > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 09:57:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 09:57:09 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 09:57:09 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: What display for DIY WB There are schematics for a bar graph display on incoming. Another one in the works is an LCD display of AFR. Depending upon how quickly the engine reaches redline a data logger is another valid alternative. Can also have an ECM input to the ADC used to read the DIY-WB output voltage and have it placed into the ALDL stream. A voltmeter also works. The DIY-WB was designed w/o a display on purpose. It is a building block so that it may be used in any manner. BobR. Trey Keifer wrote: > I was wondering the same thing, from what I can tell (and I'm sure others > can correct me if wrong) you can only use a volt meter to pull out the value > for the correct A/F ratio. > > I'm actually looking into adapting the schematic to work with an Autometer > ultra-lite A/F meter that I purchased for another (now defunct) project. > > -------------- > Trey Keifer > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Con Torrisi > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 5:31 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: What display for DIY WB > > Hi everyone, > > After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture meter with > limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. > > I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see what > display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? > > Thanks > > Con Torrisi. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 10:35:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:35:27 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:35:27 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! "Mark S. Riley" wrote: > > Bruce, I'd like to suggest adding a switch so the bar graph can be turned > into a dot graph. I find at night sometimes the bar graph is pretty bright > and I think the dot would be easier to look at. I, myself have no idea how a > bright-dim control could be easily added but the bar-dot change is just one > little switch. The Silicon Chip FMD design incorporates a very simple circuit to automatically control the brightness at night: http://www.techedge.com.au/vehicle/fmd.htm Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 10:47:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:47:25 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:47:25 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: What display for DIY WB Con Torrisi wrote: > > After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture meter with > limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. > > I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see what > display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? Con, The Silicon Chip design I modified specifically for the DIY-WB output (and for RS232 output more recently) works well. Here are the details: http://www.techedge.com.au/vehicle/wbo2/wbfmd.htm The kit is readily available from a number of suppliers, or you can make your own boards if you purchase the article from http://www.siliconchip.com.au and use their PCB detailed (or do it on perf. board - it's reasonably simple). If someone were to do a DIY design, then on my wish list would be RS232 output and a logging facility with inputs for EGT, etc. Peter. (I have no affiliation with Silicon Chip, or any FMD kit supplier) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 10:47:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:47:47 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:47:47 -0800 From: Arnaud Westenberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann wrote: >> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better >> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a >> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some > port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack of > good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. > The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as opposed > to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has _closed_ . I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb doesn't evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a (port) injector evaporates at the valve? Can't be just from the higher fuel temp in the injector case, or is it? ___ Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 10:48:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:48:14 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:48:14 -0800 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb bar graph display I've been looking around at parts prices and availablilty for the bar graph display. I'm wondering if it would be acceptable to use a single 10 ohm 1 watt resistor in place of R9 and R10 which are are 18 ohm 1/2 watt resistors in parallel? Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you could probably get them free from Nat Semi. However, buying them 100 at a time saves over $5 per 4. So i'm wondering if there will be any interest in a group buy if the PCB project comes through? Even a small group buy (~25 kits) would likely save the particpants $10 each. David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mini@bretts.com.au Sun Dec 9 10:31:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:49:30 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:49:30 -0300 From: "Con Torrisi" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: What display for DIY WB Hi everyone, After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture meter with limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see what display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? Thanks Con Torrisi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos@sydney.net Sun Dec 9 10:30:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:49:30 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 10:49:30 -0300 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. I don't live in the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. Mos. PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 11:05:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:05:02 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:05:02 -0800 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display >Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you >could probably get them free from Nat Semi. Yeah if you want one or two, they send them off to you for free. I got two for free from their web site. -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sun Dec 9 11:01:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:09:25 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:09:25 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) From: "Jon Davis" Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Bruce wrote: > > > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like > > > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, > > They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of > design. > Why does an airplane have a mixture lever then? AFAIK the carbs in airplanes > still work using a venturi, yet they require you to lean the mixture at > altitude. As you lean, there is a noticable increase in power (until you go > too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric pressure > variations. > Jon Davis Apples and Oranges. Aviation stuff is designed to be as fail safe as possible, ie simple. I have yet to see a DCOE (that fact has been edited out) in aviation use, and I'd doubt that it was properly tuned to begin with. That and the basic principal that pilots like to be in total control. I've also noticed a far number of aircraft that allow mixture control, but ignore ignition. The few aircraft carbs, that I've looked at were at best primitive, interesting as far as being able to work inverted, but that's all. Just to get back to EFI: There are a number of EFI's that are MAP systems, that other then at start up never reference to Baro., other then some special cases. The correction is only do to the exhuast back pressure change, and depending on altitude might just be a minor issue, as you climb then it will get more meaningful, as far as US roads, I don't think many get over 6K'. Go to a high enough altitude, and it's engine design / application that is the ruling matter. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 11:16:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:16:27 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:16:27 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display David Gregory wrote: > > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you > could probably get them free from Nat Semi. However, buying them 100 at a > time saves over $5 per 4. So i'm wondering if there will be any interest in > a group buy if the PCB project comes through? Even a small group buy (~25 > kits) would likely save the particpants $10 each. Although I'm hesitant to get into this debate, it makes a lot of sense for someone with PIC experience to design some veeery simple PIC code to to use a low cost and easily reprogrammable PIC like the 16F84 (US$3.90 from http://www.futurlec.com/ICMicrochip.html ), and an external A/D converter, and forget the LM3914, which IS overpriced. It would be a snap to add RS232 as well. Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sun Dec 9 11:16:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:34:25 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:34:25 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! The guy behind it would rather keep it to himself rather then see folks *cash in*, and make a profit off of his work. It's just that simple. While so many took exception to the Users Agreement, all they managed to do was ruin it for others (and themselves). Still amazes me the short sightedness of so many seemingly bright folks. Bruce From: Subject: diy-wb works! > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > Bruce Roe ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sun Dec 9 11:18:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:36:19 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:36:19 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Is this one a shared version, or another *at cost* one?. Bruce From: "Peter Gargano" Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > To right, ION is NOT dead. > Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos@sydney.net Sun Dec 9 11:37:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:51:01 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:51:01 -0300 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Greg Hermann wrote: > And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This time > mostly CAFE. > > Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with DCOE/IDA > carbys in terms of BSFC !! > Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). Mos. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com Sun Dec 9 11:49:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:58:20 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 11:58:20 -0300 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! Bruce, I'd like to suggest adding a switch so the bar graph can be turned into a dot graph. I find at night sometimes the bar graph is pretty bright and I think the dot would be easier to look at. I, myself have no idea how a bright-dim control could be easily added but the bar-dot change is just one little switch. I would love to be able to buy a pcb. I bread boarded it on perf board and got it to fit in a 1"x2"x6" box. So far I've dropped it several times and had it fly off the dash a few times and it hasn't shorted out. Purely luck :} A pcb based display would be much more "shockable" than bread boarded. It works absolutely great after I figured out all my flub ups. Thanks for the design, I'd have never figured it out. Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 2:42 AM Subject: diy-wb works! > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > > There is work afoot here to get a WB bar graph board > made. If it turns out, guys like Steven C and others will > get a complimentary working unit. > > Bruce Roe > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2001 22:29:10 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > > > > > An ionization detonation detection devise, and a > > complete and working source code for GM ecm, > > the third I don't have the authors permission to > > publicly yak about. > > Bruce > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 12:19:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:19:55 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:19:55 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 8:45 PM 12/9/01, Arnaud Westenberg wrote: >Greg Hermann wrote: > > >> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better > >> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a > >> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > > > Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some > > port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack of > > good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. > > > The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as opposed > > to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has _closed_ . > >I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb doesn't >evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a (port) injector >evaporates at the valve? Can't be just from the higher fuel temp in the >injector case, or is it? The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as Weber DCOE;s or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the intake valves) puts finely atomized fuel into the high velocity airstream (and no fuel flow when there is no air flow) in the intake port. Most of the atomized fuel makes it into the cylinder without vaporizing. Of course, SOME of the fuel gets vaporized before the intake valve closes, but not all that high a percentage of it. (Which comes under the heading of nothing is perfect.) Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if any, air velocity in the port. This is done so that the heat in the valve, combined with the reversion of exhaust gas into the intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the fuel, and thus _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's inability to atomize it very well at all. The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel is robbed from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal efficiency. The vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in the inlet charge than atomized liquid fuel does--thus the deterioration in volumetric efficiency. My own pet theory is that it would take air shrouded port fuel (and water, SHHHH!!) injectors, injecting their (respective) highly atomized fluids in time with high velocity air flow in the inlet ports, probably in a direction retro to the flow in the port, in order to get to the level of mixture and burn "quality" that good carbys can give. Hope that helps. Greg > >___ > >Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 12:26:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:26:17 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:26:17 -0800 From: "Don DRI05 Ricciardiello" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Steve, I have two words of advice and they are "Brian Dessent". He was a great help as I had the exact same question for the DataQ DI-194 I'm using. I have a variable reluctance magnetic pick-up sensing crank rotationon on my bike. Brian suggested using the LM2917 Frequency to voltage converters. I'm bread-boarding mine at the moment to test it out. Don From: Stephen Andersen @diy-efi.org on 08/12/2001 21:59 EST Please respond to diy_efi@diy-efi.org Sent by: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org To: "'diy_efi@diy-efi.org'" cc: Subject: Datalogging RPM signal Anyone have any pointers on how to log the rpm signal with the dataq or B&B "cheap person" data acquisition boards? I figure you can either use an inductive pickup or possibly intercept the signal to the ECU/DME. Problem is that I am an electronics idiot, and I have no idea what form that signal usually takes and/or how to intercept and capture it. What I really want to be able to do is log AFR/O2 volts for the WB with RPM (and possibly MAF and TPS which are simple voltage signals) to review after tuning runs, dyno pulls, or runs down the strip. Anyone got any advice? Thanks, Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 12:28:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:28:36 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:28:36 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: SPAM >The kit is readily available from a number of suppliers, or you can make >your own boards if you purchase the article from http://www.siliconchip.com.au > >Peter. > >(I have no affiliation with Silicon Chip, or any FMD kit supplier) Petie-- You have lied about other matters here, and therefore I do not give your above statement any credibility. Therefore, I regard this post as SPAM. Please govern and modify your posting behavior here accordingly !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 12:30:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:30:40 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:30:40 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Double Shhhh, The lil guys are working on something similiar, but less complex. Depending on the *Big Plenum* experiments, we might get to the timed water events. Bruce From: "Greg Hermann" > My own pet theory is that it would take air shrouded port fuel (and water, > SHHHH!!) injectors, injecting their (respective) highly atomized fluids in > time with high velocity air flow in the inlet ports, probably in a > direction retro to the flow in the port, in order to get to the level of > mixture and burn "quality" that good carbys can give. > Hope that helps. > Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 12:44:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:56:53 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:56:53 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Sensor Question At 7:00 PM 12/9/01, Bob - Uni wrote: >Hello All, > >I am at the stage of starting to do a rough overall design for the >micro and code to be used in my EFI project. So for I have made a >short list of the sensors that I think I will/may need to use, being: >MAP >Water Temp >Cam Angle >TPS >Battery Voltage >Air Temp >EGO >I basically came up with this list after looking at what most other >computers use, and what they use them for, my aim being to have a >computer that can compare to mid market kind of computers. Can anyone >suggest any that I may have left some important ones off the list, or >included ones that arent worth the hassle (with regard to the quality >of the finished product)? > >-- >Best regards, > Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au I didn't see crank angle on your list. Some others worthy of consideration: Exhaust back pressure Atmospheric pressure Fuel rail pressure Fuel Temp EGT Use a WB O2, _NOT_ just an EGO--and it's often best just to use WBO2 during tuning only. Saves a lot of money on sensors, allows use of leaded fuels, etc. All depends on how anal a tuner you are/want to become. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 12:52:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:02:06 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:02:06 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) At 1:15 AM 12/9/01, Jon Davis wrote: >Bruce wrote: > >> > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like >> > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, >> >> They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of >design. > >Why does an airplane have a mixture lever then? AFAIK the carbs in airplanes >still work using a venturi, yet they require you to lean the mixture at >altitude. As you lean, there is a noticable increase in power (until you go >too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric pressure >variations. > >Jon Davis You are correct, Jon, they don't. Main jet diameter needs to vary with the fourth root of the air density ratio in order to maintain constant A/F ratio from a carby. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 12:58:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:03:46 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:03:46 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: ION EYES At 6:02 AM 12/9/01, elcamino73 wrote: >I would give financial support to it. I'm in if it goes forward, any way I can help. Greg > > > >> Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have >> offered to try and give electronic support to it. >> >> There is work afoot here to get a WB bar graph board >> made. If it turns out, guys like Steven C and others will >> get a complimentary working unit. >> >> Bruce Roe ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From w.shawsr@att.net Sun Dec 9 12:06:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:14:03 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:14:03 -0300 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal One suggestion would be to wrap a few turns of 18 gauge wire around the #1 plug wire, then feed this signal into one of the unused inputs on the WB-LCD. Logging the 2 channels would give you RPM in sync with AFR. It would take a little playing to get the configuration right, but something like this should work. Bill Stephen Andersen wrote: > > Anyone have any pointers on how to log the rpm signal with the > dataq or B&B "cheap person" data acquisition boards? > > I figure you can either use an inductive pickup or possibly > intercept the signal to the ECU/DME. Problem is that I am > an electronics idiot, and I have no idea what form that signal > usually takes and/or how to intercept and capture it. > > What I really want to be able to do is log AFR/O2 volts for the > WB with RPM (and possibly MAF and TPS which are simple voltage > signals) to review after tuning runs, dyno pulls, or runs > down the strip. > > Anyone got any advice? > > Thanks, > Steve > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Trey@meritcomputing.com Sun Dec 9 15:15:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:22:57 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:22:57 -0300 From: "Trey Keifer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: What display for DIY WB I was wondering the same thing, from what I can tell (and I'm sure others can correct me if wrong) you can only use a volt meter to pull out the value for the correct A/F ratio. I'm actually looking into adapting the schematic to work with an Autometer ultra-lite A/F meter that I purchased for another (now defunct) project. -------------- Trey Keifer -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Con Torrisi Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 5:31 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: What display for DIY WB Hi everyone, After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture meter with limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see what display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? Thanks Con Torrisi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 13:19:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:27:40 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:27:40 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 1:37 AM 12/10/01, Mos wrote: >On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Greg Hermann wrote: > >> And--the motivating force behind DFI, is, again, regulations. This time >> mostly CAFE. >> >> Speaking of which--DFI is the only thing that can compete with DCOE/IDA >> carbys in terms of BSFC !! >> Why?? Because it HAS GOT to have good fuel atomization to even function ! > >So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better >atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a >generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > >Mos. You catch on quickly!! DCOE's have _such_ good atomization that you can let off the choke about 5 to 10 seconds after a seriously cold start. Most carbys are not that good, and port injectors are not even close. Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack of good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as opposed to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has _closed_ . What this does is let the latent heat of the fuel (as well as of any injected water, SHHHH!!) act as an internal coolant during the compression stroke. Internal cooling during the compression stroke reduces the negative work needed during that stroke, reduces the peak temp of the cycle and the EGT, reduces the peak pressures during the cycle, and reduces heat rejection to the water jackets significantly as well. The temperature/pressure reductions can get pretty significant when you are working with methanol fuel and/or a significant amount of H2O injection. And there is _NO_ net loss in power, in fact there is a gain. Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the fuel throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion (also more power and efficiency here). All of which add up to improvements in power, efficiency, as well as mechanical durability (lower pressures and temps do that!) as a direct result of better fuel atomization. Industrial oil burner practice backs up these points--the lowest cost, efficiency burners use mechanical atomization, next step up is compressed air atomization, and the highest step is steam atomization. And boilers don't even get cycle efficiency benefits that Otto cycle engines get from improvements in fuel atomization! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 13:41:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:41:56 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 13:41:56 -0800 From: Arnaud Westenberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann wrote: >> I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb doesn't >> evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a (port) >> injector evaporates at the valve? > Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back side > of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, if they > are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if any, air > velocity in the port. Thanks. I forgot that in the carb case there's no fuel flow when there's no air flow, maybe I shouldn't have taken that last beer yesterday. :-) Are there any special provisions needed to squirt during valve open and still obtain adequate (whatever that may be) vaporization? Obviously, certain pulse widths would be too long to be able to spray during valve open, but what are the differences between timed sefi and batch efi/tbi, wrt the vaporization issue? ___ Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 14:09:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 14:09:51 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 14:09:51 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Carburetors and Altitude Never been through the Eisenhower tunnel in Colorado on I-70 I see. Nor Wolf Creek Pass. Both are well over 6,000' above MSL. My 79 AMX with its marvelous Stromberg 2 barrel on an I-6 crawled through the Eisenhower tunnel at 35 mph even with 5 degrees timing advance. Jetted down to mains, and flew through at normal driving speeds. IME Carburetors have a dismal time compensating for altitude. I have tuned both cars and bikes with carburetors for living in Denver after living in Sacramento. Sac is about 12' above MSL, Denver is well known as the mile high city. Oddly, I needed bigger pilots and smaller mains to work properly at altitude. But then again, I was dealing with carburetors of a lesser design than the Webers. Mikuni flatslides, Keihin CRs, and the venerable Stromberg 2bbl are far less advanced. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 6:01 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) From: "Jon Davis" Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Bruce wrote: > > > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like > > > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, > > They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of > design. > Why does an airplane have a mixture lever then? AFAIK the carbs in airplanes > still work using a venturi, yet they require you to lean the mixture > at altitude. As you lean, there is a noticable increase in power > (until you go > too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric > pressure variations. Jon Davis Apples and Oranges. Aviation stuff is designed to be as fail safe as possible, ie simple. I have yet to see a DCOE (that fact has been edited out) in aviation use, and I'd doubt that it was properly tuned to begin with. That and the basic principal that pilots like to be in total control. I've also noticed a far number of aircraft that allow mixture control, but ignore ignition. The few aircraft carbs, that I've looked at were at best primitive, interesting as far as being able to work inverted, but that's all. Just to get back to EFI: There are a number of EFI's that are MAP systems, that other then at start up never reference to Baro., other then some special cases. The correction is only do to the exhuast back pressure change, and depending on altitude might just be a minor issue, as you climb then it will get more meaningful, as far as US roads, I don't think many get over 6K'. Go to a high enough altitude, and it's engine design / application that is the ruling matter. Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 14:57:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 14:57:03 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 14:57:03 -0800 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #924 > > Apples and Oranges. > Aviation stuff is designed to be as fail safe as possible, ie simple. I > have yet to see a DCOE (that fact has been edited out) in aviation use, and > I'd doubt that it was properly tuned to begin with. Well, there are DCOEs in aviation use, on converted auto engines. SAnd yes, they are properly tuned. >That and the basic > principal that pilots like to be in total control. Pilots NEED to be in total control in many cases. A rich carb mixture is less prone to icing and detonation, so is used for both taleoff and landing (where either can REALLY spoil your day). Leaning at altitude gives closer to full power, as well as better economy. > I've also noticed a far number of aircraft that allow mixture control, but > ignore ignition. > The few aircraft carbs, that I've looked at were at best primitive, > interesting as far as being able to work inverted, but that's all. Not too many "primitive" aviation carbs are capable of inverted flight. They are basically just an upside-down tractor carb - but with mixture control. > Just to get back to EFI: > There are a number of EFI's that are MAP systems, that other then at > start up never reference to Baro., other then some special cases. The > correction is only do to the exhuast back pressure change, and depending on > altitude might just be a minor issue, as you climb then it will get more > meaningful, as far as US roads, I don't think many get over 6K'. > Go to a high enough altitude, and it's engine design / application that > is the ruling matter. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 15:01:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:01:26 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:01:26 -0800 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #924 > > Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 09:16:14 -0500 > From: "Bruce" > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > The guy behind it would rather keep it to himself rather then see folks > *cash in*, and make a profit off of his work. > It's just that simple. While so many took exception to the Users > Agreement, all they managed to do was ruin it for others (and themselves). > Still amazes me the short sightedness of so many seemingly bright folks. > Bruce > > From: > Subject: diy-wb works! > > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > > Bruce Roe > > If you are talking about the California Egomaniac behind the Egor and ION progects, there is one heck of a lot more involved than someone on this list thinking about "cashing in".Good ol' Gar has/had a few other problems too. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 15:07:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:07:45 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:07:45 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Sensor Question Hello Greg, GH> I didn't see crank angle on your list. I was going to use the cam angle for that (actually, I was going to rip the guts out of a distributor, whack in a chopper wheel and use an opto setup) GH> Some others worthy of consideration: GH> Exhaust back pressure GH> Atmospheric pressure GH> Fuel rail pressure GH> Fuel Temp GH> EGT That rail pressure one sounds like the goods, then I could have the computer adjust for drops/spikes in rail pressure, any recommendations on the best ones to source? I hadnt thought about the EGT either. I dont know a heap about what the EGT indicates, I was under the impression the a high EGT indicates too far advanced spark or too lean mixutre, is that right? From that, is the correct compensation to retard spark/richen mixture? I recall reading an article a while back about a new system that someone like Audi or Volvo are using where they calculate the EGT based on the current atmospheric/temp/map/spark etc etc using a mathematical model they built up, and vary fuel and ignition on that. Unfortunately, I dont have a link for it, it seemed like an interesting approach though. GH> Use a WB O2, _NOT_ just an EGO--and it's often best just to use WBO2 during GH> tuning only. Saves a lot of money on sensors, allows use of leaded fuels, GH> etc. I was following some of the conversation on WB 02 sensors. I was thinking that I would probably only use the EGO for a closed loop mode, and not having closed loop operation wouldnt really phase me much anyway. Any tuning of the car wouldn't be done by me anyway, I would prefer to get it done by a pro on a dyno (unless any of you felt like giving a crash course in street tuning). -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Sun Dec 9 15:00:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:15:17 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:15:17 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: What display for DIY WB There are schematics for a bar graph display on incoming. Another one in the works is an LCD display of AFR. Depending upon how quickly the engine reaches redline a data logger is another valid alternative. Can also have an ECM input to the ADC used to read the DIY-WB output voltage and have it placed into the ALDL stream. A voltmeter also works. The DIY-WB was designed w/o a display on purpose. It is a building block so that it may be used in any manner. BobR. Trey Keifer wrote: > I was wondering the same thing, from what I can tell (and I'm sure others > can correct me if wrong) you can only use a volt meter to pull out the value > for the correct A/F ratio. > > I'm actually looking into adapting the schematic to work with an Autometer > ultra-lite A/F meter that I purchased for another (now defunct) project. > > -------------- > Trey Keifer > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Con Torrisi > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 5:31 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: What display for DIY WB > > Hi everyone, > > After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture meter with > limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. > > I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see what > display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? > > Thanks > > Con Torrisi. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Sun Dec 9 15:00:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:15:19 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:15:19 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: NTC thermistor sensors GM ECMs use a two resistor voltage divider that is read with an ADC. One resistor to +5 v, the NTC resistor being the other to ground. The lower the NTC resistance, the lower the voltage. BobR. Brian Dessent wrote: > Does anyone know the usual way in which ECMs measure the resistance of > the NTC thermistors? The most straightforward methods I can think of > would be to apply a constant current [or voltage] and measure the > resulting voltage [or current]. It seems that the constant-current > method would expand the high end of the range and compress the low end, > and the opposite for constant-voltage. The usual thermistor varies from > about 50 ohms to 50k ohms exponentially, right? I guess it depends on > whether you are interested in the low-end range of temps or the > high-end. > > Anyway, does anyone have any experience on this issue from > reverse-engineering ECMs? Also, is there a "standard thermistor" curve > such as with thermocouples? What I would like to do is piggy-back some > of the sensors currently in use by the stock ECM -- make their signals > available for datalogging or dash-display while not affecting the > readings that the computer sees. If the ECM supplies a test current and > measures resulting voltage, then this should be rather easy with an > op-amp buffer. If the ECM applies a test voltage and measures current, > then a current mirror would seem appropriate. However, if the test > current varies (to aid linearity or dynamic range) then it would seem > that a full "resistance mirror" op-amp circuit might be necessary. Any > advice? > > Brian > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 15:16:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:16:33 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:16:33 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation Hello Greg, Is that why bigger injectors that flow higher but dont atomise as well tend to rob you of idle quality and low down power? Would it be better then to have two smaller injectors per cylinder than one bigger one? Monday, December 10, 2001, 7:22:30 AM, you wrote: GH> The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as Weber DCOE;s GH> or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the intake valves) puts GH> finely atomized fuel into the high velocity airstream (and no fuel flow GH> when there is no air flow) in the intake port. Most of the atomized fuel GH> makes it into the cylinder without vaporizing. Of course, SOME of the fuel GH> gets vaporized before the intake valve closes, but not all that high a GH> percentage of it. (Which comes under the heading of nothing is perfect.) GH> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back side of GH> the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, if they are GH> lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if any, air velocity in the GH> port. This is done so that the heat in the valve, combined with the GH> reversion of exhaust gas into the intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the GH> fuel, and thus _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's GH> inability to atomize it very well at all. GH> The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel is robbed GH> from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal efficiency. The GH> vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in the inlet charge than GH> atomized liquid fuel does--thus the deterioration in volumetric efficiency. GH> My own pet theory is that it would take air shrouded port fuel (and water, GH> SHHHH!!) injectors, injecting their (respective) highly atomized fluids in GH> time with high velocity air flow in the inlet ports, probably in a GH> direction retro to the flow in the port, in order to get to the level of GH> mixture and burn "quality" that good carbys can give. GH> Hope that helps. GH> Greg >> >>___ >> >>Arnaud GH> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- GH> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) GH> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 15:43:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:43:11 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:43:11 -0800 From: "Joe Beninca" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DCOE/DHLA Ver. Efi ----- Original Message ----- From: Greg Hermann To: Sent: Sunday, 9 December 2001 12:51 PM Subject: Re: DCOE/DHLA Ver. Efi These carbies are still available. Cheap alternative to EFI for multi throttle turbo application. Joe --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 15:47:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:47:53 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:47:53 -0800 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display I would be interested in a group buy... camden >From: "David Gregory" >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: >Subject: diy-wb bar graph display >Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:52:49 -0600 > >I've been looking around at parts prices and availablilty for the bar graph >display. I'm wondering if it would be acceptable to use a single 10 ohm 1 >watt resistor in place of R9 and R10 which are are 18 ohm 1/2 watt >resistors >in parallel? > >Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you >could probably get them free from Nat Semi. However, buying them 100 at a >time saves over $5 per 4. So i'm wondering if there will be any interest in >a group buy if the PCB project comes through? Even a small group buy (~25 >kits) would likely save the particpants $10 each. > >David > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Sun Dec 9 15:38:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:50:51 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 15:50:51 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb works! "Mark S. Riley" wrote: > > Bruce, I'd like to suggest adding a switch so the bar graph can be turned > into a dot graph. I find at night sometimes the bar graph is pretty bright > and I think the dot would be easier to look at. I, myself have no idea how a > bright-dim control could be easily added but the bar-dot change is just one > little switch. The Silicon Chip FMD design incorporates a very simple circuit to automatically control the brightness at night: http://www.techedge.com.au/vehicle/fmd.htm Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnaud@wanadoo.nl Sun Dec 9 16:45:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:02:24 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:02:24 -0300 From: Arnaud Westenberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann wrote: >> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better >> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a >> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some > port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack of > good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. > The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as opposed > to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has _closed_ . I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb doesn't evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a (port) injector evaporates at the valve? Can't be just from the higher fuel temp in the injector case, or is it? ___ Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dcg1174@tntech.edu Sun Dec 9 15:52:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:02:33 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:02:33 -0300 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb bar graph display I've been looking around at parts prices and availablilty for the bar graph display. I'm wondering if it would be acceptable to use a single 10 ohm 1 watt resistor in place of R9 and R10 which are are 18 ohm 1/2 watt resistors in parallel? Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you could probably get them free from Nat Semi. However, buying them 100 at a time saves over $5 per 4. So i'm wondering if there will be any interest in a group buy if the PCB project comes through? Even a small group buy (~25 kits) would likely save the particpants $10 each. David ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 16:02:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:02:36 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:02:36 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation If you were to look at some high speed photos of an injector firing, you'd see how the piddle and drip as flow starts, the large the injector the worse the problem. Also, any the actual injector on time cal'c becomes more critical. Once you get down in the region of a 1 msec PW, some injectors just become non linear in fuel vs time, and the inertia of the guts of the injector become a limiting factor in how fast the injector can open and close. The longer the *on* time the more accurate you can be in how much fuel gets metered in a given cycle. At a 600 rpm idle you have 100 msec between ignition events, or roughly 75 msec to spray the back of the valve, rather then use a 2 msec time, with convential batch fire system if you used more of the time availble the better you'd be. It would be interesting to play with a system that offered a huge turn down ratio so you had some huge amount of injector on time at idle, and then decreased to a smaller value as rpm rose. Bruce From: "Bob - Uni" Subject: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation > Is that why bigger injectors that flow higher but dont atomise as well > tend to rob you of idle quality and low down power? Would it be better > then to have two smaller injectors per cylinder than one bigger one? > Monday, December 10, 2001, 7:22:30 AM, you wrote: > GH> The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as Weber DCOE;s > GH> or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the intake valves) puts > GH> finely atomized fuel into the high velocity airstream (and no fuel flow > GH> when there is no air flow) in the intake port. Most of the atomized fuel > GH> makes it into the cylinder without vaporizing. Of course, SOME of the fuel > GH> gets vaporized before the intake valve closes, but not all that high a > GH> percentage of it. (Which comes under the heading of nothing is perfect.) > GH> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back side of > GH> the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, if they are > GH> lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if any, air velocity in the > GH> port. This is done so that the heat in the valve, combined with the > GH> reversion of exhaust gas into the intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the > GH> fuel, and thus _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's > GH> inability to atomize it very well at all. > GH> The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel is robbed > GH> from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal efficiency. The > GH> vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in the inlet charge than > GH> atomized liquid fuel does--thus the deterioration in volumetric efficiency. > > GH> My own pet theory is that it would take air shrouded port fuel (and water, > GH> SHHHH!!) injectors, injecting their (respective) highly atomized fluids in > GH> time with high velocity air flow in the inlet ports, probably in a > GH> direction retro to the flow in the port, in order to get to the level of > GH> mixture and burn "quality" that good carbys can give. > > GH> Hope that helps. > > GH> Greg > >> > >>___ > >> > >>Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Sun Dec 9 15:50:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:04:08 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:04:08 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: What display for DIY WB Con Torrisi wrote: > > After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture meter with > limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. > > I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see what > display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? Con, The Silicon Chip design I modified specifically for the DIY-WB output (and for RS232 output more recently) works well. Here are the details: http://www.techedge.com.au/vehicle/wbo2/wbfmd.htm The kit is readily available from a number of suppliers, or you can make your own boards if you purchase the article from http://www.siliconchip.com.au and use their PCB detailed (or do it on perf. board - it's reasonably simple). If someone were to do a DIY design, then on my wish list would be RS232 output and a logging facility with inputs for EGT, etc. Peter. (I have no affiliation with Silicon Chip, or any FMD kit supplier) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From 242Turbo@alvarogil.com Sun Dec 9 16:04:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:20:11 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:20:11 -0300 From: Alvaro Gil <242Turbo@alvarogil.com> Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display >Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you >could probably get them free from Nat Semi. Yeah if you want one or two, they send them off to you for free. I got two for free from their web site. -- ____________________________________________ Alvaro Gil http://www.AlvaroGil.com '84 Volvo 242 Turbo (Silver) 13 psi '97 Leopard Gecko (White, Yellow, Black) NJIT Mechanical Engineering Student ____________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 16:25:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:25:17 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:25:17 -0800 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Bill Shaw wrote: > > One suggestion would be to wrap a few turns of 18 gauge wire around the #1 plug wire, then feed this signal into one of the unused inputs on the WB-LCD. > Logging the 2 channels would give you RPM in sync with AFR. It would take a little playing to get the configuration right, but something like this > should work. > While digging through loads of info on DAQs online, I just came across this paper. It may be of use to some of the less EE challenged... http://www.eng.auburn.edu/ece/cars/old/finalreport.pdf -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Sun Dec 9 16:20:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:28:41 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:28:41 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display David Gregory wrote: > > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you > could probably get them free from Nat Semi. However, buying them 100 at a > time saves over $5 per 4. So i'm wondering if there will be any interest in > a group buy if the PCB project comes through? Even a small group buy (~25 > kits) would likely save the particpants $10 each. Although I'm hesitant to get into this debate, it makes a lot of sense for someone with PIC experience to design some veeery simple PIC code to to use a low cost and easily reprogrammable PIC like the 16F84 (US$3.90 from http://www.futurlec.com/ICMicrochip.html ), and an external A/D converter, and forget the LM3914, which IS overpriced. It would be a snap to add RS232 as well. Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 16:45:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:45:52 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 16:45:52 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: What display for DIY WB As others stated, saparate output devices are working for bar graph, digital, and RS232. No board for the bar graph just yet. The brightness of the LED bar graph display is directly controlled by the resistor from pin 7 of each LM3914 to ground, R2, 4, 5, & 8. If you double the value, the LED current will be halved; triple will cut to 1/3. Perhaps a second resistor of 1.5 times the value between the above and ground will do the job. You could put 4 diodes from the junction of each pair and switch the other side of all 4 diodes (cathode) to ground for higher brightness. There is more than one way to skin a cat, but right now I don't see an obvious better way to drive those 36 LEDs than LM3914s. Those outputs are current regulated. The 2 18 ohms are there because a 9 ohm 1 watt is much harder to find. If they are increased much the LM7808 will run out of headroom and regulation when every green LED is on. If you elect to REDUCE the resistors mentioned to 1/2 half for maximum brightness (20 ma), you would need 4 18 ohm in parallel and twice the heat sink on the LM7808. Bruce Roe On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:31:15 +1000 "Con Torrisi" writes: > Hi everyone, > > After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture > meter with > limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. > > I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see > what > display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? > > Thanks > > Con Torrisi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 17:27:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:27:53 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:27:53 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > DCOE's have _such_ good atomization that you can let off the choke > about 5 to 10 seconds after a seriously cold start. > > Most carbys are not that good, and port injectors are not even close. What are the droplet sizes? At what airflow rates? From which jets? > Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some > port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack > of good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. > > The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as > opposed to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has > _closed_ . Increased vapourization (due to the greater atomization you say occurs in a carb.) upstream of the inlet valve is going to help how? > What this does is let the latent heat of the fuel (as well as of > any injected water, SHHHH!!) act as an internal coolant during the > compression stroke. Internal cooling during the compression stroke How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization process? Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing significant heat without running very rich mixtures. You said something about BSFC? > reduces the negative work needed during that stroke, reduces the > peak temp of the cycle and the EGT, reduces the peak pressures > during the cycle, and reduces heat rejection to the water jackets > significantly as well. Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into a gas? Removing an extra kW of heat from the coolant in a 200kW engine has always been a problem, hasn't it? > Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the > fuel throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion > (also more power and efficiency here). And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). > All of which add up to improvements in power, efficiency, as well as > mechanical durability (lower pressures and temps do that!) as a direct > result of better fuel atomization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 17:28:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:28:18 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:28:18 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM >Greg Hermann wrote: > >> Petie-- >> >> You have lied about other matters here, and therefore I do not give your >> above statement any credibility. Therefore, I regard this post as SPAM. >> Please govern and modify your posting behavior here accordingly !! >> >> Greg > >Dear Greg, you post is aptly titled. Indeed. SPAM is precisely what you posted. > >Why don't you tell the list what you've done to help out the >DIY-WB effort - See below. I don't recall anything you've actually done. That's because you weren't here and, you, and the likes of you, by design, didn't have a clue. I originally organized and motivated the off-list effort which led to the development of the DIY-WB. Despite the best efforts of another scum far more intelligent than yourself to disrupt it (just as you have so tried), the DIY WB effort eventually succeeded. There are some here who know the part I played in it, I simply haven't felt any need to mention it. Why--because I think many others played a far more important role than my own. I am happy for them to have all the credit. > >And, saying I've lied may just constitute criminal libel - better be careful >Greggy (or should that be "the FAT man"?). ROTFLMAO!! Have to assume you might call me "Little Boy" next?? As in what happened to Hiroshima and Nagasaki?? Gotta wonder how you got a clue of what I am capable of physically, tho. Perhaps you have somehow learned that my Uncle Hans spent better than 20 years in the ring as a pro wrestler?? :-) > >Peter Petie-- I have told you before to stay -_OUT _ of my private e-mail box. THAT'S _TWICE_ NOW!!! As for any accusation of criminal libel--the truth is an absolute defense against either libel OR slander,At least you appear to be educated on the difference between the two. Leads me to wonder how you acquired such an education !! Besides which--it might be rather fun to have you serve the papers on me or bear witness to any such charge in a court of competent jurisdiction (personally, of course) !! So--in order to promote my potential enjoyment of such an effort on your part-- "Petie Gargano is a self-admitted (by his own electronically written hand) thief of intellectual property." Let's dance, turkey !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 17:32:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:32:25 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:32:25 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #924 Ooops, don't tell the fly by wire guys that. Immediately gets back to what *better* can be / mean. Bruce By the way the fly by wire is applicable to EFI. Oh, and a primitive old tech way of doing it was just using vac. secondaries (or Skinner Union carbs). > Pilots NEED to be in total control in many cases. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 17:33:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:33:41 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:33:41 -0800 From: "powermaxx" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Trying to locate a page with sensor info.. Maybe I was halucinating but I thought there was a page with pic's of the various sensors on the DIY site for Megasquirt. The IAC I think is just a solenoid but I couldn't find a reference to the part number. How well does this work vs the stepper motor type? TIA Steve St"RACE"ner (and toys...) 73 Challenger "Street Outlaw" 87 GLHS Shelby ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 17:22:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:35:22 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:35:22 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 8:45 PM 12/9/01, Arnaud Westenberg wrote: >Greg Hermann wrote: > > >> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better > >> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a > >> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > > > Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some > > port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack of > > good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. > > > The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as opposed > > to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has _closed_ . > >I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb doesn't >evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a (port) injector >evaporates at the valve? Can't be just from the higher fuel temp in the >injector case, or is it? The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as Weber DCOE;s or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the intake valves) puts finely atomized fuel into the high velocity airstream (and no fuel flow when there is no air flow) in the intake port. Most of the atomized fuel makes it into the cylinder without vaporizing. Of course, SOME of the fuel gets vaporized before the intake valve closes, but not all that high a percentage of it. (Which comes under the heading of nothing is perfect.) Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if any, air velocity in the port. This is done so that the heat in the valve, combined with the reversion of exhaust gas into the intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the fuel, and thus _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's inability to atomize it very well at all. The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel is robbed from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal efficiency. The vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in the inlet charge than atomized liquid fuel does--thus the deterioration in volumetric efficiency. My own pet theory is that it would take air shrouded port fuel (and water, SHHHH!!) injectors, injecting their (respective) highly atomized fluids in time with high velocity air flow in the inlet ports, probably in a direction retro to the flow in the port, in order to get to the level of mixture and burn "quality" that good carbys can give. Hope that helps. Greg > >___ > >Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 17:31:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:37:03 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:37:03 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: SPAM >The kit is readily available from a number of suppliers, or you can make >your own boards if you purchase the article from http://www.siliconchip.com.au > >Peter. > >(I have no affiliation with Silicon Chip, or any FMD kit supplier) Petie-- You have lied about other matters here, and therefore I do not give your above statement any credibility. Therefore, I regard this post as SPAM. Please govern and modify your posting behavior here accordingly !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dricciardiello@qantas.com.au Sun Dec 9 18:26:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:37:13 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:37:13 -0300 From: "Don DRI05 Ricciardiello" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Steve, I have two words of advice and they are "Brian Dessent". He was a great help as I had the exact same question for the DataQ DI-194 I'm using. I have a variable reluctance magnetic pick-up sensing crank rotationon on my bike. Brian suggested using the LM2917 Frequency to voltage converters. I'm bread-boarding mine at the moment to test it out. Don From: Stephen Andersen @diy-efi.org on 08/12/2001 21:59 EST Please respond to diy_efi@diy-efi.org Sent by: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org To: "'diy_efi@diy-efi.org'" cc: Subject: Datalogging RPM signal Anyone have any pointers on how to log the rpm signal with the dataq or B&B "cheap person" data acquisition boards? I figure you can either use an inductive pickup or possibly intercept the signal to the ECU/DME. Problem is that I am an electronics idiot, and I have no idea what form that signal usually takes and/or how to intercept and capture it. What I really want to be able to do is log AFR/O2 volts for the WB with RPM (and possibly MAF and TPS which are simple voltage signals) to review after tuning runs, dyno pulls, or runs down the strip. Anyone got any advice? Thanks, Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 17:39:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:39:25 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:39:25 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 8:45 PM 12/9/01, Arnaud Westenberg wrote: > >Greg Hermann wrote: > > > > >> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better > > >> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a > > >> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > > > > > Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some > > > port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack of > > > good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. > > > > > The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as opposed > > > to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has _closed_ . > >I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb doesn't > >evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a (port) > >injector evaporates at the valve? Can't be just from the higher > >fuel temp in the injector case, or is it? > The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as > Weber DCOE;s or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the > intake valves) puts finely atomized fuel into the high velocity > airstream (and no fuel flow when there is no air flow) in the > intake port. Most of the atomized fuel makes it into the cylinder > without vaporizing. Of course, SOME of the fuel gets vaporized > before the intake valve closes, but not all that high a percentage > of it. (Which comes under the heading of nothing is perfect.) > Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back > side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, They do so to meet emission requirements; specifically HC. There is a finite probability that some fuel droplets survive the combustion process and will only go out the exhaust pipe as they vapourize. Regardless of the mode of fuelling. If you don't have to comply with emission standards, you can open your injected whenever it pleases you. > if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if > any, air velocity in the port. This is done so that the heat in > the valve, combined with the reversion of exhaust gas into the > intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the fuel, and thus > _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's inability to > atomize it very well at all. Droplet sizes? > The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel > is robbed from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal > efficiency. The vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in > the inlet charge than atomized liquid fuel does--thus the > deterioration in volumetric efficiency. Oh, it's robbed, is it? Basic thermal efficiency (Carnot) is determined by the hottest and coldest phases of the cycle. The greater the difference, the greater the amount of work that can be done and hence the greater the power output of the engine. Furthermore, injecting onto the back of the inlet valve cools the valve, reducing that as a being a catalyst point for detonation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sun Dec 9 17:30:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:39:28 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:39:28 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Double Shhhh, The lil guys are working on something similiar, but less complex. Depending on the *Big Plenum* experiments, we might get to the timed water events. Bruce From: "Greg Hermann" > My own pet theory is that it would take air shrouded port fuel (and water, > SHHHH!!) injectors, injecting their (respective) highly atomized fluids in > time with high velocity air flow in the inlet ports, probably in a > direction retro to the flow in the port, in order to get to the level of > mixture and burn "quality" that good carbys can give. > Hope that helps. > Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 17:39:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:39:46 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:39:46 -0800 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Greg Hermann wrote: > > >The kit is readily available from a number of suppliers, or you can make > >your own boards if you purchase the article from http://www.siliconchip.com.au > > > >Peter. > > > >(I have no affiliation with Silicon Chip, or any FMD kit supplier) > > Petie-- > > You have lied about other matters here, and therefore I do not give your > above statement any credibility. Therefore, I regard this post as SPAM. > Please govern and modify your posting behavior here accordingly !! > > Greg I don't get it. Silicon Chip is an Australian Magazine. At the URL Peter posted, 3 Australian suppliers of kits and one Australian supplier of PCBs are listed. I don't know where you're coming from Greg (other then perhaps something about some pcbs), but for Peter to be somehow affiliated with the 5 companies seems at least a little over the top. Mos. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 17:55:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:55:22 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:55:22 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bob - Uni" > > Is that why bigger injectors that flow higher but dont atomise as well > > tend to rob you of idle quality and low down power? Would it be better > > then to have two smaller injectors per cylinder than one bigger one? > If you were to look at some high speed photos of an injector > firing, you'd see how the piddle and drip as flow starts, the > large the injector the worse the problem. For about 50 microseconds; but depends on injector, injector pressure and issues such as air shrouding. > Also, any the actual injector on time cal'c becomes more critical. > Once you get down in the region of a 1 msec PW, some injectors > just become non linear in fuel vs time, and the inertia of the > guts of the injector become a limiting factor in how fast the > injector can open and close. Doesn't matter that the behaviour is non-linear. As long as the non-linear behaviour is known, the ECU can compensate accordingly. e.g. The EFI332 project makes allowances for non-linear injector behaviour, IIRC. > The longer the *on* time the more accurate you can be in how much > fuel gets metered in a given cycle. At a 600 rpm idle you have > 100 msec between ignition events, or roughly 75 msec to spray the > back of the valve, rather then use a 2 msec time, with convential > batch fire system if you used more of the time availble the better > you'd be. At least some batch-fire systems only fire once every two revs at idle. Doing so under light load at low, off-idle speeds should be feasible if the inlet manifold and and ignition timing allowed for asymetric fuelling. I don't know if it's been done; there's little point in developing such a system now that sequential injection is the rule. > It would be interesting to play with a system that offered a huge > turn down ratio so you had some huge amount of injector on time at > idle, and then decreased to a smaller value as rpm rose. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 17:57:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:57:28 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 17:57:28 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation At 10:21 AM 12/10/01, Bob - Uni wrote: >Hello Greg, > >Is that why bigger injectors that flow higher but dont atomise as well >tend to rob you of idle quality and low down power? Would it be better >then to have two smaller injectors per cylinder than one bigger one? > >Monday, December 10, 2001, 7:22:30 AM, you wrote: > >GH> The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as Weber DCOE;s >GH> or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the intake valves) puts (snip) That particular aspect of it had not occurred to me, Bob, but it sure could be a factor. I tend to think that the biggest single factor with loss of idle quality with big injectors is getting the pulse width down too short for the injectors to produce truly repeatable flow quantities at idle, though. To put it in "rigorous" control engineering terms, injectors only have so much "dynamic range". Absolutely, two, staged injectors per port will help idle and light load performance and drivability a _LOT_ on an engine with a wide dynamic range of output (such as a boosted engine). I believe that the best approach to sizing staged injectors is 1/3 primary, 2/3 secondary. Play with the numbers a bit, and I think you will see why I like this approach. Have often wondered about ways to widen the dynamic range of available injectors. The peak & hold approach is one pretty obvious approach to this, but it hasn't been taken very far. The real problem is the finite time necessary to build and then collapse the magnetic flux field in the injector's solenoid. Dump circuits for collapsing it quickly are well known, but I am not aware of such ever being used in EFI applications. Much more radical approaches to peak and hold are also possible. A _REALLY_ competent, older EE guy once suggested to me that I take a peek at some of the print hammer throw circuits that were used in the last and fastest electromechanical teletypes and printers !! Apparently some of them were using a (very) brief pulse of something on the order of 230 VDC to build the flux in the hammer coil _quite_ quickly. Bob felt there was absolutely no reason why such technology could not be applied to fuel injectors !! I rather tend to agree with him, but don't really have the electronic espertise to pursue it a lot further! I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is the answer for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to do that with conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence of "direct" injectors may make it easier to accomplish this before long. One of the things that becomes possible with air shrouded injectors is dynamic control of fuel rail pressure--since you don't need 3 bar of rail pressure to get the current mess that passes for atomization, you could run much lower rail pressure at light loads and idle, and higher rail pressure at higher loads, thus widening the dynamic range of the injectors by a factor of 1.5 or 2 without any electronic tricks. Regards, Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:09:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:09:39 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:09:39 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re[2]: Sensor Question At 10:12 AM 12/10/01, Bob - Uni wrote: >Hello Greg, > >GH> I didn't see crank angle on your list. >I was going to use the cam angle for that (actually, I was going to >rip the guts out of a distributor, whack in a chopper wheel and use >an opto setup) Hard to get much timing accuracy that way, 60 -2 tooth wheels for crank position seem to be the approach of choice lately. Seems to me that, other than the existence of canned code for 60-2 wheels, that ring gear teeth ought to be able to do pretty well, acting in concert with two, three, four, or six crank position sensors (depending on how many pots you are dealing with), and a cam position sensor. But, of course, this means three Hall effect sensor inputs. Doing all of the crank position work off of the flywheel pretty much eliminates torsion vibrations, and gear and/or timing chain lash as a source of error. Greg Believes in DIY to do _better_ --not necessarily to mimic the factory for less! :-) > > Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:17:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:17:40 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:17:40 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Arnaud Westenberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > Greg Hermann wrote: >>> I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb >>> doesn't evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a >>> (port) injector evaporates at the valve? >> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the >> back side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that >> vicinity, if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is >> little, if any, air velocity in the port. > I forgot that in the carb case there's no fuel flow when there's > no air flow, maybe I shouldn't have taken that last beer > yesterday. :-) Indeed. At least as the valve opens, initial scavenging during overlap is aided by the low airflow at most engine speeds in a non-supercharged engine. This is a reason why HC emissions are not as high as they would otherwise be. A sufficient pressure difference has to be established across the venturi by airflow to start to draw fuel from the jet(s). At valve opening near TDC, more air could be drawn in due to valve overlap (exhaust gas dynamics) than piston motion. Unfortunately, as the valve closes, the column of air above the venturi is still moving towards the valve, carrying with an amount of fuel. That mixture slams into the back of the valve and reflects back through the carb, hopefully left "standing" in the inlet. On the _next_ cycle, you have a _vapourized_ air-fuel mix ready to be drawn into the cylinder as the valve opens. Some of this goes out of the exhaust if there's heavy scavenging going on. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:18:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:18:13 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:18:13 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation >Thanks. >I forgot that in the carb case there's no fuel flow when there's no air >flow, maybe I shouldn't have taken that last beer yesterday. :-) Hope it tasted good !! :-) > >Are there any special provisions needed to squirt during valve open and >still obtain adequate (whatever that may be) vaporization? Obviously, >certain pulse widths would be too long to be able to spray during valve >open, but what are the differences between timed sefi and batch efi/tbi, >wrt the vaporization issue? > >___ > >Arnaud My thought is that air shrouded (or "boosted") injectors would do the deed--and also improve atomization in the bargain--quite admirably. The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" over a fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite capable of putting it into the port in a highly atomized state quite suddenly. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:31:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:31:24 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:31:24 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > My thought is that air shrouded (or "boosted") injectors would do > the deed--and also improve atomization in the bargain--quite > admirably. > The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" > over a fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite > capable of putting it into the port in a highly atomized state > quite suddenly. Sounds oddly like an Orbital patent. In that, compressed air is used to _shear_ the fuel droplets to ultra-fine size. I'm not at liberty to say any more. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:32:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:32:22 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:32:22 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Carburetors and Altitude At 2:09 PM 12/9/01, efi_student wrote: >Never been through the Eisenhower tunnel in Colorado on I-70 I see. Nor >Wolf Creek Pass. Both are well over 6,000' above MSL. My 79 AMX with >its marvelous Stromberg 2 barrel on an I-6 crawled through the >Eisenhower tunnel at 35 mph even with 5 degrees timing advance. Jetted >down to mains, and flew through at normal driving speeds. IME >Carburetors have a dismal time compensating for altitude. I have tuned >both cars and bikes with carburetors for living in Denver after living >in Sacramento. Sac is about 12' above MSL, Denver is well known as the >mile high city. Oddly, I needed bigger pilots and smaller mains to work >properly at altitude. But then again, I was dealing with carburetors of >a lesser design than the Webers. Mikuni flatslides, Keihin CRs, and the >venerable Stromberg 2bbl are far less advanced. > >Lance > Lance--you are quite correct. See my earlier post. The main jet diameter needs to vary with the fourth root of the air density ratio in order to maintain a constant A/F ratio from any carby. Your need for a slightly richer idle jet is related to having less vacuum at idle at altitude--since the idle circuit uses manifold vacuum (as opposed to the choke, or venturi) to meter the fuel. However--this isn't usually a problem IF you get the relationship between the transition slot/holes and the edge of the butterflies correct at idle. EVEN with the correct A/F ratio and timing at altitude, you are going to be down on power slightly less than would be indicated by the air density ratio at altitude. (Slightly less because the less dense air does not lose as much static pressure flowing through the ports at altitude!) Greg (home elevation, Steamboat Springs, =7250' MSL) (Loveland Pass, Trail Ridge road, Mt. Evans road, and Independence Pass are even more fun that way than the Ike tunnel is, too!) :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:40:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:40:34 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:40:34 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[3]: Fuel Atomisation Hello Greg, GH> I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is the answer GH> for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to do that with GH> conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence of "direct" injectors GH> may make it easier to accomplish this before long. I had thought about that before when I was looking at water injection nozzles, and wondered why fuel injectors werent built with some form of air being fired at the stream to make it finer, I had put it off as one of those "there must be a reason" things. -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:54:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:54:47 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:54:47 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Thanks for the pointer. I am actually thinking about buying the USB logger board ($99) which has a built-in 32bit counter. I can snag the rpm signal to the DME in my car and multiply it by 20 to get rpm (So I'm told). I think with the 8 single ended inputs I can record enough (including the WB) for some decent tuning data... Not exactly DIY though!!! Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Don DRI05 Ricciardiello > Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal > > I have two words of advice and they are "Brian Dessent". He > was a great > help as I had the exact same question for the DataQ DI-194 > I'm using. I > have a variable reluctance magnetic pick-up sensing crank > rotationon on my > bike. Brian suggested using the LM2917 Frequency to voltage > converters. I'm > bread-boarding mine at the moment to test it out. > > Don > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:54:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:54:56 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:54:56 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: [snip quoted email] > Petie-- > > I have told you before to stay -_OUT _ of my private e-mail box. You've quoted email he sent to you privately? It was clearly stated by others in this forum that this may be a criminal act in some jurisdictions. > THAT'S _TWICE_ NOW!!! > > As for any accusation of criminal libel--the truth is an absolute > defense against either libel OR slander,At least you appear to be > educated on the difference between the two. Leads me to wonder how > you acquired such an education !! Greg, The offence occurs in more than one jurisdiction and under more than one system of law. It is conventional to prosecute according to the location of the victim(s). Here's news for the parochial merkins: There are legal systems and laws different to those in the USA. Truth is no defence in libel or slander in Australia. The victim only has to show that he was somehow injured by the act to prove slander or libel. If the act is set to injure the victim, then the victim has a valid case and can claim damages. I understand that UK laws operate similarly. I could cite one case precedent about "successful" libel prosecutions in the Usenet domain, where at least the victim was located in Australia, and the truth was no defence. The matter was settled out of court. IANAL. I established and admin'd for an ISP that was involved in one side of a case. > Besides which--it might be rather fun to have you serve the papers > on me or bear witness to any such charge in a court of competent > jurisdiction (personally, of course) !! I assure you, it will NOT be fun. It will be expensive. You have no chance of a defence if the victim can prove any form of injury, including emotional stress. Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if you could achieve it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnaud@wanadoo.nl Sun Dec 9 19:39:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:58:49 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:58:49 -0300 From: Arnaud Westenberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann wrote: >> I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb doesn't >> evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a (port) >> injector evaporates at the valve? > Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back side > of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, if they > are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if any, air > velocity in the port. Thanks. I forgot that in the carb case there's no fuel flow when there's no air flow, maybe I shouldn't have taken that last beer yesterday. :-) Are there any special provisions needed to squirt during valve open and still obtain adequate (whatever that may be) vaporization? Obviously, certain pulse widths would be too long to be able to spray during valve open, but what are the differences between timed sefi and batch efi/tbi, wrt the vaporization issue? ___ Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:58:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:58:54 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:58:54 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[3]: Fuel Atomisation Bob - Uni tapped away at the keyboard with: > > I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is > > the answer for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to > > do that with conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence > > of "direct" injectors may make it easier to accomplish this > > before long. > I had thought about that before when I was looking at water injection > nozzles, and wondered why fuel injectors werent built with some form > of air being fired at the stream to make it finer, I had put it off as > one of those "there must be a reason" things. Co$t. You need a fairly high pressure to achieve real benefits above that of a shrouded injector. Shrouded injectors have been around for more than 20 years. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 18:59:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:59:59 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 18:59:59 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 9:26 AM 12/10/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: Nice overall, further display of ignorance, Bernd. Whatsa matter, don't like the fact that I climbed all over your cute little boy(??)-friend Petie?? >> >> Most carbys are not that good, and port injectors are not even close. > >What are the droplet sizes? At what airflow rates? From which jets? On the same order as what comes from the Bosch air shrouded injectors. eg--approx 8 microns on down. From both main and idle circuits, not from the pump jets. Talking Webers here, not typical carbys. > >Increased vapourization (due to the greater atomization you say >occurs in a carb.) upstream of the inlet valve is going to help how? Try reading what I said before , dikhed! _NOT_ misquoting it! > >> What this does is let the latent heat of the fuel (as well as of >> any injected water, SHHHH!!) act as an internal coolant during the >> compression stroke. Internal cooling during the compression stroke > >How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization >process? If you are too ignorant to calculate this for yourself, pound salt. Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing >significant heat without running very rich mixtures. Any heat removed _during _ the compression stroke is significant. > >You said something about BSFC? Yep. Properly tuned DCOE's at WOT will beat conventional port injectors every time. Significantly. > >> reduces the negative work needed during that stroke, reduces the >> peak temp of the cycle and the EGT, reduces the peak pressures >> during the cycle, and reduces heat rejection to the water jackets >> significantly as well. > >Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into >a gas? Again, I suggest you go to school if you wish to learn to do such calculations. I have done them, but you don't have enough money to pay the tuition I would charge to teach the likes of you. > >Removing an extra kW of heat from the coolant in a 200kW engine has >always been a problem, hasn't it? Not at all, idiot! But if that kW of heat stays in the cylinder instead of going into the cooling system, a given proprotion of it ends up going out the business end of the crankshaft instead of through the cooling system. Again--if you want to know how much, develop some competence, and figure it out for yourself! > >> Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the >> fuel throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion >> (also more power and efficiency here). > >And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). ROTFLMAO !! It would seem that you also wish to display (to all here) your ignorance of the fact that detonation is a function of the residence time of the end gasses at high temp/pressure conditions ! Lemme see--if we _reduce_ the peak temp, peak pressure, and time of burn, that sure oughtta increase the tendency to detonate, oughtn't it??? Not to mention the fact that a faster burn increases the basic efficiency potential of the Otto cycle !! Clearly, Keith Duckworth, you ain't !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:00:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:00:19 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:00:19 -0800 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb Vgnd I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem quite right. Maybe someone could shed some light? The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:08:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:08:27 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:08:27 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Sensor Question Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 10:12 AM 12/10/01, Bob - Uni wrote: > >GH> I didn't see crank angle on your list. > >I was going to use the cam angle for that (actually, I was going to > >rip the guts out of a distributor, whack in a chopper wheel and use > >an opto setup) > Hard to get much timing accuracy that way, 60 -2 tooth wheels for > crank position seem to be the approach of choice lately. Sufficient accuracy for an engine with inertia is possible with a chopper arrangement (Hall effect is preferable to opto) combined with some form of TPU or timebase in the ECU. As long as you have 2*N timing edges (N is number of cylinders), you can also pick up any speed variation (torque fluctuations) and adjust to ambient conditions. > Seems to me that, other than the existence of canned code for 60-2 > wheels, that ring gear teeth ought to be able to do pretty well, > acting in concert with two, three, four, or six crank position > sensors (depending on how many pots you are dealing with), and a > cam position sensor. But, of course, this means three Hall effect > sensor inputs. Doing all of the crank position work off of the > flywheel pretty much eliminates torsion vibrations, and gear > and/or timing chain lash as a source of error. You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:09:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:09:39 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:09:39 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation >> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back >> side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, > >They do so to meet emission requirements; specifically HC. There is >a finite probability that some fuel droplets survive the combustion >process and will only go out the exhaust pipe as they vapourize. >Regardless of the mode of fuelling. The bigger the droplets, the higher that probability. Try taking a peek at the HC emissions of a properly tuned engine equipped with DCOE's. at WOT. It would appear that not many droplets survive , at all, in this case !! > >If you don't have to comply with emission standards, you can open >your injected whenever it pleases you. True. But only because typical injectors give terrible atomization. > >> if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if >> any, air velocity in the port. This is done so that the heat in >> the valve, combined with the reversion of exhaust gas into the >> intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the fuel, and thus >> _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's inability to >> atomize it very well at all. > >Droplet sizes? Vary all over the place. Sometimes relatively huge. (100 micron, at least) Do your own research!! > >> The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel >> is robbed from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal >> efficiency. The vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in >> the inlet charge than atomized liquid fuel does--thus the >> deterioration in volumetric efficiency. > >Oh, it's robbed, is it? Basic thermal efficiency (Carnot) is >determined by the hottest and coldest phases of the cycle. The >greater the difference, the greater the amount of work that can be >done and hence the greater the power output of the engine. Gee --Sounds as though you took a course in basic thermo after all !! But cut the class where they explained that the cycle would fall below the theoretical efficiency if the processes were not perfectly adiabatic ! > >Furthermore, injecting onto the back of the inlet valve cools the >valve, reducing that as a being a catalyst point for detonation. B.S. !! You are blowing smoke, trying to sound knowlegeable without having a clue. The intake valve is one of the cooler parts of the chamber to begin with !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:24:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:24:21 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:24:21 -0800 From: Chris Waltham Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark Hi guys, A friend of mine recently bought an old Ford Escort with a Toyota 3T-GTE engine in it. It's the twin-spark flavour, turbocharged and non-intercooled. Anyway, it's a twin-spark engine, however it's been set up with Autronic engine management. Oddly, the guy that configured the Autronic (not it's owner, or me) didn't bother to set up the second array of spark plugs/coils and whatnot. So, of course, it's running on 4 plugs instead of 8. I reckon twin-spark working would be rather cool, does anyone have any comments on why something like Autronic (which I thought to be reasonably powerful) wouldn't work with it? cheers, Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Sun Dec 9 19:09:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:25:30 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:25:30 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Carburetors and Altitude Never been through the Eisenhower tunnel in Colorado on I-70 I see. Nor Wolf Creek Pass. Both are well over 6,000' above MSL. My 79 AMX with its marvelous Stromberg 2 barrel on an I-6 crawled through the Eisenhower tunnel at 35 mph even with 5 degrees timing advance. Jetted down to mains, and flew through at normal driving speeds. IME Carburetors have a dismal time compensating for altitude. I have tuned both cars and bikes with carburetors for living in Denver after living in Sacramento. Sac is about 12' above MSL, Denver is well known as the mile high city. Oddly, I needed bigger pilots and smaller mains to work properly at altitude. But then again, I was dealing with carburetors of a lesser design than the Webers. Mikuni flatslides, Keihin CRs, and the venerable Stromberg 2bbl are far less advanced. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 6:01 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) From: "Jon Davis" Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) > Bruce wrote: > > > Out of curiosity, Bruce, how do you tune the carbs for things like > > > temperature, barometric pressure/altitude, > > They work on Bernolli's Principal, so do those comps as a matter of > design. > Why does an airplane have a mixture lever then? AFAIK the carbs in airplanes > still work using a venturi, yet they require you to lean the mixture > at altitude. As you lean, there is a noticable increase in power > (until you go > too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric > pressure variations. Jon Davis Apples and Oranges. Aviation stuff is designed to be as fail safe as possible, ie simple. I have yet to see a DCOE (that fact has been edited out) in aviation use, and I'd doubt that it was properly tuned to begin with. That and the basic principal that pilots like to be in total control. I've also noticed a far number of aircraft that allow mixture control, but ignore ignition. The few aircraft carbs, that I've looked at were at best primitive, interesting as far as being able to work inverted, but that's all. Just to get back to EFI: There are a number of EFI's that are MAP systems, that other then at start up never reference to Baro., other then some special cases. The correction is only do to the exhuast back pressure change, and depending on altitude might just be a minor issue, as you climb then it will get more meaningful, as far as US roads, I don't think many get over 6K'. Go to a high enough altitude, and it's engine design / application that is the ruling matter. Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:29:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:29:45 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:29:45 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 10:30 AM 12/10/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: >Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: >> My thought is that air shrouded (or "boosted") injectors would do >> the deed--and also improve atomization in the bargain--quite >> admirably. > >> The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" >> over a fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite >> capable of putting it into the port in a highly atomized state >> quite suddenly. > >Sounds oddly like an Orbital patent. > >In that, compressed air is used to _shear_ the fuel droplets to >ultra-fine size. > >I'm not at liberty to say any more. You don't need to. Too bad, I hate to spoil your attempt to sound like you work for the "agency" !! I have one of the Orbital injectors for a Mercury Marine DFI 200 outboard sitting within reach here. Really, though, it's just too easy to do the same thing with standard parts and some lathe made bits ! As I recall, Orbital's stuff and patents are intended for use with DIRECT--not port -- injection. Different art, as an outhouse lawyer would say. Besides which--patents don't restrict private, not for profit use of ANY art !!! (The other side of the intellectual property laws which you and Petie seem to have so much trouble with!) Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:32:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:32:09 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:32:09 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re[3]: Fuel Atomisation >GH> I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is the answer >GH> for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to do that with >GH> conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence of "direct" injectors >GH> may make it easier to accomplish this before long. > >I had thought about that before when I was looking at water injection >nozzles, and wondered why fuel injectors werent built with some form >of air being fired at the stream to make it finer, I had put it off as >one of those "there must be a reason" things. As usual, the most probable "reason" is likely $$$ and bean counters ! Greg > >-- >Best regards, > Bob ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:34:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:34:52 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:34:52 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb Vgnd Bill Shaw wrote: > > The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The > schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd > but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 > volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make > that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? Sounds like you have a short somewhere, or perhaps your R12 is too big, or R13 too small - they should be the same value (10k). Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:46:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:46:09 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:46:09 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM (LARGE snip) >Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if >you could achieve it. Your knowlege of thermo is exceeded only by your knowlege of the law, Bernd !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:55:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:55:38 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:55:38 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, -> Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the -> subject -> line. Hardly any effort, is it? Subject line? Oh, those. Belief that a subject line actually describes a message is often found in conjunction with belief in the Tooth Fairy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:56:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:56:34 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:56:34 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, -> too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric -> pressure variations. My ThermoQuad has an aneroid enrichment system for altitude correction. A friend of mine has butted heads with Electromotive several times about the software for his very expensive (US$ 3,000 or so when he bought it) EFI. It only looks at baro on start-up, and he runs the car at Silver State speed events, which have a substantial difference in altitude between beginning and end. He has to program it way rich at start to prevent leanout at the finish line. Your aircraft carburetor example is bogus, in that aircraft carbs are designed for manual mixture control. The pilot is expected to know and set the mixture for idle, takeoff, and cruise, which are the only three modes an airplane typically runs in. You could add a bunch of electronics to do the same thing, but it'd dramatically multiply the chance of failure, not to mention requiring addition of more electrics than some light planes have to start with. All they need is a simple valve, so that's what they have. Throwing a few megaflops of microprocessor at an airplane engine won't improve its performance even a tiny bit. ==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? ============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:57:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:57:29 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:57:29 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers -> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better -> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a -> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). Running throttled, steady state - yes. A TBI system can match a carburetor under those conditions, but a port injection setup can't. Conventional Bendix-type injectors do a poor job of atomization, and too much of their output is in gobbets too big to be fully consumed during the power stroke, and the unburned portion goes out the exhaust valve. This is not normally an issue for EFI cars since most of them use catalytic convertors and the fuel is burned in the convertor, keeping it hot enough to function when exhaust flow is low. Just because it's new and complicated doesn't mean EFI is better under every condition. Eventually rail pressures will get high enough to do a better job of atomization, but right now all injectors are pretty much the same. Part-throttle cruise is where carbs and TBIs rule, but that doesn't play much of a part in EPA smog or mileage testing. They assume everyone lives in an anthill of traffic. However, for some of us, part throttle cruise is the dominant driving mode. ==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? ============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 19:58:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:58:52 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 19:58:52 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark At 11:24 AM 12/10/01, Chris Waltham wrote: >Hi guys, > >A friend of mine recently bought an old Ford Escort with a Toyota 3T-GTE >engine in it. >It's the twin-spark flavour, turbocharged and non-intercooled. Anyway, it's >a twin-spark >engine, however it's been set up with Autronic engine management. Oddly, >the guy that >configured the Autronic (not it's owner, or me) didn't bother to set up the >second >array of spark plugs/coils and whatnot. So, of course, it's running on 4 >plugs instead >of 8. I reckon twin-spark working would be rather cool, does anyone have >any comments >on why something like Autronic (which I thought to be reasonably powerful) >wouldn't >work with it? > >cheers, > > >Chris I think the Autronic has four outputs suitable for ignition use. No reason I can think of why you couldn't trigger two plugs with one output--or even two plugs with different timing if using a maverick spark approach. Might need to use a separate CD or whatever ignition for each plug (or maverick pair) --the Autronic drivers might not be up to driving two coils. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 20:01:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:01:27 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:01:27 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 9:26 AM 12/10/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: [insults snipped] > >> Most carbys are not that good, and port injectors are not even close. > >What are the droplet sizes? At what airflow rates? From which jets? > On the same order as what comes from the Bosch air shrouded > injectors. eg--approx 8 microns on down. From both main and idle > circuits, not from the pump jets. Talking Webers here, not typical > carbys. Same order... same order as some non-air-shrouded injectors IIRC. I'll dig out their Bosch PNs and nominal operating pressures later. You also know that droplet size is related to pressure differential across the pintle, not the amount of airflow, as it is in a carb. > >Increased vapourization (due to the greater atomization you say > >occurs in a carb.) upstream of the inlet valve is going to help how? > Try reading what I said before , ... I did read what you said. You're limiting port injection to the regime of only injecting on a closed valve, which as you well know, is primarily to reduce HC emissions. > >> What this does is let the latent heat of the fuel (as well as of > >> any injected water, SHHHH!!) act as an internal coolant during the > >> compression stroke. Internal cooling during the compression stroke > > > >How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization > >process? > If you are too ignorant to calculate this for yourself, pound salt. I do know how to work it out; roughly. I knew how to work it out 25 years ago. It's a small amount compared to the total heat transfer. > Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing > >significant heat without running very rich mixtures. > Any heat removed _during _ the compression stroke is significant. > >You said something about BSFC? > Yep. Properly tuned DCOE's at WOT will beat conventional port > injectors every time. Significantly. At _WOT_. Which means what? The only situations where you nominally drive at WOT is in a drag race or on a banked circuit. Oh, and on a dyno. > >> reduces the negative work needed during that stroke, reduces the > >> peak temp of the cycle and the EGT, reduces the peak pressures > >> during the cycle, and reduces heat rejection to the water jackets > >> significantly as well. > >Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into > >a gas? > Again, I suggest you go to school if you wish to learn to do such > calculations. I have done them, ... I received my B.E. in 1983, having completed studies in 1982, including a non-significant amount of pratical engine design work at the Orbital Engine Company. You can check that out. Ask UWA and Orbital's CEO, Kim Schlunke, who was my supervising engineer at the time (78/79). He will probably remember, as do a number of other Engineers I worked with at the time. My main work was orbital engine disc valve airflow prediction (by computer model) and measurement in a test rig I co-engineered. I can tell you that much because that work is no longer under NDA. > >Removing an extra kW of heat from the coolant in a 200kW engine > >has always been a problem, hasn't it? > Not at all, ... > But if that kW of heat stays in the cylinder instead of going into > the cooling system, a given proprotion of it ends up going out the > business end of the crankshaft instead of through the cooling > system. But the heat doesn't stay in the head. You just said it there was no problem to remove the additonal heat. > Again--if you want to know how much, develop some competence, and > figure it out for yourself! > >> Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the > >> fuel throughout the charge, leading to better, faster > >> combustion (also more power and efficiency here). > >And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). > [snip] of the fact that detonation is a function of the > residence time of the end gasses at high temp/pressure conditions > ! Lemme see--if we _reduce_ the peak temp, peak pressure, and time > of burn, that sure oughtta increase the tendency to detonate, > oughtn't it??? Detonation is a function of several factors. A high rate of combustion leads to rapid secondary end-gas compression ahead of the flame front, increasing the propensity to knock. If the cylinder volume is not expanding fast enough to ameliorate the secondary compression, then knock will occur. > Not to mention the fact that a faster burn increases the basic > efficiency potential of the Otto cycle !! Which engines would that be that operate on the ideal Otto cycle? Peak gasoline efficiency is not by total combustion (pressure rise) at minimum volume. The efficiency of converting the cylinder pressure to crankshaft torque varies as a function of crank angle (and conrod to crank-throw ratios). You get a great deal more torque with a peak pressure after TDC. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 20:04:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:04:27 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:04:27 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Bernd Felsche wrote: > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. If you have a starter that engages the ring gear on one side (as per normal), and you're prepared to offset a reluctor pickup away from the wearing section of the ring gear, the major problem I see is picking up magnetic grunge from the bellhousing. In many respects, it's a better option than an optic setup on a converted distributor (BTDT). Having said that, I'm planning on a Hall pickup on the crankshaft toothed belt drive pulley for the camshafts of an AlfaSud (flat 4) I just need to take a small segment out of one of the 20 teeth to make a 20-1 "wheel". Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 20:10:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:10:31 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:10:31 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. Bruce From: "Bernd Felsche" Snippage > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if > you could achieve it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clare@snyder.on.ca Sun Dec 9 20:01:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:15:03 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:15:03 -0300 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #924 > > Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 09:16:14 -0500 > From: "Bruce" > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > > The guy behind it would rather keep it to himself rather then see folks > *cash in*, and make a profit off of his work. > It's just that simple. While so many took exception to the Users > Agreement, all they managed to do was ruin it for others (and themselves). > Still amazes me the short sightedness of so many seemingly bright folks. > Bruce > > From: > Subject: diy-wb works! > > Why is ionization detonation detection dead? I have > > offered to try and give electronic support to it. > > Bruce Roe > > If you are talking about the California Egomaniac behind the Egor and ION progects, there is one heck of a lot more involved than someone on this list thinking about "cashing in".Good ol' Gar has/had a few other problems too. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clare@snyder.on.ca Sun Dec 9 19:56:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:15:03 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:15:03 -0300 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #924 > > Apples and Oranges. > Aviation stuff is designed to be as fail safe as possible, ie simple. I > have yet to see a DCOE (that fact has been edited out) in aviation use, and > I'd doubt that it was properly tuned to begin with. Well, there are DCOEs in aviation use, on converted auto engines. SAnd yes, they are properly tuned. >That and the basic > principal that pilots like to be in total control. Pilots NEED to be in total control in many cases. A rich carb mixture is less prone to icing and detonation, so is used for both taleoff and landing (where either can REALLY spoil your day). Leaning at altitude gives closer to full power, as well as better economy. > I've also noticed a far number of aircraft that allow mixture control, but > ignore ignition. > The few aircraft carbs, that I've looked at were at best primitive, > interesting as far as being able to work inverted, but that's all. Not too many "primitive" aviation carbs are capable of inverted flight. They are basically just an upside-down tractor carb - but with mixture control. > Just to get back to EFI: > There are a number of EFI's that are MAP systems, that other then at > start up never reference to Baro., other then some special cases. The > correction is only do to the exhuast back pressure change, and depending on > altitude might just be a minor issue, as you climb then it will get more > meaningful, as far as US roads, I don't think many get over 6K'. > Go to a high enough altitude, and it's engine design / application that > is the ruling matter. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Sun Dec 9 20:12:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:17:06 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:17:06 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Sensor Question Hello Greg, GH> I didn't see crank angle on your list. I was going to use the cam angle for that (actually, I was going to rip the guts out of a distributor, whack in a chopper wheel and use an opto setup) GH> Some others worthy of consideration: GH> Exhaust back pressure GH> Atmospheric pressure GH> Fuel rail pressure GH> Fuel Temp GH> EGT That rail pressure one sounds like the goods, then I could have the computer adjust for drops/spikes in rail pressure, any recommendations on the best ones to source? I hadnt thought about the EGT either. I dont know a heap about what the EGT indicates, I was under the impression the a high EGT indicates too far advanced spark or too lean mixutre, is that right? From that, is the correct compensation to retard spark/richen mixture? I recall reading an article a while back about a new system that someone like Audi or Volvo are using where they calculate the EGT based on the current atmospheric/temp/map/spark etc etc using a mathematical model they built up, and vary fuel and ignition on that. Unfortunately, I dont have a link for it, it seemed like an interesting approach though. GH> Use a WB O2, _NOT_ just an EGO--and it's often best just to use WBO2 during GH> tuning only. Saves a lot of money on sensors, allows use of leaded fuels, GH> etc. I was following some of the conversation on WB 02 sensors. I was thinking that I would probably only use the EGO for a closed loop mode, and not having closed loop operation wouldnt really phase me much anyway. Any tuning of the car wouldn't be done by me anyway, I would prefer to get it done by a pro on a dyno (unless any of you felt like giving a crash course in street tuning). -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 20:21:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:21:43 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:21:43 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back > >> side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, > >They do so to meet emission requirements; specifically HC. There is > >a finite probability that some fuel droplets survive the combustion > >process and will only go out the exhaust pipe as they vapourize. > >Regardless of the mode of fuelling. > > The bigger the droplets, the higher that probability. Try taking a > peek at the HC emissions of a properly tuned engine equipped with > DCOE's. at WOT. It would appear that not many droplets survive , > at all, in this case !! In which production cars are DCOE used? Or is it only one-offs and after-market? > >If you don't have to comply with emission standards, you can open > >your injected whenever it pleases you. > > True. But only because typical injectors give terrible atomization. "Good enough" for the accountants and engineers to reach a compromise and make the buggers. :-) What injectors do you regard as "typical"? They do fortunately respond well to increases in operating pressure because of higher fuel flow velocity. > >> if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if > >> any, air velocity in the port. This is done so that the heat in > >> the valve, combined with the reversion of exhaust gas into the > >> intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the fuel, and thus > >> _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's inability to > >> atomize it very well at all. > > > >Droplet sizes? > > Vary all over the place. Sometimes relatively huge. (100 micron, at least) > Do your own research!! Love to. Got a grant to hand around? > >> The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel > >> is robbed from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal > >> efficiency. The vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in > >> the inlet charge than atomized liquid fuel does--thus the > >> deterioration in volumetric efficiency. > > > >Oh, it's robbed, is it? Basic thermal efficiency (Carnot) is > >determined by the hottest and coldest phases of the cycle. The > >greater the difference, the greater the amount of work that can be > >done and hence the greater the power output of the engine. > > Gee --Sounds as though you took a course in basic thermo after all > !! But cut the class where they explained that the cycle would > fall below the theoretical efficiency if the processes were not > perfectly adiabatic ! Nope. You missed the class where they explained that the Otto cycle didn't apply to real engines, did you? :-) I assume that there was a whole class on that over there. It was mentioned in passing in one of mine. > >Furthermore, injecting onto the back of the inlet valve cools the > >valve, reducing that as a being a catalyst point for detonation. [snip] > ... The intake valve is one of the cooler parts > of the chamber to begin with !! You mean NO heat is removed from the valve? The inlet valve may be the coolest part at the start of compression. However, it doesn't have to be the hottest part for it to be a site of detonation; all it needs is a high temperature and a protruding edge. The total gas energy is the key to detonation. Gases being moved and compressed at high velocity ahead of the flame front are most-susceptible when they encounter a hot obstruction. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Sun Dec 9 20:21:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:27:56 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:27:56 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation Hello Greg, Is that why bigger injectors that flow higher but dont atomise as well tend to rob you of idle quality and low down power? Would it be better then to have two smaller injectors per cylinder than one bigger one? Monday, December 10, 2001, 7:22:30 AM, you wrote: GH> The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as Weber DCOE;s GH> or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the intake valves) puts GH> finely atomized fuel into the high velocity airstream (and no fuel flow GH> when there is no air flow) in the intake port. Most of the atomized fuel GH> makes it into the cylinder without vaporizing. Of course, SOME of the fuel GH> gets vaporized before the intake valve closes, but not all that high a GH> percentage of it. (Which comes under the heading of nothing is perfect.) GH> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back side of GH> the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, if they are GH> lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if any, air velocity in the GH> port. This is done so that the heat in the valve, combined with the GH> reversion of exhaust gas into the intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the GH> fuel, and thus _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's GH> inability to atomize it very well at all. GH> The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel is robbed GH> from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal efficiency. The GH> vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in the inlet charge than GH> atomized liquid fuel does--thus the deterioration in volumetric efficiency. GH> My own pet theory is that it would take air shrouded port fuel (and water, GH> SHHHH!!) injectors, injecting their (respective) highly atomized fluids in GH> time with high velocity air flow in the inlet ports, probably in a GH> direction retro to the flow in the port, in order to get to the level of GH> mixture and burn "quality" that good carbys can give. GH> Hope that helps. GH> Greg >> >>___ >> >>Arnaud GH> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- GH> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) GH> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 20:36:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:36:14 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:36:14 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Peter Gargano tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. > If you have a starter that engages the ring gear on one side > (as per normal), and you're prepared to offset a reluctor pickup > away from the wearing section of the ring gear, the major problem > I see is picking up magnetic grunge from the bellhousing. In many > respects, it's a better option than an optic setup on a converted > distributor (BTDT). There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. They are designed for a very low duty cycle and life. Starter-engagement problems can cause some teeth to be damaged, resulting in a "jitter" if you're reading the teeth. Both faces of an involute gear are subject to wear, The timing will require some averaging. i.e. you can work around the foresee-able problems with extra effort elsewhere. > Having said that, I'm planning on a Hall pickup on the crankshaft > toothed belt drive pulley for the camshafts of an AlfaSud (flat 4) > I just need to take a small segment out of one of the 20 teeth to > make a 20-1 "wheel". Or drill a small hole into the edge or notch the inside rim so you don't have to "miss" a tooth! At least the drive pulley teeth don't get significant wear. Having the sensor ripped up if the timing belt snaps would be the least of your problems. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 20:38:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:38:22 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:38:22 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation >> Again, I suggest you go to school if you wish to learn to do such >> calculations. I have done them, ... > >I received my B.E. in 1983, having completed studies in 1982, Ask UWA Had never heard of UWA before. My opinion of it just fell, though. Have ;a fair percentage of the student body and faculty been interbred with sheep, or is there some other problem??? So long as you wish to compare CV's: I appear to have had roughly 18 additional years over you in which to have forgotten my basic thermo, although the contents of our minds seem to have a different half life, not to mention where they appear to have started out. Perhaps you would like to contact Andy Schultz (Dean Emeritus of the Engineering School) or Al George (its current Dean) at Cornell University to check on my competence?? They both knew me quite reasonably well. I rather expect you may have heard of Cornell, even down there. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 20:40:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:40:28 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:40:28 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation, now just silliness If truth is no defense, why would that matter?. Or is the law just written as convient to you?. Seems like it shouldn't stop you from sharing EFI material. Bruce From: "Bernd Felsche" > I can tell you that much because that work is no longer under NDA. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 20:40:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:40:34 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:40:34 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM At 11:10 PM 12/9/01, Bruce wrote: >You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. >Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. >Bruce ROTFLMAO. Bashful !! Greg > > >From: "Bernd Felsche" > >Snippage > >> Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if >> you could achieve it. > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 20:47:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:47:39 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:47:39 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question From: "Bernd Felsche" > There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a > hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. Might read some of the GM literature on that (hint, training literature on ignition systems). It's copywritted so I can't mention it directly. > Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. Have you read and compared (from various manufactureres) anything to support those statements, and would make them absolute truths?. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From cjl169@hotmail.com Sun Dec 9 20:47:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:58:11 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:58:11 -0300 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display I would be interested in a group buy... camden From: "David Gregory" >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: >Subject: diy-wb bar graph display >Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:52:49 -0600 > >I've been looking around at parts prices and availablilty for the bar graph >display. I'm wondering if it would be acceptable to use a single 10 ohm 1 >watt resistor in place of R9 and R10 which are are 18 ohm 1/2 watt >resistors >in parallel? > >Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you >could probably get them free from Nat Semi. However, buying them 100 at a >time saves over $5 per 4. So i'm wondering if there will be any interest in >a group buy if the PCB project comes through? Even a small group buy (~25 >kits) would likely save the particpants $10 each. > >David > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From beninca@ains.net.au Sun Dec 9 20:40:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:58:20 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 20:58:20 -0300 From: "Joe Beninca" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DCOE/DHLA Ver. Efi ----- Original Message ----- From: Greg Hermann To: Sent: Sunday, 9 December 2001 12:51 PM Subject: Re: DCOE/DHLA Ver. Efi These carbies are still available. Cheap alternative to EFI for multi throttle turbo application. Joe --------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:01:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:01:08 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:01:08 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction,, tooth fairy From: "Dave Williams" Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, > -> Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > -> subject > -> line. Hardly any effort, is it? > Subject line? Oh, those. Belief that a subject line actually > describes a message is often found in conjunction with belief in the > Tooth Fairy. Whew, that was close, lil guys were poised to hit the reply key on that one. Bruce They're tired from actually working on EFI stuff all day, rather then just hitting reply to expound about "absolute truths". Someone woke Sleepy, and after listening to Bashful, he's saying 2+2 is about 4. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:01:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:01:20 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:01:20 -0800 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Fuel Atomisation I just want to say that i'm not taking sides, as one would say, with those who violated the user agreement(as an aside I'm genuinely puzzled because these people don't seem to see any harm or wrong in what they did). However, I'm probably sticking my nose where i shouldn't... but here goes anyway. Aparrently, the heat of vaporiztion for Gasoline @60 degrees F is 150 Btu/lb (ick, English units). The heat of combustion is aproximately 18,000-19,000 Btu/lb of fuel. (http://www.afdc.doe.gov/pdfs/fueltable.pdf) So, the heat of vaporization represesnts less than 1.0% of the total heat available due to combustion. Now also, if one heats the fuel prior to its entry to the combustion chamber, with energy from the previous combustion event, there is no net loss of heat to the cycle (unlike cooling losses) because the heat taken from one combustion event is added to the next. So in that respect, i don't see the disadvantage to "preheating" the fuel to vaporize it. However, I'm willing to defer on the issue of mixture cooling in the chamber due to vaporiztion. According to my estimates, it would seem that the vaporization of the fuel could lower the temperature of the mixture by as much as 23 degrees C. Significant? I would think so. But my "estimate" is very crude and I have no practical experience in this area (tho i soon will i think). As you (greg) are obviously an admirer of weber carbs, I'm wondering if maybe you could put the shoe on the other foot (so to speak) and talk to the issues of why carbs were abandoned in favor of EFI. And I'm aware that currently it is legislated that production cars be EFI, but i'm wondering about motorsports applications which chose to go EFI route(i suppose NASCAR and some drag racing would be notable exceptions). /dones flame suit/ David PS: am i correct that a carb which was setup to run at high altitude would run rich at sea level? or do i have that backwards? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:03:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:03:52 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:03:52 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 10:30 AM 12/10/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: > >Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" > >> over a fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite > >> capable of putting it into the port in a highly atomized state > >> quite suddenly. > >Sounds oddly like an Orbital patent. > >In that, compressed air is used to _shear_ the fuel droplets to > >ultra-fine size. > >I'm not at liberty to say any more. > You don't need to. Too bad, I hate to spoil your attempt to sound > like you work for the "agency" !! If you've every worked in research for a private company, or did contract work for a research company where you are exposed to proprietary information and IP, you'd understand. See http://www.orbeng.com.au/orbital/aboutOrbital/history.htm for when OEC first started down the fuel-injection line (1978). You can probably read more in OEC's published papers (download from their site) than I feel comfortable divulging. Everything published has been vetted. I don't wish to add to the public knowledge at this time. > I have one of the Orbital injectors for a Mercury Marine DFI 200 > outboard sitting within reach here. > > Really, though, it's just too easy to do the same thing with > standard parts and some lathe made bits ! Of course they're easy to make. That's one of the hallmarks of good engineering. Another hallmark is that it really works as described. I can tell you in 4 years how they were "developed". > As I recall, Orbital's stuff and patents are intended for use with > DIRECT--not port -- injection. Not necessarily. There are a number of variants that can be applied to port injection as well. OCP DI is of course their flagship engine technology; along with integral spark. > Different art, as an outhouse lawyer would say. > > Besides which--patents don't restrict private, not for profit use > of ANY art !!! Heaven forbid. I wasn't saying anything like "don't do it because you might be infringing on a Patent". I was pointing out that it looked like a particular invention. You can also refer to the patented inventions of others to develop your own inventions and then patent the result; if your invention is sufficiently novel and a sufficient development of the original patent. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:07:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:07:45 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:07:45 -0800 From: "Santi Udomkesmalee" Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor >The engine we just acquired is a CBR600 F4i. It has a factory magnetic >reluctor cam sensor. I haven't pulled the valve cover to see how it works >yet, but it is located on the non-driven side of the cam and the wires exit >through a rubber grommet between the head and the valve cover. if you get a chance to look inside, I'd love to hear how they set up the cam sensor. -santi _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sun Dec 9 21:02:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:16:13 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:16:13 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation If you were to look at some high speed photos of an injector firing, you'd see how the piddle and drip as flow starts, the large the injector the worse the problem. Also, any the actual injector on time cal'c becomes more critical. Once you get down in the region of a 1 msec PW, some injectors just become non linear in fuel vs time, and the inertia of the guts of the injector become a limiting factor in how fast the injector can open and close. The longer the *on* time the more accurate you can be in how much fuel gets metered in a given cycle. At a 600 rpm idle you have 100 msec between ignition events, or roughly 75 msec to spray the back of the valve, rather then use a 2 msec time, with convential batch fire system if you used more of the time availble the better you'd be. It would be interesting to play with a system that offered a huge turn down ratio so you had some huge amount of injector on time at idle, and then decreased to a smaller value as rpm rose. Bruce From: "Bob - Uni" Subject: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation > Is that why bigger injectors that flow higher but dont atomise as well > tend to rob you of idle quality and low down power? Would it be better > then to have two smaller injectors per cylinder than one bigger one? > Monday, December 10, 2001, 7:22:30 AM, you wrote: > GH> The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as Weber DCOE;s > GH> or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the intake valves) puts > GH> finely atomized fuel into the high velocity airstream (and no fuel flow > GH> when there is no air flow) in the intake port. Most of the atomized fuel > GH> makes it into the cylinder without vaporizing. Of course, SOME of the fuel > GH> gets vaporized before the intake valve closes, but not all that high a > GH> percentage of it. (Which comes under the heading of nothing is perfect.) > GH> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back side of > GH> the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, if they are > GH> lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if any, air velocity in the > GH> port. This is done so that the heat in the valve, combined with the > GH> reversion of exhaust gas into the intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the > GH> fuel, and thus _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's > GH> inability to atomize it very well at all. > GH> The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel is robbed > GH> from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal efficiency. The > GH> vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in the inlet charge than > GH> atomized liquid fuel does--thus the deterioration in volumetric efficiency. > > GH> My own pet theory is that it would take air shrouded port fuel (and water, > GH> SHHHH!!) injectors, injecting their (respective) highly atomized fluids in > GH> time with high velocity air flow in the inlet ports, probably in a > GH> direction retro to the flow in the port, in order to get to the level of > GH> mixture and burn "quality" that good carbys can give. > > GH> Hope that helps. > > GH> Greg > >> > >>___ > >> > >>Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:16:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:16:43 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:16:43 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[3]: Sensor Question Hello Greg, One of my main reasons for using the distributor was ease of installation, as at the moment I dont really have anywhere where I can go accessing flywheels etc. What about off the front of the cam? The car is a 240/260z (depending on if I can get a 240 at a reasonable price). Would that be more accurate than from the distributor drive? Monday, December 10, 2001, 1:12:23 PM, you wrote: GH> At 10:12 AM 12/10/01, Bob - Uni wrote: >>Hello Greg, >> >>GH> I didn't see crank angle on your list. >>I was going to use the cam angle for that (actually, I was going to >>rip the guts out of a distributor, whack in a chopper wheel and use >>an opto setup) GH> Hard to get much timing accuracy that way, 60 -2 tooth wheels for crank GH> position seem to be the approach of choice lately. GH> Seems to me that, other than the existence of canned code for 60-2 wheels, GH> that ring gear teeth ought to be able to do pretty well, acting in concert GH> with two, three, four, or six crank position sensors (depending on how GH> many pots you are dealing with), and a cam position sensor. But, of course, GH> this means three Hall effect sensor inputs. Doing all of the crank position GH> work off of the flywheel pretty much eliminates torsion vibrations, and GH> gear and/or timing chain lash as a source of error. GH> Greg GH> Believes in DIY to do _better_ --not necessarily to mimic the factory for GH> less! :-) >> >> Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au GH> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- GH> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) GH> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:18:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:18:41 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:18:41 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a > > hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. > Might read some of the GM literature on that (hint, training > literature on ignition systems). It's copywritted so I can't > mention it directly. You just did mention it. Copyright prevents you from making copies beyond fair use. The GM literture would be similar to the lit. used by Volkswagen and hence proprietary? In that case, it's restricted by much more than Copyright - you'd have to physically sign an agreement not to divulge details before being allowed to see the literature. > > Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. > Have you read and compared (from various manufactureres) anything > to support those statements, and would make them absolute truths?. I'll rely on you as being the font of absolute truth as befits a self-appointed deity. Machinery design and engineering practice dictate the complexity and hence the cost of machining gears. A low-duty, low-load gear requires nowhere near the machining accuracy as those inside a transmission; the duty cycle is so low, that the ring gear isn't even lubricated. If the machined and worn jitter of tooth signals is of the same order as the crank speed variations, then an averaging filter to eliminate jitter will also conceal initial crank speed variations. On the practical side, Bosch abandoned the idea of using the flywheel teeth in deference to a dedicated timing wheel, after initial production and trials of Motronic. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:23:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:23:49 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:23:49 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > (LARGE snip) > >Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if > >you could achieve it. > > Your knowlege of thermo is exceeded only by your knowlege of the > law, Bernd !! Far be it from me to crack the shell of your insular universe. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:26:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:26:14 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:26:14 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Snippage > > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if > > you could achieve it. > You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. > Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of Australian law. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:31:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:31:37 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:31:37 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Off topic Speaking of the tooth fairy, some people get older and grow up. Then there are those people that get older but refuse to grow up! 'Nuf said. Dave Williams wrote: > > -> Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > -> subject > -> line. Hardly any effort, is it? > > Subject line? Oh, those. Belief that a subject line actually > describes a message is often found in conjunction with belief in the > Tooth Fairy. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:32:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:32:55 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:32:55 -0800 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, Dave Williams wrote: > -> too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric > -> pressure variations. > > My ThermoQuad has an aneroid enrichment system for altitude correction. Try to keep up with the subject before you post. Bruce said Bernoulli principle compensates for density/temp/humididty. I disagreed. Your TQ example supports my claim. Thanks, but it wasn't necessary. > Your aircraft carburetor example is bogus, in that aircraft carbs are No, it served its purpose quite well. Proof by counterexample was the point. > valve, so that's what they have. Throwing a few megaflops of > microprocessor at an airplane engine won't improve its performance even > a tiny bit. Who wants to improve an airplane's performance? I'll keep my carb and magnetos on my airplane, thank you. The point was, EFI can do some things carbs can't... it's not my fault Electromotive sucks for $3k. Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:35:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:35:33 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:35:33 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Sensor Question > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > > There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a > > > hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. > > Might read some of the GM literature on that (hint, training > > literature on ignition systems). It's copywritted so I can't > > mention it directly. > You just did mention it. Copyright prevents you from making copies > beyond fair use. > The GM literture would be similar to the lit. used by Volkswagen and > hence proprietary? In that case, it's restricted by much more than > Copyright - you'd have to physically sign an agreement not to > divulge details before being allowed to see the literature. So now you are advocating disclosing copywritten material yet when you mention email, it's a different matter. Rather then confuse the issue because of your statments, I'll just let things stand as I first stated them. > > > Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. > > Have you read and compared (from various manufactureres) anything > > to support those statements, and would make them absolute truths?. > I'll rely on you as being the font of absolute truth as befits a > self-appointed deity. Off on tangents again, > Machinery design and engineering practice dictate the complexity and > hence the cost of machining gears. A low-duty, low-load gear > requires nowhere near the machining accuracy as those inside a > transmission; the duty cycle is so low, that the ring gear isn't > even lubricated. If you had the above referenced materials, you'd see what errors there are in your assumptions. > If the machined and worn jitter of tooth signals is of the same > order as the crank speed variations, then an averaging filter to > eliminate jitter will also conceal initial crank speed variations. > On the practical side, Bosch abandoned the idea of using the > flywheel teeth in deference to a dedicated timing wheel, after > initial production and trials of Motronic. So from Bosch's experience you make a generate statement for all manufacurers, OK, fine. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From gbeard1@nycap.rr.com Sun Dec 9 21:25:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:38:11 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:38:11 -0300 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Bill Shaw wrote: > > One suggestion would be to wrap a few turns of 18 gauge wire around the #1 plug wire, then feed this signal into one of the unused inputs on the WB-LCD. > Logging the 2 channels would give you RPM in sync with AFR. It would take a little playing to get the configuration right, but something like this > should work. > While digging through loads of info on DAQs online, I just came across this paper. It may be of use to some of the less EE challenged... http://www.eng.auburn.edu/ece/cars/old/finalreport.pdf -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:39:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:39:10 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:39:10 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> Again, I suggest you go to school if you wish to learn to do such > >> calculations. I have done them, ... > >I received my B.E. in 1983, having completed studies in 1982, > Ask UWA > Had never heard of UWA before. My opinion of it just fell, though. Well, go and trot off and find out about it. It's been around for a number of years. http://www.uwa.edu.au > So long as you wish to compare CV's: No. I don't have a CV. It's too long and tedious. Now zip up your pants. > I appear to have had roughly 18 additional years over you in which > to have forgotten my basic thermo, although the contents of our > minds seem to have a different half life, not to mention where > they appear to have started out. I couldn't imagine anybody would still have such insular and fixed attitudes and ignorance of the world around their tiny place at the age of 60 or more. But you almost have me convinced. > Perhaps you would like to contact Andy Schultz (Dean Emeritus of > the Engineering School) or Al George (its current Dean) at Cornell > University to check on my competence?? They both knew me quite > reasonably well. Americans seem so easy to impress. > I rather expect you may have heard of Cornell, even down there. Yeah, full of hype-masters. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 21:45:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:45:21 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:45:21 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift , tooth fairy Bruce, you're my kinda guy! :) Bruce wrote: > > From: "Dave Williams" > Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, > > -> Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > > -> subject > > -> line. Hardly any effort, is it? > > > Subject line? Oh, those. Belief that a subject line actually > > describes a message is often found in conjunction with belief in the > > Tooth Fairy. > > Whew, that was close, lil guys were poised to hit the reply key on that one. > Bruce > They're tired from actually working on EFI stuff all day, rather then > just hitting reply to expound about "absolute truths". > Someone woke Sleepy, and after listening to Bashful, he's saying 2+2 is > about 4. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Sun Dec 9 22:22:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:58:35 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:58:35 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: What display for DIY WB As others stated, saparate output devices are working for bar graph, digital, and RS232. No board for the bar graph just yet. The brightness of the LED bar graph display is directly controlled by the resistor from pin 7 of each LM3914 to ground, R2, 4, 5, & 8. If you double the value, the LED current will be halved; triple will cut to 1/3. Perhaps a second resistor of 1.5 times the value between the above and ground will do the job. You could put 4 diodes from the junction of each pair and switch the other side of all 4 diodes (cathode) to ground for higher brightness. There is more than one way to skin a cat, but right now I don't see an obvious better way to drive those 36 LEDs than LM3914s. Those outputs are current regulated. The 2 18 ohms are there because a 9 ohm 1 watt is much harder to find. If they are increased much the LM7808 will run out of headroom and regulation when every green LED is on. If you elect to REDUCE the resistors mentioned to 1/2 half for maximum brightness (20 ma), you would need 4 18 ohm in parallel and twice the heat sink on the LM7808. Bruce Roe On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:31:15 +1000 "Con Torrisi" writes: > Hi everyone, > > After several attempts to build a reasonable narrow band Mixture > meter with > limited success I've decided to have a go at the WB project. > > I've downloaded the project details but at first glance I can't see > what > display is used. How do you tell what the AFR is? > > Thanks > > Con Torrisi. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 22:08:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:08:57 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:08:57 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: SPAM > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Snippage > > > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if > > > you could achieve it. > > You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. > > Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. The act of making false statements, and there are no absolute truths. All the lil guys are confused on that one. But again they had an entire day of working on EFI stuff. > There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of > Australian law. One of several volumes, a large book, or a scholarly one?. There is just so much lost in the translation from Australian to US. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 22:09:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:09:47 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:09:47 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Subject: Re: Sensor Question > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > > > There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a > > > > hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. > > > Might read some of the GM literature on that (hint, training > > > literature on ignition systems). It's copywritted so I can't > > > mention it directly. > > You just did mention it. Copyright prevents you from making copies > > beyond fair use. > > The GM literture would be similar to the lit. used by Volkswagen and > > hence proprietary? In that case, it's restricted by much more than > > Copyright - you'd have to physically sign an agreement not to > > divulge details before being allowed to see the literature. > So now you are advocating disclosing copywritten material yet when you > mention email, it's a different matter. The concept of Copyright has been explained before. Email communications to an individual _also_ carries a reasonable expectation of privacy. If it's not published, no Copyright exists. For any correspondence to be published, it is the publisher's responsibility to ensure that the correspondent approves of publication. > Rather then confuse the issue because of your statments, I'll just > let things stand as I first stated them. > > Machinery design and engineering practice dictate the complexity and > > hence the cost of machining gears. A low-duty, low-load gear > > requires nowhere near the machining accuracy as those inside a > > transmission; the duty cycle is so low, that the ring gear isn't > > even lubricated. > > If you had the above referenced materials, you'd see what errors > there are in your assumptions. Try Morrison & Crossland's text on machinery, machinery handbooks, Bosch Automotive Handbook, ... > > If the machined and worn jitter of tooth signals is of the same > > order as the crank speed variations, then an averaging filter to > > eliminate jitter will also conceal initial crank speed variations. > > On the practical side, Bosch abandoned the idea of using the > > flywheel teeth in deference to a dedicated timing wheel, after > > initial production and trials of Motronic. > So from Bosch's experience you make a generate statement for all > manufacurers, OK, fine. Not all; just the ones willing to learn from somebody else's mistakes. Bosch ie OEM to the majority of European manufacturers, licences technology to North America and Japan. If the cost accountants tell the Engineers that they can't afford to put a separate timing wheel on a dispose-mobile, then the Engineers have to make do as best they can. Should the TPU of the available ECU require crank timing signals like that of a multi-tooth crank timing wheel, then the flywheel is the lowest-cost solution for manufacture as no ECU re-engineering is required. If the manufacturer values quality and performance, then a separate timing resolver is incorporated. Hence BMW, Volvo, Mercedes, Audi, etc., use of a separate device; because it performs better and is more reliable. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 22:10:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:10:15 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:10:15 -0800 From: clayb Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) > Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:24:24 +0800 > From: Chris Waltham > Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark The Autronics has four ignition outputs, so it can fire up to eight cylinders using wasted spark. You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines adjust the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. I don't believe the Autronics is programmed to do this. While we're on the subject of impossible tasks for aftermarket ECU's... I want one that can control Chevy's new "power on demand", where you turn off un-needed cylinders, and close the valves, leaving a near-lossless airspring, and fantastic part throttle fuel economy with a V8. - Lifespeed > Hi guys, > > A friend of mine recently bought an old Ford Escort with a Toyota 3T-GTE > engine in it. > It's the twin-spark flavour, turbocharged and non-intercooled. Anyway, it's > a twin-spark > engine, however it's been set up with Autronic engine management. Oddly, > the guy that > configured the Autronic (not it's owner, or me) didn't bother to set up the > second > array of spark plugs/coils and whatnot. So, of course, it's running on 4 > plugs instead > of 8. I reckon twin-spark working would be rather cool, does anyone have > any comments > on why something like Autronic (which I thought to be reasonably powerful) > wouldn't > work with it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 22:10:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:10:33 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:10:33 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM > >> You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. >> Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > >In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. > >There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of >Australian law. Hadn't realized that you had law written by Gooney birds (or is it Kiki birds) ! Probably should have known better, though, given what has been done to your (God given) right to self defence (sic). Did, however, realize that your courts are not of competent jurisdiction here !! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 22:28:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:28:06 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:28:06 -0800 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Dave Williams wrote: > -> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better > -> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a > -> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > > Running throttled, steady state - yes. A TBI system can match a > carburetor under those conditions, but a port injection setup can't. > Conventional Bendix-type injectors do a poor job of atomization, and too > much of their output is in gobbets too big to be fully consumed during > the power stroke, and the unburned portion goes out the exhaust valve. > This is not normally an issue for EFI cars since most of them use > catalytic convertors and the fuel is burned in the convertor, keeping it > hot enough to function when exhaust flow is low. > > Just because it's new and complicated doesn't mean EFI is better under > every condition. Eventually rail pressures will get high enough to do a > better job of atomization, but right now all injectors are pretty much > the same. > > Part-throttle cruise is where carbs and TBIs rule, but that doesn't > play much of a part in EPA smog or mileage testing. They assume > everyone lives in an anthill of traffic. However, for some of us, part > throttle cruise is the dominant driving mode. Ok, thanks for that. So do "conventional"[1] port injectors at any point in the rev/load range produce better fuel delivery then carbs? (I'm thinking 'result in lower BSFC' but possibly that is not entirely accurate?) (You did say "doesn't mean EFI is better under every condition" implying some conditions exist where efi is superior [without defining 'better']). (I'm presuming that the carbs' superiority only holds true for a small subset of available hardware, and does not extend to mass market carbs factory fitted to older non-performance cars - is that correct [in general]?). Does it follow that port injected engines without cats spit some amount of unburnt fuel out the exhaust? Apologies if the questions offend, but I'd like to improve my understanding rather then make erroneous deductions. Mos. [1] ie every day, mass market injectors. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 22:32:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:32:50 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:32:50 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) From: "clayb" Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) > > From: Chris Waltham > > Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark > You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines adjust > the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. I don't believe > the Autronics is programmed to do this. Might be noted on some it's an emission strategy. > While we're on the subject of impossible tasks for aftermarket ECU's... > I want one that can control Chevy's new "power on demand", where you > turn off un-needed cylinders, and close the valves, leaving a > near-lossless airspring, and fantastic part throttle fuel economy with a > V8. > - Lifespeed Ya, the first version was so bad I still have nightmares over it. It takes so much energy to move a car so far. I will be interesting to see what the cruise MPG actually numbers are. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sun Dec 9 22:26:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:41:50 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:41:50 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > DCOE's have _such_ good atomization that you can let off the choke > about 5 to 10 seconds after a seriously cold start. > > Most carbys are not that good, and port injectors are not even close. What are the droplet sizes? At what airflow rates? From which jets? > Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some > port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack > of good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. > > The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as > opposed to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has > _closed_ . Increased vapourization (due to the greater atomization you say occurs in a carb.) upstream of the inlet valve is going to help how? > What this does is let the latent heat of the fuel (as well as of > any injected water, SHHHH!!) act as an internal coolant during the > compression stroke. Internal cooling during the compression stroke How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization process? Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing significant heat without running very rich mixtures. You said something about BSFC? > reduces the negative work needed during that stroke, reduces the > peak temp of the cycle and the EGT, reduces the peak pressures > during the cycle, and reduces heat rejection to the water jackets > significantly as well. Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into a gas? Removing an extra kW of heat from the coolant in a 200kW engine has always been a problem, hasn't it? > Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the > fuel throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion > (also more power and efficiency here). And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). > All of which add up to improvements in power, efficiency, as well as > mechanical durability (lower pressures and temps do that!) as a direct > result of better fuel atomization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 22:31:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:41:57 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:41:57 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM >Greg Hermann wrote: > >> Petie-- >> >> You have lied about other matters here, and therefore I do not give your >> above statement any credibility. Therefore, I regard this post as SPAM. >> Please govern and modify your posting behavior here accordingly !! >> >> Greg > >Dear Greg, you post is aptly titled. Indeed. SPAM is precisely what you posted. > >Why don't you tell the list what you've done to help out the >DIY-WB effort - See below. I don't recall anything you've actually done. That's because you weren't here and, you, and the likes of you, by design, didn't have a clue. I originally organized and motivated the off-list effort which led to the development of the DIY-WB. Despite the best efforts of another scum far more intelligent than yourself to disrupt it (just as you have so tried), the DIY WB effort eventually succeeded. There are some here who know the part I played in it, I simply haven't felt any need to mention it. Why--because I think many others played a far more important role than my own. I am happy for them to have all the credit. > >And, saying I've lied may just constitute criminal libel - better be careful >Greggy (or should that be "the FAT man"?). ROTFLMAO!! Have to assume you might call me "Little Boy" next?? As in what happened to Hiroshima and Nagasaki?? Gotta wonder how you got a clue of what I am capable of physically, tho. Perhaps you have somehow learned that my Uncle Hans spent better than 20 years in the ring as a pro wrestler?? :-) > >Peter Petie-- I have told you before to stay -_OUT _ of my private e-mail box. THAT'S _TWICE_ NOW!!! As for any accusation of criminal libel--the truth is an absolute defense against either libel OR slander,At least you appear to be educated on the difference between the two. Leads me to wonder how you acquired such an education !! Besides which--it might be rather fun to have you serve the papers on me or bear witness to any such charge in a court of competent jurisdiction (personally, of course) !! So--in order to promote my potential enjoyment of such an effort on your part-- "Petie Gargano is a self-admitted (by his own electronically written hand) thief of intellectual property." Let's dance, turkey !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From powermaxx@netzero.net Sun Dec 9 22:33:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:45:31 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:45:31 -0300 From: "powermaxx" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Trying to locate a page with sensor info.. Maybe I was halucinating but I thought there was a page with pic's of the various sensors on the DIY site for Megasquirt. The IAC I think is just a solenoid but I couldn't find a reference to the part number. How well does this work vs the stepper motor type? TIA Steve St"RACE"ner (and toys...) 73 Challenger "Street Outlaw" 87 GLHS Shelby ---------------------------------------------------- Sign Up for NetZero Platinum Today Only $9.95 per month! http://my.netzero.net/s/signup?r=platinum&refcd=PT97 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sun Dec 9 22:32:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:46:10 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:46:10 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #924 Ooops, don't tell the fly by wire guys that. Immediately gets back to what *better* can be / mean. Bruce By the way the fly by wire is applicable to EFI. Oh, and a primitive old tech way of doing it was just using vac. secondaries (or Skinner Union carbs). > Pilots NEED to be in total control in many cases. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos@sydney.net Sun Dec 9 22:39:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:49:14 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:49:14 -0300 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Greg Hermann wrote: > > >The kit is readily available from a number of suppliers, or you can make > >your own boards if you purchase the article from http://www.siliconchip.com.au > > > >Peter. > > > >(I have no affiliation with Silicon Chip, or any FMD kit supplier) > > Petie-- > > You have lied about other matters here, and therefore I do not give your > above statement any credibility. Therefore, I regard this post as SPAM. > Please govern and modify your posting behavior here accordingly !! > > Greg I don't get it. Silicon Chip is an Australian Magazine. At the URL Peter posted, 3 Australian suppliers of kits and one Australian supplier of PCBs are listed. I don't know where you're coming from Greg (other then perhaps something about some pcbs), but for Peter to be somehow affiliated with the 5 companies seems at least a little over the top. Mos. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sun Dec 9 22:38:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:50:23 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:50:23 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 8:45 PM 12/9/01, Arnaud Westenberg wrote: > >Greg Hermann wrote: > > > > >> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better > > >> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a > > >> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > > > > > Squirting fuel on the back side of a closed intake valve (as some > > > port injectors do) so as to vaporize it (to make up for the lack of > > > good atomization) hurts both volumetric AND thermal efficiency. > > > > > The trick here is to have as much of the _vaporization_ (as opposed > > > to atomization) take place _after_ the intake valve has _closed_ . > >I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb doesn't > >evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a (port) > >injector evaporates at the valve? Can't be just from the higher > >fuel temp in the injector case, or is it? > The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as > Weber DCOE;s or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the > intake valves) puts finely atomized fuel into the high velocity > airstream (and no fuel flow when there is no air flow) in the > intake port. Most of the atomized fuel makes it into the cylinder > without vaporizing. Of course, SOME of the fuel gets vaporized > before the intake valve closes, but not all that high a percentage > of it. (Which comes under the heading of nothing is perfect.) > Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back > side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, They do so to meet emission requirements; specifically HC. There is a finite probability that some fuel droplets survive the combustion process and will only go out the exhaust pipe as they vapourize. Regardless of the mode of fuelling. If you don't have to comply with emission standards, you can open your injected whenever it pleases you. > if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if > any, air velocity in the port. This is done so that the heat in > the valve, combined with the reversion of exhaust gas into the > intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the fuel, and thus > _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's inability to > atomize it very well at all. Droplet sizes? > The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel > is robbed from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal > efficiency. The vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in > the inlet charge than atomized liquid fuel does--thus the > deterioration in volumetric efficiency. Oh, it's robbed, is it? Basic thermal efficiency (Carnot) is determined by the hottest and coldest phases of the cycle. The greater the difference, the greater the amount of work that can be done and hence the greater the power output of the engine. Furthermore, injecting onto the back of the inlet valve cools the valve, reducing that as a being a catalyst point for detonation. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 22:57:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:57:59 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 22:57:59 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Subject: Re: SPAM > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > > Snippage > > > > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence > > > > even if you could achieve it. > > > You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. > > > Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > > In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. > The act of making false statements, > and there are no absolute truths. Has little to do with truth or falsehood. Proving criminal libel is about establishing injury to the victim. > All the lil guys are confused on that one. But again they had an > entire day of working on EFI stuff. > > There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of > > Australian law. > One of several volumes, a large book, or a scholarly one?. IANAL. So I only have the one entitled (appropriately enough) "The Macquarie Easy Guide to Australian Law". A quick look at the intro to defamation points out that the libel is entitled to compensation without direct proof of loss or damage. Defence against (civil) defamation can be the truth in some States of Australia, but not in this case. Criminal libel is another matter. There, your only defence would be if the truth were also in the public interest. > There is just so much lost in the translation from Australian to US. The basis of law in the USA is very different to that of Australian law. Unfortunately, the opiate of the masses is mis-programmaing many Australians to the US way of law and justice which not just creates confusion, but also places the offenders neck-deep in manure. Even lawyers get confused. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sun Dec 9 22:54:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:06:31 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:06:31 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bob - Uni" > > Is that why bigger injectors that flow higher but dont atomise as well > > tend to rob you of idle quality and low down power? Would it be better > > then to have two smaller injectors per cylinder than one bigger one? > If you were to look at some high speed photos of an injector > firing, you'd see how the piddle and drip as flow starts, the > large the injector the worse the problem. For about 50 microseconds; but depends on injector, injector pressure and issues such as air shrouding. > Also, any the actual injector on time cal'c becomes more critical. > Once you get down in the region of a 1 msec PW, some injectors > just become non linear in fuel vs time, and the inertia of the > guts of the injector become a limiting factor in how fast the > injector can open and close. Doesn't matter that the behaviour is non-linear. As long as the non-linear behaviour is known, the ECU can compensate accordingly. e.g. The EFI332 project makes allowances for non-linear injector behaviour, IIRC. > The longer the *on* time the more accurate you can be in how much > fuel gets metered in a given cycle. At a 600 rpm idle you have > 100 msec between ignition events, or roughly 75 msec to spray the > back of the valve, rather then use a 2 msec time, with convential > batch fire system if you used more of the time availble the better > you'd be. At least some batch-fire systems only fire once every two revs at idle. Doing so under light load at low, off-idle speeds should be feasible if the inlet manifold and and ignition timing allowed for asymetric fuelling. I don't know if it's been done; there's little point in developing such a system now that sequential injection is the rule. > It would be interesting to play with a system that offered a huge > turn down ratio so you had some huge amount of injector on time at > idle, and then decreased to a smaller value as rpm rose. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 23:00:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:07:28 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:07:28 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re[2]: Fuel Atomisation At 10:21 AM 12/10/01, Bob - Uni wrote: >Hello Greg, > >Is that why bigger injectors that flow higher but dont atomise as well >tend to rob you of idle quality and low down power? Would it be better >then to have two smaller injectors per cylinder than one bigger one? > >Monday, December 10, 2001, 7:22:30 AM, you wrote: > >GH> The carby (talking IR carbys, one throat per cylinder, such as Weber DCOE;s >GH> or IDA's with the butterflies fairly close to the intake valves) puts (snip) That particular aspect of it had not occurred to me, Bob, but it sure could be a factor. I tend to think that the biggest single factor with loss of idle quality with big injectors is getting the pulse width down too short for the injectors to produce truly repeatable flow quantities at idle, though. To put it in "rigorous" control engineering terms, injectors only have so much "dynamic range". Absolutely, two, staged injectors per port will help idle and light load performance and drivability a _LOT_ on an engine with a wide dynamic range of output (such as a boosted engine). I believe that the best approach to sizing staged injectors is 1/3 primary, 2/3 secondary. Play with the numbers a bit, and I think you will see why I like this approach. Have often wondered about ways to widen the dynamic range of available injectors. The peak & hold approach is one pretty obvious approach to this, but it hasn't been taken very far. The real problem is the finite time necessary to build and then collapse the magnetic flux field in the injector's solenoid. Dump circuits for collapsing it quickly are well known, but I am not aware of such ever being used in EFI applications. Much more radical approaches to peak and hold are also possible. A _REALLY_ competent, older EE guy once suggested to me that I take a peek at some of the print hammer throw circuits that were used in the last and fastest electromechanical teletypes and printers !! Apparently some of them were using a (very) brief pulse of something on the order of 230 VDC to build the flux in the hammer coil _quite_ quickly. Bob felt there was absolutely no reason why such technology could not be applied to fuel injectors !! I rather tend to agree with him, but don't really have the electronic espertise to pursue it a lot further! I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is the answer for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to do that with conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence of "direct" injectors may make it easier to accomplish this before long. One of the things that becomes possible with air shrouded injectors is dynamic control of fuel rail pressure--since you don't need 3 bar of rail pressure to get the current mess that passes for atomization, you could run much lower rail pressure at light loads and idle, and higher rail pressure at higher loads, thus widening the dynamic range of the injectors by a factor of 1.5 or 2 without any electronic tricks. Regards, Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 23:07:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:07:36 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:07:36 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "clayb" > > > From: Chris Waltham > > > Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark > > You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines > > adjust the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. > > I don't believe the Autronics is programmed to do this. > Might be noted on some it's an emission strategy. How so? GH stated very recently that you want combustion to happen as fast as possible. Over a large bore, multiple spark locations (or one very long one) would consume the end-gas more steadily. First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 23:18:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:18:30 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:18:30 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. > >> Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > >In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. > >There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of > >Australian law. > > Hadn't realized that you had law written by Gooney birds (or is > it Kiki birds) ! They are all "learned" folks who would take actions to protect their reputation. (Your knowledge of fauna is abysmal.) Is it true that septics have to learn the names of all the States and their capitals, as well as the Presidents because they're expected to be illiterate? :-) > Probably should have known better, though, given what has been > done to your (God given) right to self defence (sic). > Did, however, realize that your courts are not of competent > jurisdiction here !! Irrelevant. Damages can be claimed in an undefended case. What? You mean the USA isn't all like South Park? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 23:20:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:20:45 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:20:45 -0800 From: Chris Waltham Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) >First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. >i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs >at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front >to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. What if the sparks are at the same time? For the uninitiated.. Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 23:12:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:22:13 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:22:13 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re[2]: Sensor Question At 10:12 AM 12/10/01, Bob - Uni wrote: >Hello Greg, > >GH> I didn't see crank angle on your list. >I was going to use the cam angle for that (actually, I was going to >rip the guts out of a distributor, whack in a chopper wheel and use >an opto setup) Hard to get much timing accuracy that way, 60 -2 tooth wheels for crank position seem to be the approach of choice lately. Seems to me that, other than the existence of canned code for 60-2 wheels, that ring gear teeth ought to be able to do pretty well, acting in concert with two, three, four, or six crank position sensors (depending on how many pots you are dealing with), and a cam position sensor. But, of course, this means three Hall effect sensor inputs. Doing all of the crank position work off of the flywheel pretty much eliminates torsion vibrations, and gear and/or timing chain lash as a source of error. Greg Believes in DIY to do _better_ --not necessarily to mimic the factory for less! :-) > > Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sun Dec 9 23:16:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:30:06 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:30:06 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Arnaud Westenberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > Greg Hermann wrote: >>> I don't get it. How come the atomized fuel from the carb >>> doesn't evaporate until it is in the cylinder, but that from a >>> (port) injector evaporates at the valve? >> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the >> back side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that >> vicinity, if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is >> little, if any, air velocity in the port. > I forgot that in the carb case there's no fuel flow when there's > no air flow, maybe I shouldn't have taken that last beer > yesterday. :-) Indeed. At least as the valve opens, initial scavenging during overlap is aided by the low airflow at most engine speeds in a non-supercharged engine. This is a reason why HC emissions are not as high as they would otherwise be. A sufficient pressure difference has to be established across the venturi by airflow to start to draw fuel from the jet(s). At valve opening near TDC, more air could be drawn in due to valve overlap (exhaust gas dynamics) than piston motion. Unfortunately, as the valve closes, the column of air above the venturi is still moving towards the valve, carrying with an amount of fuel. That mixture slams into the back of the valve and reflects back through the carb, hopefully left "standing" in the inlet. On the _next_ cycle, you have a _vapourized_ air-fuel mix ready to be drawn into the cylinder as the valve opens. Some of this goes out of the exhaust if there's heavy scavenging going on. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 23:20:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:30:27 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:30:27 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation >Thanks. >I forgot that in the carb case there's no fuel flow when there's no air >flow, maybe I shouldn't have taken that last beer yesterday. :-) Hope it tasted good !! :-) > >Are there any special provisions needed to squirt during valve open and >still obtain adequate (whatever that may be) vaporization? Obviously, >certain pulse widths would be too long to be able to spray during valve >open, but what are the differences between timed sefi and batch efi/tbi, >wrt the vaporization issue? > >___ > >Arnaud My thought is that air shrouded (or "boosted") injectors would do the deed--and also improve atomization in the bargain--quite admirably. The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" over a fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite capable of putting it into the port in a highly atomized state quite suddenly. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 9 23:34:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:34:49 -0800 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:34:49 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark Chris Waltham tapped away at the keyboard with: > > >First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. > >i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs > >at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front > >to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. > What if the sparks are at the same time? For the uninitiated.. I don't know. It could be to develop the cylinder pressure more progressively instead of a single hit, depending on flame/engine speeds. What do Autronics say? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 9 23:35:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:43:22 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:43:22 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Carburetors and Altitude At 2:09 PM 12/9/01, efi_student wrote: >Never been through the Eisenhower tunnel in Colorado on I-70 I see. Nor >Wolf Creek Pass. Both are well over 6,000' above MSL. My 79 AMX with >its marvelous Stromberg 2 barrel on an I-6 crawled through the >Eisenhower tunnel at 35 mph even with 5 degrees timing advance. Jetted >down to mains, and flew through at normal driving speeds. IME >Carburetors have a dismal time compensating for altitude. I have tuned >both cars and bikes with carburetors for living in Denver after living >in Sacramento. Sac is about 12' above MSL, Denver is well known as the >mile high city. Oddly, I needed bigger pilots and smaller mains to work >properly at altitude. But then again, I was dealing with carburetors of >a lesser design than the Webers. Mikuni flatslides, Keihin CRs, and the >venerable Stromberg 2bbl are far less advanced. > >Lance > Lance--you are quite correct. See my earlier post. The main jet diameter needs to vary with the fourth root of the air density ratio in order to maintain a constant A/F ratio from any carby. Your need for a slightly richer idle jet is related to having less vacuum at idle at altitude--since the idle circuit uses manifold vacuum (as opposed to the choke, or venturi) to meter the fuel. However--this isn't usually a problem IF you get the relationship between the transition slot/holes and the edge of the butterflies correct at idle. EVEN with the correct A/F ratio and timing at altitude, you are going to be down on power slightly less than would be indicated by the air density ratio at altitude. (Slightly less because the less dense air does not lose as much static pressure flowing through the ports at altitude!) Greg (home elevation, Steamboat Springs, =7250' MSL) (Loveland Pass, Trail Ridge road, Mt. Evans road, and Independence Pass are even more fun that way than the Ike tunnel is, too!) :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sun Dec 9 23:30:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:44:28 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:44:28 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > My thought is that air shrouded (or "boosted") injectors would do > the deed--and also improve atomization in the bargain--quite > admirably. > The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" > over a fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite > capable of putting it into the port in a highly atomized state > quite suddenly. Sounds oddly like an Orbital patent. In that, compressed air is used to _shear_ the fuel droplets to ultra-fine size. I'm not at liberty to say any more. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Sun Dec 9 23:43:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:50:05 -0300 Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:50:05 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[3]: Fuel Atomisation Hello Greg, GH> I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is the answer GH> for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to do that with GH> conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence of "direct" injectors GH> may make it easier to accomplish this before long. I had thought about that before when I was looking at water injection nozzles, and wondered why fuel injectors werent built with some form of air being fired at the stream to make it finer, I had put it off as one of those "there must be a reason" things. -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Sun Dec 9 23:39:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:05:26 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:05:26 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Thanks for the pointer. I am actually thinking about buying the USB logger board ($99) which has a built-in 32bit counter. I can snag the rpm signal to the DME in my car and multiply it by 20 to get rpm (So I'm told). I think with the 8 single ended inputs I can record enough (including the WB) for some decent tuning data... Not exactly DIY though!!! Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Don DRI05 Ricciardiello > Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal > > I have two words of advice and they are "Brian Dessent". He > was a great > help as I had the exact same question for the DataQ DI-194 > I'm using. I > have a variable reluctance magnetic pick-up sensing crank > rotationon on my > bike. Brian suggested using the LM2917 Frequency to voltage > converters. I'm > bread-boarding mine at the moment to test it out. > > Don > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sun Dec 9 23:53:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:05:37 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:05:37 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: [snip quoted email] > Petie-- > > I have told you before to stay -_OUT _ of my private e-mail box. You've quoted email he sent to you privately? It was clearly stated by others in this forum that this may be a criminal act in some jurisdictions. > THAT'S _TWICE_ NOW!!! > > As for any accusation of criminal libel--the truth is an absolute > defense against either libel OR slander,At least you appear to be > educated on the difference between the two. Leads me to wonder how > you acquired such an education !! Greg, The offence occurs in more than one jurisdiction and under more than one system of law. It is conventional to prosecute according to the location of the victim(s). Here's news for the parochial merkins: There are legal systems and laws different to those in the USA. Truth is no defence in libel or slander in Australia. The victim only has to show that he was somehow injured by the act to prove slander or libel. If the act is set to injure the victim, then the victim has a valid case and can claim damages. I understand that UK laws operate similarly. I could cite one case precedent about "successful" libel prosecutions in the Usenet domain, where at least the victim was located in Australia, and the truth was no defence. The matter was settled out of court. IANAL. I established and admin'd for an ISP that was involved in one side of a case. > Besides which--it might be rather fun to have you serve the papers > on me or bear witness to any such charge in a court of competent > jurisdiction (personally, of course) !! I assure you, it will NOT be fun. It will be expensive. You have no chance of a defence if the victim can prove any form of injury, including emotional stress. Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if you could achieve it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 00:02:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:09:13 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:09:13 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 9:26 AM 12/10/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: Nice overall, further display of ignorance, Bernd. Whatsa matter, don't like the fact that I climbed all over your cute little boy(??)-friend Petie?? >> >> Most carbys are not that good, and port injectors are not even close. > >What are the droplet sizes? At what airflow rates? From which jets? On the same order as what comes from the Bosch air shrouded injectors. eg--approx 8 microns on down. From both main and idle circuits, not from the pump jets. Talking Webers here, not typical carbys. > >Increased vapourization (due to the greater atomization you say >occurs in a carb.) upstream of the inlet valve is going to help how? Try reading what I said before , dikhed! _NOT_ misquoting it! > >> What this does is let the latent heat of the fuel (as well as of >> any injected water, SHHHH!!) act as an internal coolant during the >> compression stroke. Internal cooling during the compression stroke > >How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization >process? If you are too ignorant to calculate this for yourself, pound salt. Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing >significant heat without running very rich mixtures. Any heat removed _during _ the compression stroke is significant. > >You said something about BSFC? Yep. Properly tuned DCOE's at WOT will beat conventional port injectors every time. Significantly. > >> reduces the negative work needed during that stroke, reduces the >> peak temp of the cycle and the EGT, reduces the peak pressures >> during the cycle, and reduces heat rejection to the water jackets >> significantly as well. > >Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into >a gas? Again, I suggest you go to school if you wish to learn to do such calculations. I have done them, but you don't have enough money to pay the tuition I would charge to teach the likes of you. > >Removing an extra kW of heat from the coolant in a 200kW engine has >always been a problem, hasn't it? Not at all, idiot! But if that kW of heat stays in the cylinder instead of going into the cooling system, a given proprotion of it ends up going out the business end of the crankshaft instead of through the cooling system. Again--if you want to know how much, develop some competence, and figure it out for yourself! > >> Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the >> fuel throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion >> (also more power and efficiency here). > >And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). ROTFLMAO !! It would seem that you also wish to display (to all here) your ignorance of the fact that detonation is a function of the residence time of the end gasses at high temp/pressure conditions ! Lemme see--if we _reduce_ the peak temp, peak pressure, and time of burn, that sure oughtta increase the tendency to detonate, oughtn't it??? Not to mention the fact that a faster burn increases the basic efficiency potential of the Otto cycle !! Clearly, Keith Duckworth, you ain't !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From w.shawsr@att.net Sun Dec 9 23:00:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:09:15 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:09:15 -0300 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb Vgnd I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem quite right. Maybe someone could shed some light? The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sun Dec 9 23:58:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:13:59 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:13:59 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[3]: Fuel Atomisation Bob - Uni tapped away at the keyboard with: > > I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is > > the answer for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to > > do that with conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence > > of "direct" injectors may make it easier to accomplish this > > before long. > I had thought about that before when I was looking at water injection > nozzles, and wondered why fuel injectors werent built with some form > of air being fired at the stream to make it finer, I had put it off as > one of those "there must be a reason" things. Co$t. You need a fairly high pressure to achieve real benefits above that of a shrouded injector. Shrouded injectors have been around for more than 20 years. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 00:12:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:18:21 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:18:21 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation >> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back >> side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, > >They do so to meet emission requirements; specifically HC. There is >a finite probability that some fuel droplets survive the combustion >process and will only go out the exhaust pipe as they vapourize. >Regardless of the mode of fuelling. The bigger the droplets, the higher that probability. Try taking a peek at the HC emissions of a properly tuned engine equipped with DCOE's. at WOT. It would appear that not many droplets survive , at all, in this case !! > >If you don't have to comply with emission standards, you can open >your injected whenever it pleases you. True. But only because typical injectors give terrible atomization. > >> if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if >> any, air velocity in the port. This is done so that the heat in >> the valve, combined with the reversion of exhaust gas into the >> intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the fuel, and thus >> _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's inability to >> atomize it very well at all. > >Droplet sizes? Vary all over the place. Sometimes relatively huge. (100 micron, at least) Do your own research!! > >> The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel >> is robbed from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal >> efficiency. The vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in >> the inlet charge than atomized liquid fuel does--thus the >> deterioration in volumetric efficiency. > >Oh, it's robbed, is it? Basic thermal efficiency (Carnot) is >determined by the hottest and coldest phases of the cycle. The >greater the difference, the greater the amount of work that can be >done and hence the greater the power output of the engine. Gee --Sounds as though you took a course in basic thermo after all !! But cut the class where they explained that the cycle would fall below the theoretical efficiency if the processes were not perfectly adiabatic ! > >Furthermore, injecting onto the back of the inlet valve cools the >valve, reducing that as a being a catalyst point for detonation. B.S. !! You are blowing smoke, trying to sound knowlegeable without having a clue. The intake valve is one of the cooler parts of the chamber to begin with !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 00:07:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:18:28 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:18:28 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Sensor Question Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 10:12 AM 12/10/01, Bob - Uni wrote: > >GH> I didn't see crank angle on your list. > >I was going to use the cam angle for that (actually, I was going to > >rip the guts out of a distributor, whack in a chopper wheel and use > >an opto setup) > Hard to get much timing accuracy that way, 60 -2 tooth wheels for > crank position seem to be the approach of choice lately. Sufficient accuracy for an engine with inertia is possible with a chopper arrangement (Hall effect is preferable to opto) combined with some form of TPU or timebase in the ECU. As long as you have 2*N timing edges (N is number of cylinders), you can also pick up any speed variation (torque fluctuations) and adjust to ambient conditions. > Seems to me that, other than the existence of canned code for 60-2 > wheels, that ring gear teeth ought to be able to do pretty well, > acting in concert with two, three, four, or six crank position > sensors (depending on how many pots you are dealing with), and a > cam position sensor. But, of course, this means three Hall effect > sensor inputs. Doing all of the crank position work off of the > flywheel pretty much eliminates torsion vibrations, and gear > and/or timing chain lash as a source of error. You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 00:32:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:32:57 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:32:57 -0800 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM From: "Bernd Felsche" > The basis of law in the USA is very different to that of Australian > law. Unfortunately, the opiate of the masses is mis-programmaing > many Australians to the US way of law and justice which not just > creates confusion, but also places the offenders neck-deep in > manure. Even lawyers get confused. In Oz, you and your lawyers are all confused because they watch reruns of L.A. LAW? FR Wilk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chris@harvestroad.com Mon Dec 10 00:24:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:35:47 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:35:47 -0300 From: Chris Waltham Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark Hi guys, A friend of mine recently bought an old Ford Escort with a Toyota 3T-GTE engine in it. It's the twin-spark flavour, turbocharged and non-intercooled. Anyway, it's a twin-spark engine, however it's been set up with Autronic engine management. Oddly, the guy that configured the Autronic (not it's owner, or me) didn't bother to set up the second array of spark plugs/coils and whatnot. So, of course, it's running on 4 plugs instead of 8. I reckon twin-spark working would be rather cool, does anyone have any comments on why something like Autronic (which I thought to be reasonably powerful) wouldn't work with it? cheers, Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 00:32:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:40:11 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:40:11 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 10:30 AM 12/10/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: >Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: >> My thought is that air shrouded (or "boosted") injectors would do >> the deed--and also improve atomization in the bargain--quite >> admirably. > >> The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" >> over a fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite >> capable of putting it into the port in a highly atomized state >> quite suddenly. > >Sounds oddly like an Orbital patent. > >In that, compressed air is used to _shear_ the fuel droplets to >ultra-fine size. > >I'm not at liberty to say any more. You don't need to. Too bad, I hate to spoil your attempt to sound like you work for the "agency" !! I have one of the Orbital injectors for a Mercury Marine DFI 200 outboard sitting within reach here. Really, though, it's just too easy to do the same thing with standard parts and some lathe made bits ! As I recall, Orbital's stuff and patents are intended for use with DIRECT--not port -- injection. Different art, as an outhouse lawyer would say. Besides which--patents don't restrict private, not for profit use of ANY art !!! (The other side of the intellectual property laws which you and Petie seem to have so much trouble with!) Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Mon Dec 10 00:38:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:42:32 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:42:32 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb Vgnd Bill Shaw wrote: > > The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The > schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd > but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 > volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make > that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? Sounds like you have a short somewhere, or perhaps your R12 is too big, or R13 too small - they should be the same value (10k). Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 00:34:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:46:11 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:46:11 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re[3]: Fuel Atomisation >GH> I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is the answer >GH> for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to do that with >GH> conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence of "direct" injectors >GH> may make it easier to accomplish this before long. > >I had thought about that before when I was looking at water injection >nozzles, and wondered why fuel injectors werent built with some form >of air being fired at the stream to make it finer, I had put it off as >one of those "there must be a reason" things. As usual, the most probable "reason" is likely $$$ and bean counters ! Greg > >-- >Best regards, > Bob ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 00:46:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:46:43 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:46:43 -0800 From: "Andrew R. Ghali" Subject: Thanks for the EFI! Well, I hate to do things twice, but I will this time. I dropped off the DIY_EFI list back in the days of Garfield, EGOR and ION; when the signal to noise ratio went negative like it has now. I rejoined the list after more than 2 years hoping that things had improved but I see that they have not. The name-calling, chest thumping and other assorted rubbish between grown men is pathetic. Most of the regulars seem incapable of being civil, much less maintaining a simple conver- sation. Sure, some may know a lot about some subjects but NOBODY knows enough to justify these attitudes and belligerence. Screw you. And some of this noise even makes me ashamed to be an American - wake up and smell the coffee. I thought the list was to be moderated; either way it has not improved. All I wanted to do was be able to apply my enginnering skills to my hobby; I don't do EFI for work, I do it for fun, but this is not fun. At all. Goody bye. Andrew ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 00:49:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:49:31 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 00:49:31 -0800 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM From: "Bernd Felsche" > Is it true that septics have to learn the names of all the States > and their capitals, as well as the Presidents because they're > expected to be illiterate? :-) No, we in the US do not teach our "septics" anything. We flush our toilets and the shit just runs into them. FR Wilk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 01:01:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:01:05 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:01:05 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM 944Technologist tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > The basis of law in the USA is very different to that of Australian > > law. Unfortunately, the opiate of the masses is mis-programmaing > > many Australians to the US way of law and justice which not just > > creates confusion, but also places the offenders neck-deep in > > manure. Even lawyers get confused. > In Oz, you and your lawyers are all confused because they watch > reruns of L.A. LAW? Not me personally. Others are sucked into trash-TV. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 00:48:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:05:31 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:05:31 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM (LARGE snip) >Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if >you could achieve it. Your knowlege of thermo is exceeded only by your knowlege of the law, Bernd !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Sun Dec 9 10:17:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:08:14 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:08:14 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, -> Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the -> subject -> line. Hardly any effort, is it? Subject line? Oh, those. Belief that a subject line actually describes a message is often found in conjunction with belief in the Tooth Fairy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Sun Dec 9 12:00:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:09:37 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:09:37 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers -> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better -> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a -> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). Running throttled, steady state - yes. A TBI system can match a carburetor under those conditions, but a port injection setup can't. Conventional Bendix-type injectors do a poor job of atomization, and too much of their output is in gobbets too big to be fully consumed during the power stroke, and the unburned portion goes out the exhaust valve. This is not normally an issue for EFI cars since most of them use catalytic convertors and the fuel is burned in the convertor, keeping it hot enough to function when exhaust flow is low. Just because it's new and complicated doesn't mean EFI is better under every condition. Eventually rail pressures will get high enough to do a better job of atomization, but right now all injectors are pretty much the same. Part-throttle cruise is where carbs and TBIs rule, but that doesn't play much of a part in EPA smog or mileage testing. They assume everyone lives in an anthill of traffic. However, for some of us, part throttle cruise is the dominant driving mode. ==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? ============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 01:01:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:10:02 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:10:02 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark At 11:24 AM 12/10/01, Chris Waltham wrote: >Hi guys, > >A friend of mine recently bought an old Ford Escort with a Toyota 3T-GTE >engine in it. >It's the twin-spark flavour, turbocharged and non-intercooled. Anyway, it's >a twin-spark >engine, however it's been set up with Autronic engine management. Oddly, >the guy that >configured the Autronic (not it's owner, or me) didn't bother to set up the >second >array of spark plugs/coils and whatnot. So, of course, it's running on 4 >plugs instead >of 8. I reckon twin-spark working would be rather cool, does anyone have >any comments >on why something like Autronic (which I thought to be reasonably powerful) >wouldn't >work with it? > >cheers, > > >Chris I think the Autronic has four outputs suitable for ignition use. No reason I can think of why you couldn't trigger two plugs with one output--or even two plugs with different timing if using a maverick spark approach. Might need to use a separate CD or whatever ignition for each plug (or maverick pair) --the Autronic drivers might not be up to driving two coils. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Sun Dec 9 11:15:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:11:19 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:11:19 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, -> too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric -> pressure variations. My ThermoQuad has an aneroid enrichment system for altitude correction. A friend of mine has butted heads with Electromotive several times about the software for his very expensive (US$ 3,000 or so when he bought it) EFI. It only looks at baro on start-up, and he runs the car at Silver State speed events, which have a substantial difference in altitude between beginning and end. He has to program it way rich at start to prevent leanout at the finish line. Your aircraft carburetor example is bogus, in that aircraft carbs are designed for manual mixture control. The pilot is expected to know and set the mixture for idle, takeoff, and cruise, which are the only three modes an airplane typically runs in. You could add a bunch of electronics to do the same thing, but it'd dramatically multiply the chance of failure, not to mention requiring addition of more electrics than some light planes have to start with. All they need is a simple valve, so that's what they have. Throwing a few megaflops of microprocessor at an airplane engine won't improve its performance even a tiny bit. ==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? ============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 01:00:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:15:08 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:15:08 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 9:26 AM 12/10/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: [insults snipped] > >> Most carbys are not that good, and port injectors are not even close. > >What are the droplet sizes? At what airflow rates? From which jets? > On the same order as what comes from the Bosch air shrouded > injectors. eg--approx 8 microns on down. From both main and idle > circuits, not from the pump jets. Talking Webers here, not typical > carbys. Same order... same order as some non-air-shrouded injectors IIRC. I'll dig out their Bosch PNs and nominal operating pressures later. You also know that droplet size is related to pressure differential across the pintle, not the amount of airflow, as it is in a carb. > >Increased vapourization (due to the greater atomization you say > >occurs in a carb.) upstream of the inlet valve is going to help how? > Try reading what I said before , ... I did read what you said. You're limiting port injection to the regime of only injecting on a closed valve, which as you well know, is primarily to reduce HC emissions. > >> What this does is let the latent heat of the fuel (as well as of > >> any injected water, SHHHH!!) act as an internal coolant during the > >> compression stroke. Internal cooling during the compression stroke > > > >How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization > >process? > If you are too ignorant to calculate this for yourself, pound salt. I do know how to work it out; roughly. I knew how to work it out 25 years ago. It's a small amount compared to the total heat transfer. > Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing > >significant heat without running very rich mixtures. > Any heat removed _during _ the compression stroke is significant. > >You said something about BSFC? > Yep. Properly tuned DCOE's at WOT will beat conventional port > injectors every time. Significantly. At _WOT_. Which means what? The only situations where you nominally drive at WOT is in a drag race or on a banked circuit. Oh, and on a dyno. > >> reduces the negative work needed during that stroke, reduces the > >> peak temp of the cycle and the EGT, reduces the peak pressures > >> during the cycle, and reduces heat rejection to the water jackets > >> significantly as well. > >Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into > >a gas? > Again, I suggest you go to school if you wish to learn to do such > calculations. I have done them, ... I received my B.E. in 1983, having completed studies in 1982, including a non-significant amount of pratical engine design work at the Orbital Engine Company. You can check that out. Ask UWA and Orbital's CEO, Kim Schlunke, who was my supervising engineer at the time (78/79). He will probably remember, as do a number of other Engineers I worked with at the time. My main work was orbital engine disc valve airflow prediction (by computer model) and measurement in a test rig I co-engineered. I can tell you that much because that work is no longer under NDA. > >Removing an extra kW of heat from the coolant in a 200kW engine > >has always been a problem, hasn't it? > Not at all, ... > But if that kW of heat stays in the cylinder instead of going into > the cooling system, a given proprotion of it ends up going out the > business end of the crankshaft instead of through the cooling > system. But the heat doesn't stay in the head. You just said it there was no problem to remove the additonal heat. > Again--if you want to know how much, develop some competence, and > figure it out for yourself! > >> Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the > >> fuel throughout the charge, leading to better, faster > >> combustion (also more power and efficiency here). > >And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). > [snip] of the fact that detonation is a function of the > residence time of the end gasses at high temp/pressure conditions > ! Lemme see--if we _reduce_ the peak temp, peak pressure, and time > of burn, that sure oughtta increase the tendency to detonate, > oughtn't it??? Detonation is a function of several factors. A high rate of combustion leads to rapid secondary end-gas compression ahead of the flame front, increasing the propensity to knock. If the cylinder volume is not expanding fast enough to ameliorate the secondary compression, then knock will occur. > Not to mention the fact that a faster burn increases the basic > efficiency potential of the Otto cycle !! Which engines would that be that operate on the ideal Otto cycle? Peak gasoline efficiency is not by total combustion (pressure rise) at minimum volume. The efficiency of converting the cylinder pressure to crankshaft torque varies as a function of crank angle (and conrod to crank-throw ratios). You get a great deal more torque with a peak pressure after TDC. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Mon Dec 10 01:08:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:16:55 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:16:55 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Bernd Felsche wrote: > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. If you have a starter that engages the ring gear on one side (as per normal), and you're prepared to offset a reluctor pickup away from the wearing section of the ring gear, the major problem I see is picking up magnetic grunge from the bellhousing. In many respects, it's a better option than an optic setup on a converted distributor (BTDT). Having said that, I'm planning on a Hall pickup on the crankshaft toothed belt drive pulley for the camshafts of an AlfaSud (flat 4) I just need to take a small segment out of one of the 20 teeth to make a 20-1 "wheel". Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 01:10:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:24:18 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:24:18 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. Bruce From: "Bernd Felsche" Snippage > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if > you could achieve it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 01:20:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:33:29 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:33:29 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> Most port EFI designs deliberately injects the fuel onto the back > >> side of the _closed_ intake valves (or somewhere in that vicinity, > >They do so to meet emission requirements; specifically HC. There is > >a finite probability that some fuel droplets survive the combustion > >process and will only go out the exhaust pipe as they vapourize. > >Regardless of the mode of fuelling. > > The bigger the droplets, the higher that probability. Try taking a > peek at the HC emissions of a properly tuned engine equipped with > DCOE's. at WOT. It would appear that not many droplets survive , > at all, in this case !! In which production cars are DCOE used? Or is it only one-offs and after-market? > >If you don't have to comply with emission standards, you can open > >your injected whenever it pleases you. > > True. But only because typical injectors give terrible atomization. "Good enough" for the accountants and engineers to reach a compromise and make the buggers. :-) What injectors do you regard as "typical"? They do fortunately respond well to increases in operating pressure because of higher fuel flow velocity. > >> if they are lucky) at a point in time when there is little, if > >> any, air velocity in the port. This is done so that the heat in > >> the valve, combined with the reversion of exhaust gas into the > >> intake during overlap will _vaporize_ the fuel, and thus > >> _compensate_ for the (conventional) port injector's inability to > >> atomize it very well at all. > > > >Droplet sizes? > > Vary all over the place. Sometimes relatively huge. (100 micron, at least) > Do your own research!! Love to. Got a grant to hand around? > >> The heat that is taken from the intake valve to vaporize the fuel > >> is robbed from the next cycle. Thus the deterioration in thermal > >> efficiency. The vaporized fuel displaces a great deal more O2 in > >> the inlet charge than atomized liquid fuel does--thus the > >> deterioration in volumetric efficiency. > > > >Oh, it's robbed, is it? Basic thermal efficiency (Carnot) is > >determined by the hottest and coldest phases of the cycle. The > >greater the difference, the greater the amount of work that can be > >done and hence the greater the power output of the engine. > > Gee --Sounds as though you took a course in basic thermo after all > !! But cut the class where they explained that the cycle would > fall below the theoretical efficiency if the processes were not > perfectly adiabatic ! Nope. You missed the class where they explained that the Otto cycle didn't apply to real engines, did you? :-) I assume that there was a whole class on that over there. It was mentioned in passing in one of mine. > >Furthermore, injecting onto the back of the inlet valve cools the > >valve, reducing that as a being a catalyst point for detonation. [snip] > ... The intake valve is one of the cooler parts > of the chamber to begin with !! You mean NO heat is removed from the valve? The inlet valve may be the coolest part at the start of compression. However, it doesn't have to be the hottest part for it to be a site of detonation; all it needs is a high temperature and a protruding edge. The total gas energy is the key to detonation. Gases being moved and compressed at high velocity ahead of the flame front are most-susceptible when they encounter a hot obstruction. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 01:40:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:40:29 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:40:29 -0800 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Seeking a little advice on EFI project "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." wrote: > > hmm... and what about using the TB, sensors & fuel stuff from a GM engine, > is there an engine model suited well for stripping this things? Is there a GM > TB which is plug'n play to bolt on the Ford manifold? All those parts are a little to a lot different. There's no plug'n play interchange except for port style fuel injectors. > Chile (pretty southern, huh? :-) . > Here Ford was very absent from our vehicle market for many years (like from > 70-mid 90s) > GM is MUCH easier to find and the new parts are cheaper than Ford's. Check EBay. You might find someone auctioning off "complete" Ford EFI setups. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 01:40:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:40:29 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:40:29 -0800 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor Leon Rathburn wrote: > > I understand that to a point, however, wouldn't shielding in the system > prevent the 'phantom ghosts'? Of course that will depend on exactly where > you are getting it, but for the most part it should work, right? I've heard that one of Doc's cousins wants to visit you. His name is Murphy. Are you sure you want to trust your engine to _never_ having a glitch? -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 01:40:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:40:37 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:40:37 -0800 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #909 Jens Knickmeyer wrote: > > I recognized that the ECU sometimes tells a value of 1.85V. AFAIK, lambda > voltage > is limited by approx. [0.1V, 0.85V]. I tried to recognize any correlation > between lambda voltage and any other signal, but I couldn't. The 1.85V > occurr instead of the 0.85V I would have expected. The "lean" voltage of > 0.1V is reached in every cycle, no problem there. The 1.xx volts might be a data communication error: If the value is sent as two bytes, it could be that the value changes between the time that the high and low bytes are sampled by the diagnostic interface. Thinking in decimal, perhaps the voltage was 1.01 volts.* The interface sends the 1. part. Meanwhile, the voltage drops to 0.85. The interface then grabs the .85 part. Presto, your logger says 1.85. Early GM ECMs had this problem - it was corrected in the late 1980's. * Yes, that's a possible voltage. I have a carb'ed truck that likes to idle at say 1.08 volts. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 01:41:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:41:17 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:41:17 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation Interesting...I must admit that I had thought that, under part throttle, as the runner velocity was low it was better to inject at the narrowest point. I hadn't thought about whether the poorer atomisation would countermand this. I guess we are assuming here that a TBI system will have a larger ID than the carb as it will not need a venturi? Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us] Running throttled, steady state - yes. A TBI system can match a carburetor under those conditions, but a port injection setup can't. Part-throttle cruise is where carbs and TBIs rule, but that doesn't play much of a part in EPA smog or mileage testing. They assume everyone lives in an anthill of traffic. However, for some of us, part throttle cruise is the dominant driving mode. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 01:41:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:48:10 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:48:10 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation >> Again, I suggest you go to school if you wish to learn to do such >> calculations. I have done them, ... > >I received my B.E. in 1983, having completed studies in 1982, Ask UWA Had never heard of UWA before. My opinion of it just fell, though. Have ;a fair percentage of the student body and faculty been interbred with sheep, or is there some other problem??? So long as you wish to compare CV's: I appear to have had roughly 18 additional years over you in which to have forgotten my basic thermo, although the contents of our minds seem to have a different half life, not to mention where they appear to have started out. Perhaps you would like to contact Andy Schultz (Dean Emeritus of the Engineering School) or Al George (its current Dean) at Cornell University to check on my competence?? They both knew me quite reasonably well. I rather expect you may have heard of Cornell, even down there. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 01:35:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:48:35 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:48:35 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Peter Gargano tapped away at the keyboard with: > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. > If you have a starter that engages the ring gear on one side > (as per normal), and you're prepared to offset a reluctor pickup > away from the wearing section of the ring gear, the major problem > I see is picking up magnetic grunge from the bellhousing. In many > respects, it's a better option than an optic setup on a converted > distributor (BTDT). There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. They are designed for a very low duty cycle and life. Starter-engagement problems can cause some teeth to be damaged, resulting in a "jitter" if you're reading the teeth. Both faces of an involute gear are subject to wear, The timing will require some averaging. i.e. you can work around the foresee-able problems with extra effort elsewhere. > Having said that, I'm planning on a Hall pickup on the crankshaft > toothed belt drive pulley for the camshafts of an AlfaSud (flat 4) > I just need to take a small segment out of one of the 20 teeth to > make a 20-1 "wheel". Or drill a small hole into the edge or notch the inside rim so you don't have to "miss" a tooth! At least the drive pulley teeth don't get significant wear. Having the sensor ripped up if the timing belt snaps would be the least of your problems. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 01:40:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:49:19 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:49:19 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation, now just silliness If truth is no defense, why would that matter?. Or is the law just written as convient to you?. Seems like it shouldn't stop you from sharing EFI material. Bruce From: "Bernd Felsche" > I can tell you that much because that work is no longer under NDA. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 01:43:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:50:17 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:50:17 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM At 11:10 PM 12/9/01, Bruce wrote: >You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. >Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. >Bruce ROTFLMAO. Bashful !! Greg > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > >Snippage > >> Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if >> you could achieve it. > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 01:47:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:58:08 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 01:58:08 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question From: "Bernd Felsche" > There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a > hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. Might read some of the GM literature on that (hint, training literature on ignition systems). It's copywritted so I can't mention it directly. > Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. Have you read and compared (from various manufactureres) anything to support those statements, and would make them absolute truths?. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 02:01:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:12:33 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:12:33 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction,, tooth fairy From: "Dave Williams" Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, > -> Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > -> subject > -> line. Hardly any effort, is it? > Subject line? Oh, those. Belief that a subject line actually > describes a message is often found in conjunction with belief in the > Tooth Fairy. Whew, that was close, lil guys were poised to hit the reply key on that one. Bruce They're tired from actually working on EFI stuff all day, rather then just hitting reply to expound about "absolute truths". Someone woke Sleepy, and after listening to Bashful, he's saying 2+2 is about 4. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 02:02:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:13:29 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:13:29 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > At 10:30 AM 12/10/01, Bernd Felsche wrote: > >Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" > >> over a fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite > >> capable of putting it into the port in a highly atomized state > >> quite suddenly. > >Sounds oddly like an Orbital patent. > >In that, compressed air is used to _shear_ the fuel droplets to > >ultra-fine size. > >I'm not at liberty to say any more. > You don't need to. Too bad, I hate to spoil your attempt to sound > like you work for the "agency" !! If you've every worked in research for a private company, or did contract work for a research company where you are exposed to proprietary information and IP, you'd understand. See http://www.orbeng.com.au/orbital/aboutOrbital/history.htm for when OEC first started down the fuel-injection line (1978). You can probably read more in OEC's published papers (download from their site) than I feel comfortable divulging. Everything published has been vetted. I don't wish to add to the public knowledge at this time. > I have one of the Orbital injectors for a Mercury Marine DFI 200 > outboard sitting within reach here. > > Really, though, it's just too easy to do the same thing with > standard parts and some lathe made bits ! Of course they're easy to make. That's one of the hallmarks of good engineering. Another hallmark is that it really works as described. I can tell you in 4 years how they were "developed". > As I recall, Orbital's stuff and patents are intended for use with > DIRECT--not port -- injection. Not necessarily. There are a number of variants that can be applied to port injection as well. OCP DI is of course their flagship engine technology; along with integral spark. > Different art, as an outhouse lawyer would say. > > Besides which--patents don't restrict private, not for profit use > of ANY art !!! Heaven forbid. I wasn't saying anything like "don't do it because you might be infringing on a Patent". I was pointing out that it looked like a particular invention. You can also refer to the patented inventions of others to develop your own inventions and then patent the result; if your invention is sufficiently novel and a sufficient development of the original patent. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dcg1174@tntech.edu Mon Dec 10 02:05:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:13:36 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:13:36 -0300 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Fuel Atomisation I just want to say that i'm not taking sides, as one would say, with those who violated the user agreement(as an aside I'm genuinely puzzled because these people don't seem to see any harm or wrong in what they did). However, I'm probably sticking my nose where i shouldn't... but here goes anyway. Aparrently, the heat of vaporiztion for Gasoline @60 degrees F is 150 Btu/lb (ick, English units). The heat of combustion is aproximately 18,000-19,000 Btu/lb of fuel. (http://www.afdc.doe.gov/pdfs/fueltable.pdf) So, the heat of vaporization represesnts less than 1.0% of the total heat available due to combustion. Now also, if one heats the fuel prior to its entry to the combustion chamber, with energy from the previous combustion event, there is no net loss of heat to the cycle (unlike cooling losses) because the heat taken from one combustion event is added to the next. So in that respect, i don't see the disadvantage to "preheating" the fuel to vaporize it. However, I'm willing to defer on the issue of mixture cooling in the chamber due to vaporiztion. According to my estimates, it would seem that the vaporization of the fuel could lower the temperature of the mixture by as much as 23 degrees C. Significant? I would think so. But my "estimate" is very crude and I have no practical experience in this area (tho i soon will i think). As you (greg) are obviously an admirer of weber carbs, I'm wondering if maybe you could put the shoe on the other foot (so to speak) and talk to the issues of why carbs were abandoned in favor of EFI. And I'm aware that currently it is legislated that production cars be EFI, but i'm wondering about motorsports applications which chose to go EFI route(i suppose NASCAR and some drag racing would be notable exceptions). /dones flame suit/ David PS: am i correct that a carb which was setup to run at high altitude would run rich at sea level? or do i have that backwards? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 02:15:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:15:28 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:15:28 -0800 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Andrew, how true! I was just getting to think the same myself.... I don't know that many Americans (UK myself), but this stuff doesn't make me want to.... The EFi stuff is interesting, but there's getting less and less - I'm quite happy to hit the delete button, and often do, so i'm not even reading half of it.. Regards Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Andrew R. Ghali > Sent: 10 December 2001 08:46 > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Thanks for the EFI! > > > > Well, I hate to do things twice, but I will this time. I dropped off > the DIY_EFI list back in the days of Garfield, EGOR and ION; when the > signal to noise ratio went negative like it has now. I rejoined the > list after more than 2 years hoping that things had improved but I > see that they have not. The name-calling, chest thumping and other > assorted rubbish between grown men is pathetic. Most of the regulars > seem incapable of being civil, much less maintaining a simple conver- > sation. Sure, some may know a lot about some subjects but NOBODY knows > enough to justify these attitudes and belligerence. Screw you. And > some of this noise even makes me ashamed to be an American - wake up > and smell the coffee. > > I thought the list was to be moderated; either way it has not improved. > All I wanted to do was be able to apply my enginnering skills to my > hobby; I don't do EFI for work, I do it for fun, but this is not fun. > At all. > > Goody bye. > > Andrew > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From scathontiphat@hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 02:06:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:16:29 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:16:29 -0300 From: "Santi Udomkesmalee" Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor >The engine we just acquired is a CBR600 F4i. It has a factory magnetic >reluctor cam sensor. I haven't pulled the valve cover to see how it works >yet, but it is located on the non-driven side of the cam and the wires exit >through a rubber grommet between the head and the valve cover. if you get a chance to look inside, I'd love to hear how they set up the cam sensor. -santi _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Mon Dec 10 02:21:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:27:05 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:27:05 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[3]: Sensor Question Hello Greg, One of my main reasons for using the distributor was ease of installation, as at the moment I dont really have anywhere where I can go accessing flywheels etc. What about off the front of the cam? The car is a 240/260z (depending on if I can get a 240 at a reasonable price). Would that be more accurate than from the distributor drive? Monday, December 10, 2001, 1:12:23 PM, you wrote: GH> At 10:12 AM 12/10/01, Bob - Uni wrote: >>Hello Greg, >> >>GH> I didn't see crank angle on your list. >>I was going to use the cam angle for that (actually, I was going to >>rip the guts out of a distributor, whack in a chopper wheel and use >>an opto setup) GH> Hard to get much timing accuracy that way, 60 -2 tooth wheels for crank GH> position seem to be the approach of choice lately. GH> Seems to me that, other than the existence of canned code for 60-2 wheels, GH> that ring gear teeth ought to be able to do pretty well, acting in concert GH> with two, three, four, or six crank position sensors (depending on how GH> many pots you are dealing with), and a cam position sensor. But, of course, GH> this means three Hall effect sensor inputs. Doing all of the crank position GH> work off of the flywheel pretty much eliminates torsion vibrations, and GH> gear and/or timing chain lash as a source of error. GH> Greg GH> Believes in DIY to do _better_ --not necessarily to mimic the factory for GH> less! :-) >> >> Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au GH> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- GH> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) GH> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 02:17:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:31:29 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:31:29 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a > > hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. > Might read some of the GM literature on that (hint, training > literature on ignition systems). It's copywritted so I can't > mention it directly. You just did mention it. Copyright prevents you from making copies beyond fair use. The GM literture would be similar to the lit. used by Volkswagen and hence proprietary? In that case, it's restricted by much more than Copyright - you'd have to physically sign an agreement not to divulge details before being allowed to see the literature. > > Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. > Have you read and compared (from various manufactureres) anything > to support those statements, and would make them absolute truths?. I'll rely on you as being the font of absolute truth as befits a self-appointed deity. Machinery design and engineering practice dictate the complexity and hence the cost of machining gears. A low-duty, low-load gear requires nowhere near the machining accuracy as those inside a transmission; the duty cycle is so low, that the ring gear isn't even lubricated. If the machined and worn jitter of tooth signals is of the same order as the crank speed variations, then an averaging filter to eliminate jitter will also conceal initial crank speed variations. On the practical side, Bosch abandoned the idea of using the flywheel teeth in deference to a dedicated timing wheel, after initial production and trials of Motronic. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 02:32:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:32:57 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:32:57 -0800 From: Arnaud Westenberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Bernd Felsche wrote: > How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization process? > Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing significant > heat without running very rich mixtures. Running very rich mixtures to aid cooling is quite a common strategy, especially in racing applications. So delaying vaporization until the charge is in the cylinder, without the need to go extra rich, would result in the benefits Greg mentioned. > Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into a > gas? >> Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the fuel >> throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion (also >> more power and efficiency here). > And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). The faster flame propagation would expose the end gasses _shorter_ to the increased temp/pressures, hence reduce the tendency to knock. Besides the vaporization heat absorbed by the fuel during compression, the faster burn rate of the more homogeneous distributed fuel allows for more ignition retard. Obviously the retard results in lower compression end pressures and temperatures, reducing the tendency to knock. ___ Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 02:22:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:32:57 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:32:57 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > (LARGE snip) > >Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if > >you could achieve it. > > Your knowlege of thermo is exceeded only by your knowlege of the > law, Bernd !! Far be it from me to crack the shell of your insular universe. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 02:25:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:36:32 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:36:32 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Snippage > > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if > > you could achieve it. > You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. > Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of Australian law. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Mon Dec 10 02:32:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:40:41 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:40:41 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Off topic Speaking of the tooth fairy, some people get older and grow up. Then there are those people that get older but refuse to grow up! 'Nuf said. Dave Williams wrote: > > -> Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > -> subject > -> line. Hardly any effort, is it? > > Subject line? Oh, those. Belief that a subject line actually > describes a message is often found in conjunction with belief in the > Tooth Fairy. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 02:35:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:44:33 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:44:33 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Sensor Question > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > > There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a > > > hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. > > Might read some of the GM literature on that (hint, training > > literature on ignition systems). It's copywritted so I can't > > mention it directly. > You just did mention it. Copyright prevents you from making copies > beyond fair use. > The GM literture would be similar to the lit. used by Volkswagen and > hence proprietary? In that case, it's restricted by much more than > Copyright - you'd have to physically sign an agreement not to > divulge details before being allowed to see the literature. So now you are advocating disclosing copywritten material yet when you mention email, it's a different matter. Rather then confuse the issue because of your statments, I'll just let things stand as I first stated them. > > > Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. > > Have you read and compared (from various manufactureres) anything > > to support those statements, and would make them absolute truths?. > I'll rely on you as being the font of absolute truth as befits a > self-appointed deity. Off on tangents again, > Machinery design and engineering practice dictate the complexity and > hence the cost of machining gears. A low-duty, low-load gear > requires nowhere near the machining accuracy as those inside a > transmission; the duty cycle is so low, that the ring gear isn't > even lubricated. If you had the above referenced materials, you'd see what errors there are in your assumptions. > If the machined and worn jitter of tooth signals is of the same > order as the crank speed variations, then an averaging filter to > eliminate jitter will also conceal initial crank speed variations. > On the practical side, Bosch abandoned the idea of using the > flywheel teeth in deference to a dedicated timing wheel, after > initial production and trials of Motronic. So from Bosch's experience you make a generate statement for all manufacurers, OK, fine. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 02:44:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:44:42 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:44:42 -0800 From: Arnaud Westenberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann wrote: >> but what are the differences between timed sefi and batch efi/tbi, >> wrt the vaporization issue? > My thought is that air shrouded (or "boosted") injectors would do the > deed--and also improve atomization in the bargain--quite admirably. > > The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" over a > fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite capable of > putting it into the port in a highly atomized state quite suddenly. Ok, I can see that this would aid atomization, but how does _current_ sequential injection looks like? I assume, it's injecting at IVO, but how come it is advocated as improving HC emmisions as atomization isn't any better than with normal batch injection? Does is solely rely on the exhaust back flow then? How does it solve the problems that are the entire reason for squirting on the back of a closed valve? ___ Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jfdavis@epix.net Mon Dec 10 02:35:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:47:14 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:47:14 -0300 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Mass Market EFI (was: Intake manifold construction, Dave Williams wrote: > -> too far). This implies carbs do not compensate for atmospheric > -> pressure variations. > > My ThermoQuad has an aneroid enrichment system for altitude correction. Try to keep up with the subject before you post. Bruce said Bernoulli principle compensates for density/temp/humididty. I disagreed. Your TQ example supports my claim. Thanks, but it wasn't necessary. > Your aircraft carburetor example is bogus, in that aircraft carbs are No, it served its purpose quite well. Proof by counterexample was the point. > valve, so that's what they have. Throwing a few megaflops of > microprocessor at an airplane engine won't improve its performance even > a tiny bit. Who wants to improve an airplane's performance? I'll keep my carb and magnetos on my airplane, thank you. The point was, EFI can do some things carbs can't... it's not my fault Electromotive sucks for $3k. Jon Davis ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 02:38:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:48:19 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:48:19 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> Again, I suggest you go to school if you wish to learn to do such > >> calculations. I have done them, ... > >I received my B.E. in 1983, having completed studies in 1982, > Ask UWA > Had never heard of UWA before. My opinion of it just fell, though. Well, go and trot off and find out about it. It's been around for a number of years. http://www.uwa.edu.au > So long as you wish to compare CV's: No. I don't have a CV. It's too long and tedious. Now zip up your pants. > I appear to have had roughly 18 additional years over you in which > to have forgotten my basic thermo, although the contents of our > minds seem to have a different half life, not to mention where > they appear to have started out. I couldn't imagine anybody would still have such insular and fixed attitudes and ignorance of the world around their tiny place at the age of 60 or more. But you almost have me convinced. > Perhaps you would like to contact Andy Schultz (Dean Emeritus of > the Engineering School) or Al George (its current Dean) at Cornell > University to check on my competence?? They both knew me quite > reasonably well. Americans seem so easy to impress. > I rather expect you may have heard of Cornell, even down there. Yeah, full of hype-masters. :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Mon Dec 10 02:46:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:52:14 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 02:52:14 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thread drift , tooth fairy Bruce, you're my kinda guy! :) Bruce wrote: > > From: "Dave Williams" > Subject: Re: Thread drift (was: Intake manifold construction, > > -> Then you admit the topic has changed. Simple enuf, just change the > > -> subject > > -> line. Hardly any effort, is it? > > > Subject line? Oh, those. Belief that a subject line actually > > describes a message is often found in conjunction with belief in the > > Tooth Fairy. > > Whew, that was close, lil guys were poised to hit the reply key on that one. > Bruce > They're tired from actually working on EFI stuff all day, rather then > just hitting reply to expound about "absolute truths". > Someone woke Sleepy, and after listening to Bashful, he's saying 2+2 is > about 4. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clayb@sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 10 03:13:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:22:09 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:22:09 -0300 From: clayb Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) > Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:24:24 +0800 > From: Chris Waltham > Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark The Autronics has four ignition outputs, so it can fire up to eight cylinders using wasted spark. You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines adjust the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. I don't believe the Autronics is programmed to do this. While we're on the subject of impossible tasks for aftermarket ECU's... I want one that can control Chevy's new "power on demand", where you turn off un-needed cylinders, and close the valves, leaving a near-lossless airspring, and fantastic part throttle fuel economy with a V8. - Lifespeed > Hi guys, > > A friend of mine recently bought an old Ford Escort with a Toyota 3T-GTE > engine in it. > It's the twin-spark flavour, turbocharged and non-intercooled. Anyway, it's > a twin-spark > engine, however it's been set up with Autronic engine management. Oddly, > the guy that > configured the Autronic (not it's owner, or me) didn't bother to set up the > second > array of spark plugs/coils and whatnot. So, of course, it's running on 4 > plugs instead > of 8. I reckon twin-spark working would be rather cool, does anyone have > any comments > on why something like Autronic (which I thought to be reasonably powerful) > wouldn't > work with it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 03:08:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:22:36 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:22:36 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Subject: Re: Sensor Question > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > > > There are 8 edges for timing in a 4-cylinder engine using a > > > > hall-effect pickup in a distributor. They are accurately-machined. > > > Might read some of the GM literature on that (hint, training > > > literature on ignition systems). It's copywritted so I can't > > > mention it directly. > > You just did mention it. Copyright prevents you from making copies > > beyond fair use. > > The GM literture would be similar to the lit. used by Volkswagen and > > hence proprietary? In that case, it's restricted by much more than > > Copyright - you'd have to physically sign an agreement not to > > divulge details before being allowed to see the literature. > So now you are advocating disclosing copywritten material yet when you > mention email, it's a different matter. The concept of Copyright has been explained before. Email communications to an individual _also_ carries a reasonable expectation of privacy. If it's not published, no Copyright exists. For any correspondence to be published, it is the publisher's responsibility to ensure that the correspondent approves of publication. > Rather then confuse the issue because of your statments, I'll just > let things stand as I first stated them. > > Machinery design and engineering practice dictate the complexity and > > hence the cost of machining gears. A low-duty, low-load gear > > requires nowhere near the machining accuracy as those inside a > > transmission; the duty cycle is so low, that the ring gear isn't > > even lubricated. > > If you had the above referenced materials, you'd see what errors > there are in your assumptions. Try Morrison & Crossland's text on machinery, machinery handbooks, Bosch Automotive Handbook, ... > > If the machined and worn jitter of tooth signals is of the same > > order as the crank speed variations, then an averaging filter to > > eliminate jitter will also conceal initial crank speed variations. > > On the practical side, Bosch abandoned the idea of using the > > flywheel teeth in deference to a dedicated timing wheel, after > > initial production and trials of Motronic. > So from Bosch's experience you make a generate statement for all > manufacurers, OK, fine. Not all; just the ones willing to learn from somebody else's mistakes. Bosch ie OEM to the majority of European manufacturers, licences technology to North America and Japan. If the cost accountants tell the Engineers that they can't afford to put a separate timing wheel on a dispose-mobile, then the Engineers have to make do as best they can. Should the TPU of the available ECU require crank timing signals like that of a multi-tooth crank timing wheel, then the flywheel is the lowest-cost solution for manufacture as no ECU re-engineering is required. If the manufacturer values quality and performance, then a separate timing resolver is incorporated. Hence BMW, Volvo, Mercedes, Audi, etc., use of a separate device; because it performs better and is more reliable. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 03:13:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:23:11 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:23:11 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM > >> You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. >> Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > >In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. > >There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of >Australian law. Hadn't realized that you had law written by Gooney birds (or is it Kiki birds) ! Probably should have known better, though, given what has been done to your (God given) right to self defence (sic). Did, however, realize that your courts are not of competent jurisdiction here !! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 03:09:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:23:19 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:23:19 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: SPAM > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Snippage > > > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if > > > you could achieve it. > > You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. > > Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. The act of making false statements, and there are no absolute truths. All the lil guys are confused on that one. But again they had an entire day of working on EFI stuff. > There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of > Australian law. One of several volumes, a large book, or a scholarly one?. There is just so much lost in the translation from Australian to US. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 03:32:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:40:48 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:40:48 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) From: "clayb" Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) > > From: Chris Waltham > > Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark > You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines adjust > the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. I don't believe > the Autronics is programmed to do this. Might be noted on some it's an emission strategy. > While we're on the subject of impossible tasks for aftermarket ECU's... > I want one that can control Chevy's new "power on demand", where you > turn off un-needed cylinders, and close the valves, leaving a > near-lossless airspring, and fantastic part throttle fuel economy with a > V8. > - Lifespeed Ya, the first version was so bad I still have nightmares over it. It takes so much energy to move a car so far. I will be interesting to see what the cruise MPG actually numbers are. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos@sydney.net Mon Dec 10 03:27:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:40:56 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 03:40:56 -0300 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers On Sun, 9 Dec 2001, Dave Williams wrote: > -> So what you are saying is that carbs (I guess not all) have better > -> atomisation than port injection? and consequently lower BSFC? (As a > -> generalised statement - feel free to go into much detail). > > Running throttled, steady state - yes. A TBI system can match a > carburetor under those conditions, but a port injection setup can't. > Conventional Bendix-type injectors do a poor job of atomization, and too > much of their output is in gobbets too big to be fully consumed during > the power stroke, and the unburned portion goes out the exhaust valve. > This is not normally an issue for EFI cars since most of them use > catalytic convertors and the fuel is burned in the convertor, keeping it > hot enough to function when exhaust flow is low. > > Just because it's new and complicated doesn't mean EFI is better under > every condition. Eventually rail pressures will get high enough to do a > better job of atomization, but right now all injectors are pretty much > the same. > > Part-throttle cruise is where carbs and TBIs rule, but that doesn't > play much of a part in EPA smog or mileage testing. They assume > everyone lives in an anthill of traffic. However, for some of us, part > throttle cruise is the dominant driving mode. Ok, thanks for that. So do "conventional"[1] port injectors at any point in the rev/load range produce better fuel delivery then carbs? (I'm thinking 'result in lower BSFC' but possibly that is not entirely accurate?) (You did say "doesn't mean EFI is better under every condition" implying some conditions exist where efi is superior [without defining 'better']). (I'm presuming that the carbs' superiority only holds true for a small subset of available hardware, and does not extend to mass market carbs factory fitted to older non-performance cars - is that correct [in general]?). Does it follow that port injected engines without cats spit some amount of unburnt fuel out the exhaust? Apologies if the questions offend, but I'd like to improve my understanding rather then make erroneous deductions. Mos. [1] ie every day, mass market injectors. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 03:57:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:11:15 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:11:15 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > Subject: Re: SPAM > > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > > Snippage > > > > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence > > > > even if you could achieve it. > > > You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. > > > Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > > In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. > The act of making false statements, > and there are no absolute truths. Has little to do with truth or falsehood. Proving criminal libel is about establishing injury to the victim. > All the lil guys are confused on that one. But again they had an > entire day of working on EFI stuff. > > There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of > > Australian law. > One of several volumes, a large book, or a scholarly one?. IANAL. So I only have the one entitled (appropriately enough) "The Macquarie Easy Guide to Australian Law". A quick look at the intro to defamation points out that the libel is entitled to compensation without direct proof of loss or damage. Defence against (civil) defamation can be the truth in some States of Australia, but not in this case. Criminal libel is another matter. There, your only defence would be if the truth were also in the public interest. > There is just so much lost in the translation from Australian to US. The basis of law in the USA is very different to that of Australian law. Unfortunately, the opiate of the masses is mis-programmaing many Australians to the US way of law and justice which not just creates confusion, but also places the offenders neck-deep in manure. Even lawyers get confused. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 04:06:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:15:56 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:15:56 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "clayb" > > > From: Chris Waltham > > > Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark > > You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines > > adjust the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. > > I don't believe the Autronics is programmed to do this. > Might be noted on some it's an emission strategy. How so? GH stated very recently that you want combustion to happen as fast as possible. Over a large bore, multiple spark locations (or one very long one) would consume the end-gas more steadily. First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 04:17:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:29:07 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:29:07 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >> You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. > >> Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > >In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. > >There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of > >Australian law. > > Hadn't realized that you had law written by Gooney birds (or is > it Kiki birds) ! They are all "learned" folks who would take actions to protect their reputation. (Your knowledge of fauna is abysmal.) Is it true that septics have to learn the names of all the States and their capitals, as well as the Presidents because they're expected to be illiterate? :-) > Probably should have known better, though, given what has been > done to your (God given) right to self defence (sic). > Did, however, realize that your courts are not of competent > jurisdiction here !! Irrelevant. Damages can be claimed in an undefended case. What? You mean the USA isn't all like South Park? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chris@harvestroad.com Mon Dec 10 04:20:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:33:18 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:33:18 -0300 From: Chris Waltham Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) >First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. >i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs >at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front >to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. What if the sparks are at the same time? For the uninitiated.. Chris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 04:33:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:47:08 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 04:47:08 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark Chris Waltham tapped away at the keyboard with: > > >First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. > >i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs > >at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front > >to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. > What if the sparks are at the same time? For the uninitiated.. I don't know. It could be to develop the cylinder pressure more progressively instead of a single hit, depending on flame/engine speeds. What do Autronics say? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 05:01:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:01:11 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:01:11 -0800 From: =?US-ASCII?Q?Jorgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Autronic ECU and twin-spark If we assume that both plugs should fire at the same time (pretty safe assumption) then you would only need to duplicate the ignition used on half of the plugs now. If you are lucky enough to have one coil per plug you would only have to change to waste spark coils and change the coil arrangement setting in the Autronic. Each waste spark coil should fire one plug in the compression stroke and one in the exhaust stroke. It will not work well if you use both ends of the waste spark coil for one cylinder, the spark energy would then be shared evenly between the plugs. That is not the case if one of the sparks try to fire a more or less inactive cylinder. If you already run waste spark you only need to add duplicates of the coils and coil drivers. No parameter changes would be needed in the Autronic in this case. Both are simple modifications, the only reason not to do it is the additional cost for ignition parts. But since the car was non intercooled I think that the better distibution of the flame front is god sent. Jorgen Karlsson Gothenburg, Sweden. Chris wrote: > A friend of mine recently bought an old Ford Escort with a Toyota 3T-GTE > engine in it. > It's the twin-spark flavour, turbocharged and non-intercooled. > Anyway, it's > a twin-spark > engine, however it's been set up with Autronic engine management. Oddly, > the guy that > configured the Autronic (not it's owner, or me) didn't bother to > set up the > second > array of spark plugs/coils and whatnot. So, of course, it's running on 4 > plugs instead > of 8. I reckon twin-spark working would be rather cool, does anyone have > any comments > on why something like Autronic (which I thought to be reasonably > powerful) > wouldn't > work with it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 05:02:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:02:24 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:02:24 -0800 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Re[2]: Sensor Question I think on 80's Mortronic BMW's starter teeth (RPM ) and long peg on flywheel (position) where used. Sensors mounted to bellhousing. Peter Florance 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 10:07 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Re[2]: Sensor Question > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 05:05:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:05:00 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:05:00 -0800 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #926 > At 2:09 PM 12/9/01, efi_student wrote: > >Never been through the Eisenhower tunnel in Colorado on I-70 I see. Nor > >Wolf Creek Pass. Both are well over 6,000' above MSL. My 79 AMX with > >its marvelous Stromberg 2 barrel on an I-6 crawled through the > >Eisenhower tunnel at 35 mph even with 5 degrees timing advance. Jetted > >down to mains, and flew through at normal driving speeds. IME > >Carburetors have a dismal time compensating for altitude. I have tuned > >both cars and bikes with carburetors for living in Denver after living > >in Sacramento. Sac is about 12' above MSL, Denver is well known as the > >mile high city. Oddly, I needed bigger pilots and smaller mains to work > >properly at altitude. But then again, I was dealing with carburetors of > >a lesser design than the Webers. Mikuni flatslides, Keihin CRs, and the > >venerable Stromberg 2bbl are far less advanced. > > > >Lance > > > Lance--you are quite correct. See my earlier post. The main jet diameter > needs to vary with the fourth root of the air density ratio in order to > maintain a constant A/F ratio from any carby. > > Your need for a slightly richer idle jet is related to having less vacuum > at idle at altitude--since the idle circuit uses manifold vacuum (as > opposed to the choke, or venturi) to meter the fuel. However--this isn't > usually a problem IF you get the relationship between the transition > slot/holes and the edge of the butterflies correct at idle. > > EVEN with the correct A/F ratio and timing at altitude, you are going to be > down on power slightly less than would be indicated by the air density > ratio at altitude. (Slightly less because the less dense air does not lose > as much static pressure flowing through the ports at altitude!) > > Greg (home elevation, Steamboat Springs, =7250' MSL) > > (Loveland Pass, Trail Ridge road, Mt. Evans road, and Independence Pass are > even more fun that way than the Ike tunnel is, too!) :-) Independence Day Pass is one of 2 places my injected Aerostar van had trouble hauling my 17 foot trailer - it is definitely a doozey - and would be even starting at sea level!!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 05:11:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:11:39 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:11:39 -0800 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #926 > > Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:43:22 +1100 > From: Bob - Uni > Subject: Re[3]: Fuel Atomisation > > Hello Greg, > > GH> I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is the answer > GH> for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to do that with > GH> conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence of "direct" injectors > GH> may make it easier to accomplish this before long. > > I had thought about that before when I was looking at water injection > nozzles, and wondered why fuel injectors werent built with some form > of air being fired at the stream to make it finer, I had put it off as > one of those "there must be a reason" things. > > - -- > Best regards, > Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au > What about little "booster venturis" in the intake runners, right at the injector to speed up local air velocity? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 05:22:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:22:37 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:22:37 -0800 From: Kevin Wright Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 12/10/01: > > While we're on the subject of impossible tasks for aftermarket ECU's... > > I want one that can control Chevy's new "power on demand", where you >> turn off un-needed cylinders, and close the valves, leaving a >> near-lossless airspring, and fantastic part throttle fuel economy with a >> V8. >> - Lifespeed > >Ya, the first version was so bad I still have nightmares over it. Would that be the infamous Cadillac 4-6-8? Was recently in the wrecking yard, and nearly every Caddy there was either a 4-6-8 or the almost-as-bad HT4100. Of course, *I* was looking for one with the Caddy/Olds EFI to plop on my '70 Cutlass with the MegaSquirt. -- Kevin Wright krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 05:32:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:32:16 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:32:16 -0800 From: Kevin Wright Subject: Re: SPAM ...and lo, thus spake Bernd Felsche on 12/10/01: >Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> From: "Bernd Felsche" >> Snippage > >> > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if >> > you could achieve it. > >> You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. >> Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > >In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. > >There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of >Australian law. So, as I read it, telling the truth in Australia is illegal if it happens to 'hurt' somebody? Sheesh, I and I thought US law was f'd up! -- Kevin Wright krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 05:37:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:37:52 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:37:52 -0800 From: Kevin Wright Subject: RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) I hate to add a me-too, but I'm here trying to learn a little about EFI. So far I've learned that a number of Americans and Aussies don't get along, and there are several who have apparently approached godhood in there infinite wisdom and knowledge. On both sides, I might add. I think perhaps a moderator might be in order, but I can understand how one wouldn't want to wish *that* duty on anyone! That said, my delete key works well, also; and if that isn't enough - filters! krw ...and lo, thus spake Rich M on 12/10/01: >Andrew, how true! I was just getting to think the same myself.... I don't >know that many Americans (UK myself), but this stuff doesn't make me want >to.... >The EFi stuff is interesting, but there's getting less and less - I'm quite >happy to hit the delete button, and often do, so i'm not even reading half >of it.. >Regards >Rich > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On >> Behalf Of Andrew R. Ghali >> Sent: 10 December 2001 08:46 >> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >> Subject: Thanks for the EFI! >> >> >> >> Well, I hate to do things twice, but I will this time. I dropped off >> the DIY_EFI list back in the days of Garfield, EGOR and ION; when the >> signal to noise ratio went negative like it has now. I rejoined the >> list after more than 2 years hoping that things had improved but I >> see that they have not. The name-calling, chest thumping and other >> assorted rubbish between grown men is pathetic. Most of the regulars >> seem incapable of being civil, much less maintaining a simple conver- >> sation. Sure, some may know a lot about some subjects but NOBODY knows >> enough to justify these attitudes and belligerence. Screw you. And >> some of this noise even makes me ashamed to be an American - wake up >> and smell the coffee. >> >> I thought the list was to be moderated; either way it has not improved. >> All I wanted to do was be able to apply my enginnering skills to my >> hobby; I don't do EFI for work, I do it for fun, but this is not fun. >> At all. >> >> Goody bye. >> >> Andrew >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without >> the quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> >> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Kevin Wright krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From f_wilk@hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 05:26:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:52:19 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 05:52:19 -0300 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM From: "Bernd Felsche" > The basis of law in the USA is very different to that of Australian > law. Unfortunately, the opiate of the masses is mis-programmaing > many Australians to the US way of law and justice which not just > creates confusion, but also places the offenders neck-deep in > manure. Even lawyers get confused. In Oz, you and your lawyers are all confused because they watch reruns of L.A. LAW? FR Wilk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From andrewg@16paws.com Mon Dec 10 05:45:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:00:36 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:00:36 -0300 From: "Andrew R. Ghali" Subject: Thanks for the EFI! Well, I hate to do things twice, but I will this time. I dropped off the DIY_EFI list back in the days of Garfield, EGOR and ION; when the signal to noise ratio went negative like it has now. I rejoined the list after more than 2 years hoping that things had improved but I see that they have not. The name-calling, chest thumping and other assorted rubbish between grown men is pathetic. Most of the regulars seem incapable of being civil, much less maintaining a simple conver- sation. Sure, some may know a lot about some subjects but NOBODY knows enough to justify these attitudes and belligerence. Screw you. And some of this noise even makes me ashamed to be an American - wake up and smell the coffee. I thought the list was to be moderated; either way it has not improved. All I wanted to do was be able to apply my enginnering skills to my hobby; I don't do EFI for work, I do it for fun, but this is not fun. At all. Goody bye. Andrew ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 06:09:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:09:55 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:09:55 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Atomisation At 11:40 AM 12/10/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >Interesting...I must admit that I had thought that, under part throttle, >as the runner velocity was low it was better to inject at the narrowest >point. I hadn't thought about whether the poorer atomisation would >countermand this. > >I guess we are assuming here that a TBI system will have a larger ID >than the carb as it will not need a venturi? > >Bill I think Dave is more onto the point that there is sonic flow going past the edges of the throttle butterfly with a TBI at part throttle which does a pretty respectable job of atomizing the fuel. Greg > >-----Original Message----- >From: ext Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us] > Running throttled, steady state - yes. A TBI system can match a >carburetor under those conditions, but a port injection setup can't. > > Part-throttle cruise is where carbs and TBIs rule, but that doesn't >play much of a part in EPA smog or mileage testing. They assume >everyone lives in an anthill of traffic. However, for some of us, part >throttle cruise is the dominant driving mode. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 06:00:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:13:46 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:13:46 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM 944Technologist tapped away at the keyboard with: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > The basis of law in the USA is very different to that of Australian > > law. Unfortunately, the opiate of the masses is mis-programmaing > > many Australians to the US way of law and justice which not just > > creates confusion, but also places the offenders neck-deep in > > manure. Even lawyers get confused. > In Oz, you and your lawyers are all confused because they watch > reruns of L.A. LAW? Not me personally. Others are sucked into trash-TV. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From f_wilk@hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 05:43:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:14:18 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:14:18 -0300 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM From: "Bernd Felsche" > Is it true that septics have to learn the names of all the States > and their capitals, as well as the Presidents because they're > expected to be illiterate? :-) No, we in the US do not teach our "septics" anything. We flush our toilets and the shit just runs into them. FR Wilk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 06:22:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:22:37 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:22:37 -0800 From: skulte MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Ditto. I've been "forced" to read through the latest petty bickering because I'm actually learning. Among the 3 or 4 paragraphs of chest-thumping, there are the few sentences that are actually about EFI, not CV's, NDA's, penis size, etc... I learn from those few sentences, but its unfortunate that 90% of the post is insults and rebuttals. If anyone has insight on some combustion chamber designs for a twin turbo smallblock chevy, I'm beginning the parts-buying process for the new engine soon. Now back to your regularly scheduled bickering... ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs http://www.skulte.com Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > I hate to add a me-too, but I'm here trying to learn a little about > EFI. So far I've learned that a number of Americans and Aussies don't > get along, and there are several who have apparently approached > godhood in there infinite wisdom and knowledge. On both sides, I > might add. > I think perhaps a moderator might be in order, but I can understand > how one wouldn't want to wish *that* duty on anyone! > That said, my delete key works well, also; and if that isn't enough - filters! > > krw ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 06:31:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:31:20 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:31:20 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "clayb" > > > > From: Chris Waltham > > > > Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark > > > You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines > > > adjust the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. > > > I don't believe the Autronics is programmed to do this. > > Might be noted on some it's an emission strategy. > How so? Talk to Mazda. > GH stated very recently that you want combustion to happen as fast > as possible. Over a large bore, multiple spark locations (or one > very long one) would consume the end-gas more steadily. And? why mention what's just been covered. > First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. > i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs > at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front > to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. First instincts, are different from blind guessing in what way?. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 06:51:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:51:19 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:51:19 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation I must admit to have been hunting for some suitable injectors following some posts on another list about certain types having better spray patterns than others for non-port applications, but gave up when I decided that I was getting ahead of myself. I have a horrible feeling that this is one of these empirical trade-off areas where you end up trying umpteen different strategies and end up back where you started. Maybe Bruce is right with his Single P&H per cylinder/rotor position...... -----Original Message----- From: ext Greg Hermann [mailto:bearbvd@mindspring.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 2:13 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Atomisation At 11:40 AM 12/10/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >Interesting...I must admit that I had thought that, under part throttle, >as the runner velocity was low it was better to inject at the narrowest >point. I hadn't thought about whether the poorer atomisation would >countermand this. > >I guess we are assuming here that a TBI system will have a larger ID >than the carb as it will not need a venturi? > >Bill I think Dave is more onto the point that there is sonic flow going past the edges of the throttle butterfly with a TBI at part throttle which does a pretty respectable job of atomizing the fuel. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 06:57:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:57:31 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 06:57:31 -0800 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question One problem with using a distributor to generate timing is the jitter due to mechanical backlash in the drive. Many use some sort of helical gear arrangement off of the camshaft, often in common with the oil pump drive. Any wear in the system will result in timing innacuracies. To compensate, you would have to run a more conservative advance map. Using the starter ring gearteeth has some issues. The environment is not friendly; clutch dust, road dirt, water, bits of metal from the gearteeth, oil leaks (engine and transmission), heat, vibration, etc. The frequency of a 150 tooth gear at 9,000 RPM is 2250 Hz. So pulsewidth is around 440 microseconds. Since the ECU is already pretty busy, it may not appreciate handling an interrupt so often. That means some kind of frequency divider circuitry (and intermediary signal conditioning if you use a mag pickup). Well within the state of the art, just more bother. As for pickups, you have 3 main choices, opto, inductive, or hall. Both opto detectors and hall sensors must be able to handle the frequency (not all can). The opto emitter and detector, and the hall sensor are semiconductors, so you must specify parts capable withstanding the environment. An inductive sensor can handle the frequency, but the air gap may be critcal and require fine adjustment. The sensing edge of the ring gear may also require machining to insure that the runout is small enough to yield reliable operation. With an opto sensor, whether you choose a reflective or transmissive scheme, the obvious issue is obscurement of the beam by debris. An inductive or hall pickup can be affected by a buildup of ferrous dust or particles, since the sensor must be biased with a magnet to detect the teeth. Detection of TDC (or equivalent) can be accomplished by altering one tooth somehow, to give a detectably different waveform. If I was forced to make a choice, I'd probably go with inductive. The detector itself is more robust. To combat crud buidup, I would probably fashion a 'wiper' that would sweep the pickup each revolution. A small piece of teflon or whatnot on the tip of one geartooth (maybe 0.02-0.05" thick). Maybe spring load it so the root of the starter pinion gear could compress it during starts. Lucky for me, I'm not faced with such a choice. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 07:07:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:07:19 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:07:19 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 12:30 PM 12/10/01, Arnaud Westenberg wrote: >Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization process? > > Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing significant > > heat without running very rich mixtures. > >Running very rich mixtures to aid cooling is quite a common strategy, >especially in racing applications. So delaying vaporization until the >charge is in the cylinder, without the need to go extra rich, would >result in the benefits Greg mentioned. > > > Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into a > > gas? > > >> Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the fuel > >> throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion (also > >> more power and efficiency here). > > > And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). > >The faster flame propagation would expose the end gasses _shorter_ to >the increased temp/pressures, hence reduce the tendency to knock. > >Besides the vaporization heat absorbed by the fuel during compression, >the faster burn rate of the more homogeneous distributed fuel allows for > more ignition retard. Obviously the retard results in lower >compression end pressures and temperatures, reducing the tendency to knock. > >___ > >Arnaud Glad to see someone else understands, Arnie !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Mon Dec 10 06:40:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:07:24 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:07:24 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation Interesting...I must admit that I had thought that, under part throttle, as the runner velocity was low it was better to inject at the narrowest point. I hadn't thought about whether the poorer atomisation would countermand this. I guess we are assuming here that a TBI system will have a larger ID than the carb as it will not need a venturi? Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us] Running throttled, steady state - yes. A TBI system can match a carburetor under those conditions, but a port injection setup can't. Part-throttle cruise is where carbs and TBIs rule, but that doesn't play much of a part in EPA smog or mileage testing. They assume everyone lives in an anthill of traffic. However, for some of us, part throttle cruise is the dominant driving mode. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ludis@cruzers.com Sun Dec 9 07:44:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:07:29 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:07:29 -0300 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AW: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #909 Jens Knickmeyer wrote: > > I recognized that the ECU sometimes tells a value of 1.85V. AFAIK, lambda > voltage > is limited by approx. [0.1V, 0.85V]. I tried to recognize any correlation > between lambda voltage and any other signal, but I couldn't. The 1.85V > occurr instead of the 0.85V I would have expected. The "lean" voltage of > 0.1V is reached in every cycle, no problem there. The 1.xx volts might be a data communication error: If the value is sent as two bytes, it could be that the value changes between the time that the high and low bytes are sampled by the diagnostic interface. Thinking in decimal, perhaps the voltage was 1.01 volts.* The interface sends the 1. part. Meanwhile, the voltage drops to 0.85. The interface then grabs the .85 part. Presto, your logger says 1.85. Early GM ECMs had this problem - it was corrected in the late 1980's. * Yes, that's a possible voltage. I have a carb'ed truck that likes to idle at say 1.08 volts. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ludis@cruzers.com Sun Dec 9 07:36:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:08:05 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:08:05 -0300 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Seeking a little advice on EFI project "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." wrote: > > hmm... and what about using the TB, sensors & fuel stuff from a GM engine, > is there an engine model suited well for stripping this things? Is there a GM > TB which is plug'n play to bolt on the Ford manifold? All those parts are a little to a lot different. There's no plug'n play interchange except for port style fuel injectors. > Chile (pretty southern, huh? :-) . > Here Ford was very absent from our vehicle market for many years (like from > 70-mid 90s) > GM is MUCH easier to find and the new parts are cheaper than Ford's. Check EBay. You might find someone auctioning off "complete" Ford EFI setups. -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ludis@cruzers.com Sun Dec 9 07:46:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:22:27 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:22:27 -0300 From: Ludis Langens MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor Leon Rathburn wrote: > > I understand that to a point, however, wouldn't shielding in the system > prevent the 'phantom ghosts'? Of course that will depend on exactly where > you are getting it, but for the most part it should work, right? I've heard that one of Doc's cousins wants to visit you. His name is Murphy. Are you sure you want to trust your engine to _never_ having a glitch? -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 07:25:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:25:01 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:25:01 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) > >> > You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines >> > adjust the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. >> > I don't believe the Autronics is programmed to do this. > >> Might be noted on some it's an emission strategy. > >How so? > >GH stated very recently that you want combustion to happen as fast >as possible. Over a large bore, multiple spark locations (or one >very long one) would consume the end-gas more steadily. > >First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. >i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs >at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front >to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. A simpler way to say this might go as follows: If you have a given flame speed in the chamber, initiating the flame at two well chosen spots will cause the burn to be completed in much less time. A faster burn, and therefore a faster pressure rise require less overall advance, increase cycle efficiency, and often avoid or deter detonation. Then again, it might be useful to quote something I once heard Keith Duckworth say in re the 3 liter three plug per cylinder V-12 Maserati F1 engine in the garage at Watkins Glen: "If they couldn't get the fool thing to light with two plugs, what bloody hope do they have that a third one would be of any help??!!" Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 07:39:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:39:10 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:39:10 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM > >So, as I read it, telling the truth in Australia is illegal if it >happens to 'hurt' somebody? >Sheesh, I and I thought US law was f'd up! > >-- >Kevin Wright BINGO-- Why do I suspect that the source is the problem here?? :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rsrich@cwcom.net Mon Dec 10 07:14:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:40:53 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:40:53 -0300 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Andrew, how true! I was just getting to think the same myself.... I don't know that many Americans (UK myself), but this stuff doesn't make me want to.... The EFi stuff is interesting, but there's getting less and less - I'm quite happy to hit the delete button, and often do, so i'm not even reading half of it.. Regards Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Andrew R. Ghali > Sent: 10 December 2001 08:46 > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Thanks for the EFI! > > > > Well, I hate to do things twice, but I will this time. I dropped off > the DIY_EFI list back in the days of Garfield, EGOR and ION; when the > signal to noise ratio went negative like it has now. I rejoined the > list after more than 2 years hoping that things had improved but I > see that they have not. The name-calling, chest thumping and other > assorted rubbish between grown men is pathetic. Most of the regulars > seem incapable of being civil, much less maintaining a simple conver- > sation. Sure, some may know a lot about some subjects but NOBODY knows > enough to justify these attitudes and belligerence. Screw you. And > some of this noise even makes me ashamed to be an American - wake up > and smell the coffee. > > I thought the list was to be moderated; either way it has not improved. > All I wanted to do was be able to apply my enginnering skills to my > hobby; I don't do EFI for work, I do it for fun, but this is not fun. > At all. > > Goody bye. > > Andrew > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnaud@wanadoo.nl Mon Dec 10 08:42:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:00:36 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:00:36 -0300 From: Arnaud Westenberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann wrote: >> but what are the differences between timed sefi and batch efi/tbi, >> wrt the vaporization issue? > My thought is that air shrouded (or "boosted") injectors would do the > deed--and also improve atomization in the bargain--quite admirably. > > The fuel injector could put the fuel into a small "pre-chamber" over a > fairly long pulse width, and then compressed air is quite capable of > putting it into the port in a highly atomized state quite suddenly. Ok, I can see that this would aid atomization, but how does _current_ sequential injection looks like? I assume, it's injecting at IVO, but how come it is advocated as improving HC emmisions as atomization isn't any better than with normal batch injection? Does is solely rely on the exhaust back flow then? How does it solve the problems that are the entire reason for squirting on the back of a closed valve? ___ Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 08:00:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:00:39 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:00:39 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Turbo Chubby parts >If anyone has insight on some >combustion chamber designs for a twin turbo smallblock chevy, I'm >beginning the parts-buying process for the new engine soon. Now back to >your regularly scheduled bickering... > >------------------ >Andris Skulte I would suggest using heads with "heart" shaped chambers with the plugs angled toward the exhaust valves, and setting the squish/quench clearance as tight as you dare. Aluminium heads will generally allow almost a full point more compression for a given fuel quality/;boost level without getting into detonation. Forged 4032 alloy (the lower expansion one compared to 2018) pistons are a good way to go. Internal coatings, particularly on the piston crowns, are helpful. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnaud@wanadoo.nl Mon Dec 10 08:30:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:01:42 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:01:42 -0300 From: Arnaud Westenberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Bernd Felsche wrote: > How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization process? > Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing significant > heat without running very rich mixtures. Running very rich mixtures to aid cooling is quite a common strategy, especially in racing applications. So delaying vaporization until the charge is in the cylinder, without the need to go extra rich, would result in the benefits Greg mentioned. > Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into a > gas? >> Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the fuel >> throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion (also >> more power and efficiency here). > And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). The faster flame propagation would expose the end gasses _shorter_ to the increased temp/pressures, hence reduce the tendency to knock. Besides the vaporization heat absorbed by the fuel during compression, the faster burn rate of the more homogeneous distributed fuel allows for more ignition retard. Obviously the retard results in lower compression end pressures and temperatures, reducing the tendency to knock. ___ Arnaud ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 08:33:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:33:54 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:33:54 -0800 From: George Dickey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: MAP Sensor Hi I'm looking a making a programmable ECU for my Mazda MX-5, anyone worked with one of these before? Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as the MX-5 has an AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the restriction). I know that a NZ company called Link sell MAP sensors, but I was hoping to get one a bit cheaper than what their UK distributor asks (about 100 GBP). Any suggestions welcome. Thanks George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 08:43:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:43:11 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 08:43:11 -0800 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Constipated Carb Project Constipated Carb ( " Plugged Up" ) is underway. RV uses 292 Ford Y-Block V8 and a dual plane 4 barrel manifold. Main fuel unit and components is a butt simple vacuum secondary holy shit holly 4 barrel. With modifications. Idle jets plugged. Accelerator pump removed. Transitions sealed. Mains leaned back. Very simple EFI that takes its cue from the carb TPS and from EGO ( I'll be stealing Dr Bruces design and adopting it. Why can I do that - because I asked first, and will give Bruce everything about it and it will not appear on this list unless, if after it works and its given back to Bruce - Bruce himself wants to publish it ) and maybe a misfire defecation complication. EFI for idle, early transition and mixture trim. Carb for low mid to full throttle - to take full advantage of atomization of venturii action without losing tunability of EFI. House Propane will also be used and controlled. Gas propane in several steps controlled by solenoid valve. Controller based on adaption of antique german injection system. Electronics research starts after christmas vacation to find small simple chip - either atmel or basic stamp pic. Butt simple control logic laid out enough to reduce to silicon after choosing chip. With luck running this summer - if Rosa lets me have enough time to thimk. For control logic - check the archives. I've blathered enough about its elements on this list and right now just want to build it rather than spar with the dweebshits. If it works, I'll consult with some other Dark Siders and maybe allow it to be publicly stolen because since Rosa isn't into whips and chains, I really need to be flogged and abused for trying to do something for someone. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 09:07:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:07:42 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:07:42 -0800 From: Peter Florance MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor I played with Flying Miata turbo kit on a 2000 MX5 and I think they used Link piggy back ecu for fuel, ignition and turbo control. It was pretty easy to work with and the owner is pleased with it. Peter Florance -----Original Message----- From: George Dickey [SMTP:georged@lsil.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:33 AM To: diy_efi Subject: MAP Sensor Hi I'm looking a making a programmable ECU for my Mazda MX-5, anyone worked with one of these before? Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as the MX-5 has an AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the restriction). I know that a NZ company called Link sell MAP sensors, but I was hoping to get one a bit cheaper than what their UK distributor asks (about 100 GBP). Any suggestions welcome. Thanks George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 09:44:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:44:53 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:44:53 -0800 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Atomization vs Vaporization Revist Ideal Gas Laws. The absorbtion of heat in the intake tract and the cylinder prior to combustion is not to affect the energy release of combustion, it is to both reduce the work of induction and to increase the amount of the inducted charge. The heat of vaporization of fuel is large with respect to the inducted air mass and thus can cause significant changes in the temperature and thus total quantity of inlet charge. Liquid fuel atomized to 10 microns or less ( you will see that number many times ) burns not as a liquid - droplet by droplet - as essentially identical to a pre-mixed gas. A liquid "vaporized" has transitions to a gas state - with a significant size change. Water expands approx 1800 times going to steam - fuel significantly less, but the resultant vapor molecule is orders of magnitude greater in size than the liquid. Atomized - preferably to 10 micron or less - fuel absorbs heat - thus cooling the intake charge and increasing the fresh charge inductable - without appreciatory changing the size of the fuel particle Vaporization the fuel absorbs the heat, but since a state change is involved, it greatly expands the space occupied by the fuel. The benefits of cooling are offset by the loss of space by vaporization. Atomize - not vaporize. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 09:47:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:47:11 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 09:47:11 -0800 From: Robert Liu MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor You should be able to get a map sensor from a gm vehicle or dealer. Try electromotive's website (http://www.getfuelinjected.com/), and look under the installation directions for the TEC2. They have the GM part#'s for 1,2, and 3 bar map sensors. Bob --- George Dickey wrote: > Hi > > I'm looking a making a programmable ECU for my Mazda > MX-5, anyone > worked with one of these before? > > Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as > the MX-5 has an > AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the > restriction). > > I know that a NZ company called Link sell MAP > sensors, but I was > hoping to get one a bit cheaper than what their UK > distributor asks > (about 100 GBP). > > Any suggestions welcome. > > Thanks > > George > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ===== ------------------------------------------------------------ Robert Liu bob_a_liu@yahoo.com ICQ# 22765210 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 10:06:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:06:14 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:06:14 -0800 From: Jeffrey Engel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomization vs Vaporization Is 10 microns the magic number for water as well? Jeffrey Engel --- Robert Harris wrote: > Revist Ideal Gas Laws. > > The absorbtion of heat in the intake tract and the > cylinder prior to > combustion is not to affect the energy release of > combustion, it is to both > reduce the work of induction and to increase the > amount of the inducted > charge. > > The heat of vaporization of fuel is large with > respect to the inducted air > mass and thus can cause significant changes in the > temperature and thus total > quantity of inlet charge. > > Liquid fuel atomized to 10 microns or less ( you > will see that number many > times ) burns not as a liquid - droplet by droplet - > as essentially identical > to a pre-mixed gas. > > A liquid "vaporized" has transitions to a gas state > - with a significant size > change. Water expands approx 1800 times going to > steam - fuel significantly > less, but the resultant vapor molecule is orders of > magnitude greater in size > than the liquid. > > Atomized - preferably to 10 micron or less - fuel > absorbs heat - thus cooling > the intake charge and increasing the fresh charge > inductable - without > appreciatory changing the size of the fuel particle > > Vaporization the fuel absorbs the heat, but since a > state change is involved, > it greatly expands the space occupied by the fuel. > The benefits of cooling > are offset by the loss of space by vaporization. > > Atomize - not vaporize. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 10:17:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:17:53 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:17:53 -0800 From: w.shawsr@att.net Subject: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't read my post completely. GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe even report back to the list??? My previous post stated: I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem quite right. Maybe someone could shed some light? The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From audserv@exis.net Mon Dec 10 09:49:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:18:02 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:18:02 -0300 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Re[2]: Sensor Question I think on 80's Mortronic BMW's starter teeth (RPM ) and long peg on flywheel (position) where used. Sensors mounted to bellhousing. Peter Florance 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bernd Felsche > Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 10:07 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Re[2]: Sensor Question > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jorgen.m.karlsson@home.se Mon Dec 10 10:00:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:18:05 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:18:05 -0300 From: =?US-ASCII?Q?Jorgen_Karlsson?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Autronic ECU and twin-spark If we assume that both plugs should fire at the same time (pretty safe assumption) then you would only need to duplicate the ignition used on half of the plugs now. If you are lucky enough to have one coil per plug you would only have to change to waste spark coils and change the coil arrangement setting in the Autronic. Each waste spark coil should fire one plug in the compression stroke and one in the exhaust stroke. It will not work well if you use both ends of the waste spark coil for one cylinder, the spark energy would then be shared evenly between the plugs. That is not the case if one of the sparks try to fire a more or less inactive cylinder. If you already run waste spark you only need to add duplicates of the coils and coil drivers. No parameter changes would be needed in the Autronic in this case. Both are simple modifications, the only reason not to do it is the additional cost for ignition parts. But since the car was non intercooled I think that the better distibution of the flame front is god sent. Jorgen Karlsson Gothenburg, Sweden. Chris wrote: > A friend of mine recently bought an old Ford Escort with a Toyota 3T-GTE > engine in it. > It's the twin-spark flavour, turbocharged and non-intercooled. > Anyway, it's > a twin-spark > engine, however it's been set up with Autronic engine management. Oddly, > the guy that > configured the Autronic (not it's owner, or me) didn't bother to > set up the > second > array of spark plugs/coils and whatnot. So, of course, it's running on 4 > plugs instead > of 8. I reckon twin-spark working would be rather cool, does anyone have > any comments > on why something like Autronic (which I thought to be reasonably > powerful) > wouldn't > work with it? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clare@snyder.on.ca Mon Dec 10 10:05:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:21:20 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:21:20 -0300 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #926 > At 2:09 PM 12/9/01, efi_student wrote: > >Never been through the Eisenhower tunnel in Colorado on I-70 I see. Nor > >Wolf Creek Pass. Both are well over 6,000' above MSL. My 79 AMX with > >its marvelous Stromberg 2 barrel on an I-6 crawled through the > >Eisenhower tunnel at 35 mph even with 5 degrees timing advance. Jetted > >down to mains, and flew through at normal driving speeds. IME > >Carburetors have a dismal time compensating for altitude. I have tuned > >both cars and bikes with carburetors for living in Denver after living > >in Sacramento. Sac is about 12' above MSL, Denver is well known as the > >mile high city. Oddly, I needed bigger pilots and smaller mains to work > >properly at altitude. But then again, I was dealing with carburetors of > >a lesser design than the Webers. Mikuni flatslides, Keihin CRs, and the > >venerable Stromberg 2bbl are far less advanced. > > > >Lance > > > Lance--you are quite correct. See my earlier post. The main jet diameter > needs to vary with the fourth root of the air density ratio in order to > maintain a constant A/F ratio from any carby. > > Your need for a slightly richer idle jet is related to having less vacuum > at idle at altitude--since the idle circuit uses manifold vacuum (as > opposed to the choke, or venturi) to meter the fuel. However--this isn't > usually a problem IF you get the relationship between the transition > slot/holes and the edge of the butterflies correct at idle. > > EVEN with the correct A/F ratio and timing at altitude, you are going to be > down on power slightly less than would be indicated by the air density > ratio at altitude. (Slightly less because the less dense air does not lose > as much static pressure flowing through the ports at altitude!) > > Greg (home elevation, Steamboat Springs, =7250' MSL) > > (Loveland Pass, Trail Ridge road, Mt. Evans road, and Independence Pass are > even more fun that way than the Ike tunnel is, too!) :-) Independence Day Pass is one of 2 places my injected Aerostar van had trouble hauling my 17 foot trailer - it is definitely a doozey - and would be even starting at sea level!!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clare@snyder.on.ca Mon Dec 10 10:07:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:25:57 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:25:57 -0300 From: "Clare Snyder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #926 > > Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:43:22 +1100 > From: Bob - Uni > Subject: Re[3]: Fuel Atomisation > > Hello Greg, > > GH> I really think that air shrouding, or "boosting" of injectors is the answer > GH> for better atomization, though. Am plotting a way to do that with > GH> conventional injectors, but the beginning emergence of "direct" injectors > GH> may make it easier to accomplish this before long. > > I had thought about that before when I was looking at water injection > nozzles, and wondered why fuel injectors werent built with some form > of air being fired at the stream to make it finer, I had put it off as > one of those "there must be a reason" things. > > - -- > Best regards, > Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au > What about little "booster venturis" in the intake runners, right at the injector to speed up local air velocity? ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From krwright@wankel.net Mon Dec 10 10:20:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:34:13 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:34:13 -0300 From: Kevin Wright Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 12/10/01: > > While we're on the subject of impossible tasks for aftermarket ECU's... > > I want one that can control Chevy's new "power on demand", where you >> turn off un-needed cylinders, and close the valves, leaving a >> near-lossless airspring, and fantastic part throttle fuel economy with a >> V8. >> - Lifespeed > >Ya, the first version was so bad I still have nightmares over it. Would that be the infamous Cadillac 4-6-8? Was recently in the wrecking yard, and nearly every Caddy there was either a 4-6-8 or the almost-as-bad HT4100. Of course, *I* was looking for one with the Caddy/Olds EFI to plop on my '70 Cutlass with the MegaSquirt. -- Kevin Wright krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 10:35:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:35:52 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:35:52 -0800 From: Scott_Hay@notes.toyota.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: New EFI System Went to PRI last week and saw this system. I have not seen this name before and I was very impressed. I would get it if I were considering F.A.S.T. (formerly Speedpro), Autronic, etc. It is going on sale in the US for $985. Anybody have any experience? http://www.link-electro.co.nz Scott back to lurk/delete mode ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From krwright@wankel.net Mon Dec 10 10:30:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:48:07 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:48:07 -0300 From: Kevin Wright Subject: Re: SPAM ...and lo, thus spake Bernd Felsche on 12/10/01: >Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: >> From: "Bernd Felsche" >> Snippage > >> > Proving an "absolute truth" is impossible, and no defence even if >> > you could achieve it. > >> You've, got Doc scratching his head over that one. >> Drat, and now Bashful is saying, *2+2, IS 3*. > >In the matter of defamation, that is the law in Australia. > >There's a tome on my shelf covering this and other aspects of >Australian law. So, as I read it, telling the truth in Australia is illegal if it happens to 'hurt' somebody? Sheesh, I and I thought US law was f'd up! -- Kevin Wright krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From krwright@wankel.net Mon Dec 10 10:35:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:51:12 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 10:51:12 -0300 From: Kevin Wright Subject: RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) I hate to add a me-too, but I'm here trying to learn a little about EFI. So far I've learned that a number of Americans and Aussies don't get along, and there are several who have apparently approached godhood in there infinite wisdom and knowledge. On both sides, I might add. I think perhaps a moderator might be in order, but I can understand how one wouldn't want to wish *that* duty on anyone! That said, my delete key works well, also; and if that isn't enough - filters! krw ...and lo, thus spake Rich M on 12/10/01: >Andrew, how true! I was just getting to think the same myself.... I don't >know that many Americans (UK myself), but this stuff doesn't make me want >to.... >The EFi stuff is interesting, but there's getting less and less - I'm quite >happy to hit the delete button, and often do, so i'm not even reading half >of it.. >Regards >Rich > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On >> Behalf Of Andrew R. Ghali >> Sent: 10 December 2001 08:46 >> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >> Subject: Thanks for the EFI! >> >> >> >> Well, I hate to do things twice, but I will this time. I dropped off >> the DIY_EFI list back in the days of Garfield, EGOR and ION; when the >> signal to noise ratio went negative like it has now. I rejoined the >> list after more than 2 years hoping that things had improved but I >> see that they have not. The name-calling, chest thumping and other >> assorted rubbish between grown men is pathetic. Most of the regulars >> seem incapable of being civil, much less maintaining a simple conver- >> sation. Sure, some may know a lot about some subjects but NOBODY knows >> enough to justify these attitudes and belligerence. Screw you. And >> some of this noise even makes me ashamed to be an American - wake up >> and smell the coffee. >> >> I thought the list was to be moderated; either way it has not improved. >> All I wanted to do was be able to apply my enginnering skills to my >> hobby; I don't do EFI for work, I do it for fun, but this is not fun. >> At all. >> >> Goody bye. >> >> Andrew >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> ---------- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without >> the quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> >> > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Kevin Wright krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 11:06:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:06:44 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:06:44 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: New EFI System In reading ZONEFUEL, it looks like the fuel table is 6x16. Seems kind of small in my opinion. It would be interesting to see how the columns and rows are laid out. ie what increments they use Bruce From: Subject: New EFI System > Went to PRI last week and saw this system. I have not seen this name > before and I was very impressed. I would get it if I were considering > F.A.S.T. (formerly Speedpro), Autronic, etc. It is going on sale in the US > for $985. > Anybody have any experience? > http://www.link-electro.co.nz > Scott > back to lurk/delete mode ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 11:16:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:16:52 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:16:52 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Greg Hermann" Subject: Turbo Chubby parts > >If anyone has insight on some > >combustion chamber designs for a twin turbo smallblock chevy, I'm > >beginning the parts-buying process for the new engine soon. Now back to > >your regularly scheduled bickering... > >Andris Skulte > I would suggest using heads with "heart" shaped chambers with the plugs > angled toward the exhaust valves, and setting the squish/quench clearance > as tight as you dare. Aluminium heads will generally allow almost a full > point more compression for a given fuel quality/;boost level without > getting into detonation. Forged 4032 alloy (the lower expansion one > compared to 2018) pistons are a good way to go. Internal coatings, > particularly on the piston crowns, are helpful. > Greg And, spend some time smoothing out the chambers, and the edges where the chambers meet the headgasket surface. I routinely run 2-3 more PSI of boost then equal engines, on pump gas, and I'd imagine even more on some sweet smelling fuel. Also, I consider WI done right as a must. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 11:17:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:17:07 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:17:07 -0800 From: Lasse Langwadt Christensen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann wrote: > snip > .. Much > more radical approaches to peak and hold are also possible. A _REALLY_ > competent, older EE guy once suggested to me that I take a peek at some of > the print hammer throw circuits that were used in the last and fastest > electromechanical teletypes and printers !! Apparently some of them were > using a (very) brief pulse of something on the order of 230 VDC to build > the flux in the hammer coil _quite_ quickly. Bob felt there was absolutely > no reason why such technology could not be applied to fuel injectors !! > > I rather tend to agree with him, but don't really have the electronic > espertise to pursue it a lot further! > snip The same approach has been used for stepper motor drivers, the idea being using as high a voltage as they'll take but limit the current to a safe value. The simplest way of doing it is to just use a high voltage and a series resistor to limit the current, in a car it would probably be a good idea to use something more advanced, e.g. PWM current limiting or switching between a high and a low voltage, because building a multi ampere, high voltage supply with 12 volt input is not that simple -Lasse ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 11:24:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:24:02 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:24:02 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor You might investigate just using an oem one that's been hac'd. I'll admit to not knowing anything about a MX-5, but there maybe much cheaper alternatives out there then $$$$ aftermarkets Bruce From: "George Dickey" Subject: MAP Sensor > I'm looking a making a programmable ECU for my Mazda MX-5, anyone > worked with one of these before? > Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as the MX-5 has an > AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the restriction). > I know that a NZ company called Link sell MAP sensors, but I was > hoping to get one a bit cheaper than what their UK distributor asks > (about 100 GBP). > George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 11:28:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:28:10 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:28:10 -0800 From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: No Subject ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 11:12:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:28:56 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:28:56 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Atomisation At 11:40 AM 12/10/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >Interesting...I must admit that I had thought that, under part throttle, >as the runner velocity was low it was better to inject at the narrowest >point. I hadn't thought about whether the poorer atomisation would >countermand this. > >I guess we are assuming here that a TBI system will have a larger ID >than the carb as it will not need a venturi? > >Bill I think Dave is more onto the point that there is sonic flow going past the edges of the throttle butterfly with a TBI at part throttle which does a pretty respectable job of atomizing the fuel. Greg > >-----Original Message----- From: ext Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us] > Running throttled, steady state - yes. A TBI system can match a >carburetor under those conditions, but a port injection setup can't. > > Part-throttle cruise is where carbs and TBIs rule, but that doesn't >play much of a part in EPA smog or mileage testing. They assume >everyone lives in an anthill of traffic. However, for some of us, part >throttle cruise is the dominant driving mode. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 11:33:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:33:21 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:33:21 -0800 From: "rr" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! I'm still at work, don't have a PCB here. However, if you are measuring a connection between the junction of R37 and C11 to the output of the 8 v reg, then there is most likely a solder short on the board. I don't believe that the layout is incorrrect as there are several of these units already in use. If you would double check and get back to me I may be able to help further. BobR. On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:16:48 +0000 w.shawsr@att.net wrote: >Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was >Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't >read my post completely. > >GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! > >Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe >even report back to the list??? > > >My previous post stated: > >I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around >with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem >quite >right. Maybe someone could shed some light? > >The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. > The >schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd >but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 >volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would >make >that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? > >Bill > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From skulte@skulte.com Mon Dec 10 11:22:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:40:44 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:40:44 -0300 From: skulte MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Ditto. I've been "forced" to read through the latest petty bickering because I'm actually learning. Among the 3 or 4 paragraphs of chest-thumping, there are the few sentences that are actually about EFI, not CV's, NDA's, penis size, etc... I learn from those few sentences, but its unfortunate that 90% of the post is insults and rebuttals. If anyone has insight on some combustion chamber designs for a twin turbo smallblock chevy, I'm beginning the parts-buying process for the new engine soon. Now back to your regularly scheduled bickering... ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs http://www.skulte.com Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > I hate to add a me-too, but I'm here trying to learn a little about > EFI. So far I've learned that a number of Americans and Aussies don't > get along, and there are several who have apparently approached > godhood in there infinite wisdom and knowledge. On both sides, I > might add. > I think perhaps a moderator might be in order, but I can understand > how one wouldn't want to wish *that* duty on anyone! > That said, my delete key works well, also; and if that isn't enough - filters! > > krw ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 11:31:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:50:13 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 11:50:13 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) From: "Bernd Felsche" Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) > Bruce tapped away at the keyboard with: > > From: "clayb" > > > > From: Chris Waltham > > > > Subject: Autronic ECU and twin-spark > > > You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines > > > adjust the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. > > > I don't believe the Autronics is programmed to do this. > > Might be noted on some it's an emission strategy. > How so? Talk to Mazda. > GH stated very recently that you want combustion to happen as fast > as possible. Over a large bore, multiple spark locations (or one > very long one) would consume the end-gas more steadily. And? why mention what's just been covered. > First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. > i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs > at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front > to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. First instincts, are different from blind guessing in what way?. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 12:09:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:09:17 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:09:17 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Bill, The one I built works fine, did not require any changes to make it work. However, I had to configure mine to interface to a data recorder on our drag car. The data recorder only has a 5V capability, so I could not power the WBO2 UEGO part of the board from my data recorder. I had to power both the Heater and the UEGO circuits from the same source. This means that I also needed to tie the two grounds together. J4 should be connected to J12 and should be GND in my case. Until I connected J12 to gnd I could not get the board to work either. The board is fine. Steve -----Original Message----- From: w.shawsr@att.net [mailto:w.shawsr@att.net] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:17 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't read my post completely. GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe even report back to the list??? My previous post stated: I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem quite right. Maybe someone could shed some light? The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clshore@yahoo.com Mon Dec 10 11:57:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:15:50 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:15:50 -0300 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question One problem with using a distributor to generate timing is the jitter due to mechanical backlash in the drive. Many use some sort of helical gear arrangement off of the camshaft, often in common with the oil pump drive. Any wear in the system will result in timing innacuracies. To compensate, you would have to run a more conservative advance map. Using the starter ring gearteeth has some issues. The environment is not friendly; clutch dust, road dirt, water, bits of metal from the gearteeth, oil leaks (engine and transmission), heat, vibration, etc. The frequency of a 150 tooth gear at 9,000 RPM is 2250 Hz. So pulsewidth is around 440 microseconds. Since the ECU is already pretty busy, it may not appreciate handling an interrupt so often. That means some kind of frequency divider circuitry (and intermediary signal conditioning if you use a mag pickup). Well within the state of the art, just more bother. As for pickups, you have 3 main choices, opto, inductive, or hall. Both opto detectors and hall sensors must be able to handle the frequency (not all can). The opto emitter and detector, and the hall sensor are semiconductors, so you must specify parts capable withstanding the environment. An inductive sensor can handle the frequency, but the air gap may be critcal and require fine adjustment. The sensing edge of the ring gear may also require machining to insure that the runout is small enough to yield reliable operation. With an opto sensor, whether you choose a reflective or transmissive scheme, the obvious issue is obscurement of the beam by debris. An inductive or hall pickup can be affected by a buildup of ferrous dust or particles, since the sensor must be biased with a magnet to detect the teeth. Detection of TDC (or equivalent) can be accomplished by altering one tooth somehow, to give a detectably different waveform. If I was forced to make a choice, I'd probably go with inductive. The detector itself is more robust. To combat crud buidup, I would probably fashion a 'wiper' that would sweep the pickup each revolution. A small piece of teflon or whatnot on the tip of one geartooth (maybe 0.02-0.05" thick). Maybe spring load it so the root of the starter pinion gear could compress it during starts. Lucky for me, I'm not faced with such a choice. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 12:21:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:21:13 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:21:13 -0800 From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB O2 Success I finished building my WB O2 unit with the list's circuit board and parts kits. As suggested I checked it out first with a light bulb in place of the sensor and everything looked good. Then fired it up with the sensor in place and it worked OK. Thanks again to all the list members who made this possible. I read 4.02V in free air with my Fluke DVM. Drove it down to 0.79V by flooding the sensor with propane from my plumber's torch (unlit of course). Then installed it on my carbureted motorcycle after warming the engine up from the ambient +3C temperature and read 1.82V at idle.........couldn't road test it under load because of the snow drifts in the way. Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and the LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate of heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? Thanks, Neil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 12:23:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:23:09 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:23:09 -0800 From: "Dave Mumert" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Hi The output of the 8V regulator goes between the leads of C11. My unpopulated board shows no connection. It would be easy to get a solder bridge between C11 and the trace running between the leads of C11. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "rr" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:28 PM Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! > > I'm still at work, don't have a PCB here. However, if you > are measuring a connection between the junction of R37 and > C11 to the output of the 8 v reg, then there is most > likely > a solder short on the board. > > I don't believe that the layout is incorrrect as there are > several of these units already in use. If you would double > check and get back to me I may be able to help further. > > > BobR. > > > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:16:48 +0000 > w.shawsr@att.net wrote: > >Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was > >Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't > >read my post completely. > > > >GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! > > > >Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe > >even report back to the list??? > > > > > >My previous post stated: > > > >I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around > >with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem > >quite > >right. Maybe someone could shed some light? > > > >The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. > > The > >schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd > >but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 > >volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would > >make > >that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? > > > >Bill > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 12:09:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:26:43 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:26:43 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation At 12:30 PM 12/10/01, Arnaud Westenberg wrote: >Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > How many Joules are going to be absorbed in the vapourization process? > > Unless you're evaporating water, you won't be removing significant > > heat without running very rich mixtures. > >Running very rich mixtures to aid cooling is quite a common strategy, >especially in racing applications. So delaying vaporization until the >charge is in the cylinder, without the need to go extra rich, would >result in the benefits Greg mentioned. > > > Reduces the pressure by how much to vapourize a liquid droplet into a > > gas? > > >> Good atomization also leads to more uniform distribution of the fuel > >> throughout the charge, leading to better, faster combustion (also > >> more power and efficiency here). > > > And increases the tendency to detonate (knock). > >The faster flame propagation would expose the end gasses _shorter_ to >the increased temp/pressures, hence reduce the tendency to knock. > >Besides the vaporization heat absorbed by the fuel during compression, >the faster burn rate of the more homogeneous distributed fuel allows for > more ignition retard. Obviously the retard results in lower >compression end pressures and temperatures, reducing the tendency to knock. > >___ > >Arnaud Glad to see someone else understands, Arnie !! Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Mon Dec 10 11:50:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:28:37 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:28:37 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation I must admit to have been hunting for some suitable injectors following some posts on another list about certain types having better spray patterns than others for non-port applications, but gave up when I decided that I was getting ahead of myself. I have a horrible feeling that this is one of these empirical trade-off areas where you end up trying umpteen different strategies and end up back where you started. Maybe Bruce is right with his Single P&H per cylinder/rotor position...... -----Original Message----- From: ext Greg Hermann [mailto:bearbvd@mindspring.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 2:13 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Atomisation At 11:40 AM 12/10/01, bill.shurvinton@nokia.com wrote: >Interesting...I must admit that I had thought that, under part throttle, >as the runner velocity was low it was better to inject at the narrowest >point. I hadn't thought about whether the poorer atomisation would >countermand this. > >I guess we are assuming here that a TBI system will have a larger ID >than the carb as it will not need a venturi? > >Bill I think Dave is more onto the point that there is sonic flow going past the edges of the throttle butterfly with a TBI at part throttle which does a pretty respectable job of atomizing the fuel. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 12:33:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:33:39 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:33:39 -0800 From: "rob files" Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? Hey all, I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different and I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? Thanks, Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 12:43:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:43:18 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:43:18 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? Just looking at the prices something is wrong. Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce From: "rob files" Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different and > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it can't be > beat!). > So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor 1994- > for CA only there are three listings; > Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 > Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 > Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > Rob ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 12:27:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:43:34 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:43:34 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Autronic ECU and twin-spark (and other unlikely ECU tasks) > >> > You can fire all your plugs. However, certain dual plug engines >> > adjust the timing of the two plugs independent from each other. >> > I don't believe the Autronics is programmed to do this. > >> Might be noted on some it's an emission strategy. > >How so? > >GH stated very recently that you want combustion to happen as fast >as possible. Over a large bore, multiple spark locations (or one >very long one) would consume the end-gas more steadily. > >First instinct would be that it's a knock-reduction strategy. >i.e. second spark ahead of the flame front so that combustion occurs >at a controlled time. You can ignite later to allow the flame front >to expand into a more-rapidly-increasing cylinder volume. A simpler way to say this might go as follows: If you have a given flame speed in the chamber, initiating the flame at two well chosen spots will cause the burn to be completed in much less time. A faster burn, and therefore a faster pressure rise require less overall advance, increase cycle efficiency, and often avoid or deter detonation. Then again, it might be useful to quote something I once heard Keith Duckworth say in re the 3 liter three plug per cylinder V-12 Maserati F1 engine in the garage at Watkins Glen: "If they couldn't get the fool thing to light with two plugs, what bloody hope do they have that a third one would be of any help??!!" Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 12:41:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:54:53 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 12:54:53 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: SPAM > >So, as I read it, telling the truth in Australia is illegal if it >happens to 'hurt' somebody? >Sheesh, I and I thought US law was f'd up! > >-- >Kevin Wright BINGO-- Why do I suspect that the source is the problem here?? :-) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 13:04:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:04:14 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:04:14 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? rob files wrote: > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different and > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it can't be > beat!). The following URL (make sure you get it all - your browser may break it up) references the HONDA part 36531-P07-003 and gives the correct result despite being shown as a Bosch product. This is called badge engineering. http://catalog.eautopartscatalog.com/partsbin/quote.jsp?product=36531-P07-003&Submit=GO&partner=partsbin&action=search&cart=&partnerSession=++&usemake= Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 13:06:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:06:51 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:06:51 -0800 From: "rob files" Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? >Just looking at the prices something is wrong. >Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a complete >product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I doubt they >would be selling them at or below cost. >Bruce One key piece of data I should have included is that the parts bin lists all three sensor as having the same list price; $186.52. I agree it sounds fishy, but I was hoping somebody had bought a bosch sensor and could give a part # to cross-reference. Maybe I'll have to buy it and give a report. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 13:16:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:16:15 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:16:15 -0800 From: CJYoungDET@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: EFI Information --part1_169.5699050.29467fed_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if there were any papers or such materials available that explain the fundamentals for EFI. Any help is greatly appreciated, Christopher Young --part1_169.5699050.29467fed_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if there were any papers or such materials available that explain the fundamentals for EFI.


            Any help is greatly appreciated,
                  Christopher Young --part1_169.5699050.29467fed_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 13:03:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:25:31 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:25:31 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Turbo Chubby parts >If anyone has insight on some >combustion chamber designs for a twin turbo smallblock chevy, I'm >beginning the parts-buying process for the new engine soon. Now back to >your regularly scheduled bickering... > >------------------ >Andris Skulte I would suggest using heads with "heart" shaped chambers with the plugs angled toward the exhaust valves, and setting the squish/quench clearance as tight as you dare. Aluminium heads will generally allow almost a full point more compression for a given fuel quality/;boost level without getting into detonation. Forged 4032 alloy (the lower expansion one compared to 2018) pistons are a good way to go. Internal coatings, particularly on the piston crowns, are helpful. Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 13:30:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:30:18 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:30:18 -0800 From: "Tony Bryant" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Toyota anything EFI late eighties/early nineties. Nice 5V supply, 0-4.2ish V out. simple to mount works well. I recently bought one for nz$10 at a wrecker. ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Dickey" To: "diy_efi" Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 5:33 AM Subject: MAP Sensor > > Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as the MX-5 has an > AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the restriction). > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 13:36:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:36:12 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:36:12 -0800 From: "Andrew Theurer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Carter, Thanks for sticking to the original thread :) The ring gear was brought up in efi332 a while back, and was discarded for a number of reasons including the concerns you wrote about below. One other valid concern: It's quite possible that a tooth will break off, making a difficult situtation much worse :( -Andrew > One problem with using a distributor to generate > timing is the jitter due to mechanical backlash in the > drive. Many use some sort of helical gear arrangement > off of the camshaft, often in common with the oil pump > drive. Any wear in the system will result in timing > innacuracies. To compensate, you would have to run a > more conservative advance map. > > Using the starter ring gearteeth has some issues. The > environment is not friendly; clutch dust, road dirt, > water, bits of metal from the gearteeth, oil leaks > (engine and transmission), heat, vibration, etc. The > frequency of a 150 tooth gear at 9,000 RPM is 2250 Hz. > So pulsewidth is around 440 microseconds. Since the > ECU is already pretty busy, it may not appreciate > handling an interrupt so often. That means some kind > of frequency divider circuitry (and intermediary > signal conditioning if you use a mag pickup). Well > within the state of the art, just more bother. > As for pickups, you have 3 main choices, opto, > inductive, or hall. > Both opto detectors and hall sensors must be able to > handle the frequency (not all can). The opto emitter > and detector, and the hall sensor are semiconductors, > so you must specify parts capable withstanding the > environment. An inductive sensor can handle the > frequency, but the air gap may be critcal and require > fine adjustment. The sensing edge of the ring gear may > also require machining to insure that the runout is > small enough to yield reliable operation. > > With an opto sensor, whether you choose a reflective > or transmissive scheme, the obvious issue is > obscurement of the beam by debris. > > An inductive or hall pickup can be affected by a > buildup of ferrous dust or particles, since the sensor > must be biased with a magnet to detect the teeth. > > Detection of TDC (or equivalent) can be accomplished > by altering one tooth somehow, to give a detectably > different waveform. > > If I was forced to make a choice, I'd probably go with > inductive. The detector itself is more robust. To > combat crud buidup, I would probably fashion a 'wiper' > that would sweep the pickup each revolution. A small > piece of teflon or whatnot on the tip of one geartooth > (maybe 0.02-0.05" thick). Maybe spring load it so the > root of the starter pinion gear could compress it > during starts. > > Lucky for me, I'm not faced with such a choice. > > Carter Shore > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.yahoo.com > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 13:42:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:42:07 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:42:07 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question While possible, it's not a common occurance on many cars. I can't recall having ever seen a tooth break off. Driving a car with a fubar'd starter can ruin some teeth, but again it's not a common occurance. I've seen many times more reluctor coils in a distributor break then flywheels fail. Some times you just have to play the odds. Bruce From: "Andrew Theurer" Subject: Re: Sensor Question > Thanks for sticking to the original thread :) > The ring gear was brought up in efi332 a while back, and was discarded for a > number of reasons including the concerns you wrote about below. One other > valid concern: It's quite possible that a tooth will break off, making a > difficult situtation much worse :( > -Andrew > > One problem with using a distributor to generate > > timing is the jitter due to mechanical backlash in the > > drive. Many use some sort of helical gear arrangement > > off of the camshaft, often in common with the oil pump > > drive. Any wear in the system will result in timing > > innacuracies. To compensate, you would have to run a > > more conservative advance map. > > Using the starter ring gearteeth has some issues. The > > environment is not friendly; clutch dust, road dirt, > > water, bits of metal from the gearteeth, oil leaks > > (engine and transmission), heat, vibration, etc. The > > frequency of a 150 tooth gear at 9,000 RPM is 2250 Hz. > > So pulsewidth is around 440 microseconds. Since the > > ECU is already pretty busy, it may not appreciate > > handling an interrupt so often. That means some kind > > of frequency divider circuitry (and intermediary > > signal conditioning if you use a mag pickup). Well > > within the state of the art, just more bother. > > As for pickups, you have 3 main choices, opto, > > inductive, or hall. > > Both opto detectors and hall sensors must be able to > > handle the frequency (not all can). The opto emitter > > and detector, and the hall sensor are semiconductors, > > so you must specify parts capable withstanding the > > environment. An inductive sensor can handle the > > frequency, but the air gap may be critcal and require > > fine adjustment. The sensing edge of the ring gear may > > also require machining to insure that the runout is > > small enough to yield reliable operation. > > > > With an opto sensor, whether you choose a reflective > > or transmissive scheme, the obvious issue is > > obscurement of the beam by debris. > > > > An inductive or hall pickup can be affected by a > > buildup of ferrous dust or particles, since the sensor > > must be biased with a magnet to detect the teeth. > > > > Detection of TDC (or equivalent) can be accomplished > > by altering one tooth somehow, to give a detectably > > different waveform. > > > > If I was forced to make a choice, I'd probably go with > > inductive. The detector itself is more robust. To > > combat crud buidup, I would probably fashion a 'wiper' > > that would sweep the pickup each revolution. A small > > piece of teflon or whatnot on the tip of one geartooth > > (maybe 0.02-0.05" thick). Maybe spring load it so the > > root of the starter pinion gear could compress it > > during starts. > > > > Lucky for me, I'm not faced with such a choice. > > > > Carter Shore ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 13:45:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:45:21 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:45:21 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: EFI Information Stated like that you'll be looking at papers for years before you get going. I'd suggest that you visit www.tunercat.com, and from there follow the links to the ecmguy's page, in there are several hac's of popular GM ECMs that would give an idea of what an ecm does. Also, at his site, are overviews of what items are editable in various ecms, and that would give some insight as where to head Bruce From: CJYoungDET@aol.com Subject: EFI Information Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if there were any papers or such materials available that explain the fundamentals for EFI. Christopher Young ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 13:56:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:56:20 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 13:56:20 -0800 From: "Jacky Chu" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? The correct one I got from the parts pin has Bosch part number 13246 on the box. ----- Original Message ----- From: "rob files" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:06 PM Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > > >Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > >Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a complete > >product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I doubt they > >would be selling them at or below cost. > >Bruce > > One key piece of data I should have included is that the parts bin lists all > three sensor as having the same list price; $186.52. > > I agree it sounds fishy, but I was hoping somebody had bought a bosch sensor > and could give a part # to cross-reference. > > Maybe I'll have to buy it and give a report. > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From georged@lsil.com Mon Dec 10 13:33:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:00:46 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:00:46 -0300 From: George Dickey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: MAP Sensor Hi I'm looking a making a programmable ECU for my Mazda MX-5, anyone worked with one of these before? Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as the MX-5 has an AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the restriction). I know that a NZ company called Link sell MAP sensors, but I was hoping to get one a bit cheaper than what their UK distributor asks (about 100 GBP). Any suggestions welcome. Thanks George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bob@bobthecomputerguy.com Mon Dec 10 13:52:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:02:19 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:02:19 -0300 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Constipated Carb Project Constipated Carb ( " Plugged Up" ) is underway. RV uses 292 Ford Y-Block V8 and a dual plane 4 barrel manifold. Main fuel unit and components is a butt simple vacuum secondary holy shit holly 4 barrel. With modifications. Idle jets plugged. Accelerator pump removed. Transitions sealed. Mains leaned back. Very simple EFI that takes its cue from the carb TPS and from EGO ( I'll be stealing Dr Bruces design and adopting it. Why can I do that - because I asked first, and will give Bruce everything about it and it will not appear on this list unless, if after it works and its given back to Bruce - Bruce himself wants to publish it ) and maybe a misfire defecation complication. EFI for idle, early transition and mixture trim. Carb for low mid to full throttle - to take full advantage of atomization of venturii action without losing tunability of EFI. House Propane will also be used and controlled. Gas propane in several steps controlled by solenoid valve. Controller based on adaption of antique german injection system. Electronics research starts after christmas vacation to find small simple chip - either atmel or basic stamp pic. Butt simple control logic laid out enough to reduce to silicon after choosing chip. With luck running this summer - if Rosa lets me have enough time to thimk. For control logic - check the archives. I've blathered enough about its elements on this list and right now just want to build it rather than spar with the dweebshits. If it works, I'll consult with some other Dark Siders and maybe allow it to be publicly stolen because since Rosa isn't into whips and chains, I really need to be flogged and abused for trying to do something for someone. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 14:16:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:16:38 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:16:38 -0800 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? I believe you need a sensor from a non-CA car. As we know, emission laws are stricter in CA because of smog problems. Therefore, I'm drawing the assumption that the CA version had to run stoich to maintain maximum catalyst efficiency and lowest emissions. You can easily detect stoich with a cheaper, switching narrow-band O2 sensor. In the other states, laws are a little less strict so I'm guessing it was a lean-burn civic VX in 49 states. Just to toss out a question, does anybody know what A:F they ran on the lean-burn side of that VX? I know it couldn't be that lean because its not stratified charge, but I am curious... Kevin >Hey all, > >I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different and >I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it can't be >beat!). > >So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor 1994- >for CA only there are three listings; > >Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 >Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 >Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > >Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > >Thanks, >Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From audserv@exis.net Mon Dec 10 14:09:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:32:04 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:32:04 -0300 From: Peter Florance MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor I played with Flying Miata turbo kit on a 2000 MX5 and I think they used Link piggy back ecu for fuel, ignition and turbo control. It was pretty easy to work with and the owner is pleased with it. Peter Florance -----Original Message----- From: George Dickey [SMTP:georged@lsil.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:33 AM To: diy_efi Subject: MAP Sensor Hi I'm looking a making a programmable ECU for my Mazda MX-5, anyone worked with one of these before? Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as the MX-5 has an AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the restriction). I know that a NZ company called Link sell MAP sensors, but I was hoping to get one a bit cheaper than what their UK distributor asks (about 100 GBP). Any suggestions welcome. Thanks George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 14:42:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:42:57 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:42:57 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Shock Sensor Question Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. Linear position sensor are on the order of $180 US per sensor, as you can see this gets expensive for 2 and maybe 4 sensors (front and back). I had thought of using a rotary pot, with a pulley, return spring, you get the idea, but from speaking with someone who mentioned they tried something similar, they said the rotary pots do not react fast enough for the frequencies that the shock moves. Instead of the Rotary Pot, how about interfacing an optical sensor from a PC mouse in its place, does anyone have an idea if the mouse optical sensor could be made to react fast enough? I have been thinking of maybe a different optical approach, but I do not know the easiest way to do this. Maybe a pulsed light / laser, to a reflector, measure the round trip time, speed of light should handle any frequencies that a shock can move at. Do some of you engineers out there have any good ideas that we could tackle to try to build a cheap way to measure shock position on a Drag race car. Thanks Steve F ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 14:52:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:52:41 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:52:41 -0800 From: Stephen Webb MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing I have an LM1815 "variable reluctance sensor amplifier" IC, which I believe is appropriate for my application. I am trying to use it to sense the ignition pulses from a Bosch hall sender distributor. I prototyped the suggested circuit, but was unable to get any meaningful output from it. Does anyone have any experience with these ICs, and if so are there any pitfalls that I might be in right now? (I either get seemingly uncorrelated triggers at a very high rate, or no triggering at all) Does the ground reference for the IC have to be the same as the one going into the distributor? TIA -Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 14:55:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:55:57 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 14:55:57 -0800 From: akallotte@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB assembly help This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ----__JNP_000_4b0f.0dca.3518 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is the first time I've built something like this, so bear with me. I've soldered on all the resistors, which was easy thanks to all the work put into the parts kit. I moved on to the caps and have had to learn how to read them. I'm still confused though. First, is the 22uf 25v cap in the parts kit for reference C5 (25uf 25v)? Next, C2 and C8 call for .1uf 25v, but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, and C14 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. Is the parts kit a little off or am I supposed to substitute something? Thanks for the help and for the project. ----__JNP_000_4b0f.0dca.3518 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is the first time I've built = something like=20 this, so bear with me. I've soldered on all the resistors, which was easy = thanks=20 to all the work put into the parts kit. I moved on to the caps and have had= to=20 learn how to read them. I'm still confused though. First, is the 22uf 25v = cap in=20 the parts kit for reference C5 (25uf 25v)? Next, C2 and C8 call for .1uf = 25v,=20 but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, and= C14=20 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. Is the parts= kit=20 a little off or am I supposed to substitute something? Thanks for the help = and=20 for the project. ----__JNP_000_4b0f.0dca.3518-- ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 15:02:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:02:14 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:02:14 -0800 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question There are small electric motors with integrated position sensors, you could mount one of them and use the position output. This is similar to your mouse idea only already packaged and maybe more rugged. Plus when you're ready for the big leagues you could drive the motor for active suspension control. --steve ps just kidding about the active control part. Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 15:04:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:04:40 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:04:40 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca wrote: > There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in parallel with R4). BobR. > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and the > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate of > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > Thanks, > Neil > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 15:06:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:06:44 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:06:44 -0800 From: "Huw Scourfield" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: EFI Information Bruce, all, do you ever read people's emails Bruce, this guy just wrote that he wants to "build his own efi system", not hack someone elses GM whatever; - not everyone lives in the good ol' US of A. Anyway does this really further the cause of diy efi? Huw ----- Original Message ----- From: Bruce To: Sent: 10 December 2001 21:45 Subject: Re: EFI Information > > Stated like that you'll be looking at papers for years before you get going. > I'd suggest that you visit www.tunercat.com, and from there follow the links > to the ecmguy's page, in there are several hac's of popular GM ECMs that > would give an idea of what an ecm does. Also, at his site, are overviews of > what items are editable in various ecms, and that would give some insight as > where to head > Bruce > > > > From: CJYoungDET@aol.com > Subject: EFI Information > Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am > interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have > experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if > there were any papers or such materials available that explain the > fundamentals for EFI. > Christopher Young > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bob_a_liu@yahoo.com Mon Dec 10 14:47:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:09:14 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:09:14 -0300 From: Robert Liu MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor You should be able to get a map sensor from a gm vehicle or dealer. Try electromotive's website (http://www.getfuelinjected.com/), and look under the installation directions for the TEC2. They have the GM part#'s for 1,2, and 3 bar map sensors. Bob --- George Dickey wrote: > Hi > > I'm looking a making a programmable ECU for my Mazda > MX-5, anyone > worked with one of these before? > > Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as > the MX-5 has an > AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the > restriction). > > I know that a NZ company called Link sell MAP > sensors, but I was > hoping to get one a bit cheaper than what their UK > distributor asks > (about 100 GBP). > > Any suggestions welcome. > > Thanks > > George > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ===== ------------------------------------------------------------ Robert Liu bob_a_liu@yahoo.com ICQ# 22765210 __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bob@bobthecomputerguy.com Mon Dec 10 14:54:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:12:52 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:12:52 -0300 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Atomization vs Vaporization Revist Ideal Gas Laws. The absorbtion of heat in the intake tract and the cylinder prior to combustion is not to affect the energy release of combustion, it is to both reduce the work of induction and to increase the amount of the inducted charge. The heat of vaporization of fuel is large with respect to the inducted air mass and thus can cause significant changes in the temperature and thus total quantity of inlet charge. Liquid fuel atomized to 10 microns or less ( you will see that number many times ) burns not as a liquid - droplet by droplet - as essentially identical to a pre-mixed gas. A liquid "vaporized" has transitions to a gas state - with a significant size change. Water expands approx 1800 times going to steam - fuel significantly less, but the resultant vapor molecule is orders of magnitude greater in size than the liquid. Atomized - preferably to 10 micron or less - fuel absorbs heat - thus cooling the intake charge and increasing the fresh charge inductable - without appreciatory changing the size of the fuel particle Vaporization the fuel absorbs the heat, but since a state change is involved, it greatly expands the space occupied by the fuel. The benefits of cooling are offset by the loss of space by vaporization. Atomize - not vaporize. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 15:13:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:13:37 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:13:37 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: WB O2 Success Neil, I power mine with a 16V system. Because of drag race issues, I needed it to heat up as fast as possible. Mine heats up in about 25 Sec. You can change the heat time by changing the heater current. The Notes are on the schematic, you will need to add some R's in Parallel to R4 to alter the Heater current. 1.5 Amps max is recommended. I think the warning was not to heat to fast or you can hurt the sensor. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca [mailto:Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 3:20 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: WB O2 Success I finished building my WB O2 unit with the list's circuit board and parts kits. As suggested I checked it out first with a light bulb in place of the sensor and everything looked good. Then fired it up with the sensor in place and it worked OK. Thanks again to all the list members who made this possible. I read 4.02V in free air with my Fluke DVM. Drove it down to 0.79V by flooding the sensor with propane from my plumber's torch (unlit of course). Then installed it on my carbureted motorcycle after warming the engine up from the ambient +3C temperature and read 1.82V at idle.........couldn't road test it under load because of the snow drifts in the way. Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and the LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate of heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? Thanks, Neil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jengeltx@yahoo.com Mon Dec 10 15:06:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:28:42 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:28:42 -0300 From: Jeffrey Engel MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomization vs Vaporization Is 10 microns the magic number for water as well? Jeffrey Engel --- Robert Harris wrote: > Revist Ideal Gas Laws. > > The absorbtion of heat in the intake tract and the > cylinder prior to > combustion is not to affect the energy release of > combustion, it is to both > reduce the work of induction and to increase the > amount of the inducted > charge. > > The heat of vaporization of fuel is large with > respect to the inducted air > mass and thus can cause significant changes in the > temperature and thus total > quantity of inlet charge. > > Liquid fuel atomized to 10 microns or less ( you > will see that number many > times ) burns not as a liquid - droplet by droplet - > as essentially identical > to a pre-mixed gas. > > A liquid "vaporized" has transitions to a gas state > - with a significant size > change. Water expands approx 1800 times going to > steam - fuel significantly > less, but the resultant vapor molecule is orders of > magnitude greater in size > than the liquid. > > Atomized - preferably to 10 micron or less - fuel > absorbs heat - thus cooling > the intake charge and increasing the fresh charge > inductable - without > appreciatory changing the size of the fuel particle > > Vaporization the fuel absorbs the heat, but since a > state change is involved, > it greatly expands the space occupied by the fuel. > The benefits of cooling > are offset by the loss of space by vaporization. > > Atomize - not vaporize. > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe > diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 15:33:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:33:53 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:33:53 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: EFI Information Yes, I did. Did you?. What better way to understand the fundamentals then to see what actually works. Once you see how things are done, you can make descisions about what you want to use or not. He asked a very basic guestion, and I replied with a basic answer. There is more to those sites then hacing, just in case you missed it, that info can be applied in many different ways. Bruce From: "Huw Scourfield" Subject: Re: EFI Information > Bruce, all, do you ever read people's emails Bruce, this guy just wrote that > he wants to "build his own efi system", not hack someone elses GM > whatever; - not everyone lives in the good ol' US of A. Anyway does this > really further the cause of diy efi? > Huw > From: Bruce nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: EFI Information > > Stated like that you'll be looking at papers for years before you get > going. > > I'd suggest that you visit www.tunercat.com, and from there follow the > links > > to the ecmguy's page, in there are several hac's of popular GM ECMs that > > would give an idea of what an ecm does. Also, at his site, are overviews > of > > what items are editable in various ecms, and that would give some insight > as > > where to head > > Bruce > > From: CJYoungDET@aol.com > > Subject: EFI Information > > Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am > > interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have > > experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if > > there were any papers or such materials available that explain the > > fundamentals for EFI. > > Christopher Young ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 15:33:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:33:55 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:33:55 -0800 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: WB O2 Success I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat the sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds and the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this properly and safely though. Kevin >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in >parallel with R4). > >BobR. > > > > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and >the > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate >of > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > > Thanks, > > Neil > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From w.shawsr@att.net Mon Dec 10 15:16:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:33:57 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:33:57 -0300 From: w.shawsr@att.net Subject: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't read my post completely. GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe even report back to the list??? My previous post stated: I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem quite right. Maybe someone could shed some light? The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 15:39:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:39:03 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:39:03 -0800 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing Steve, It could be that the input signal from the hall effect does not reach zero. Hall effect outputs often swing between two voltage levels which are both above ground. LM1815 requires that the input at least reaches 0V, preferably going negative. You could try capacitive coupling of the input signal to get a zero crossing signal. Cheers Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Stephen Webb > Sent: 10 December 2001 22:52 > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing > > > > I have an LM1815 "variable reluctance sensor amplifier" IC, which I > believe is appropriate for my application. I am trying to use it to sense > the ignition pulses from a Bosch hall sender distributor. > > I prototyped the suggested circuit, but was unable to get any meaningful > output from it. Does anyone have any experience with these ICs, and if so > are there any pitfalls that I might be in right now? (I either get > seemingly uncorrelated triggers at a very high rate, or no triggering at > all) > > Does the ground reference for the IC have to be the same as the one going > into the distributor? > > TIA > > -Steve > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 15:45:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:45:19 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:45:19 -0800 From: Eric Aos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question I saw some baluf (?) linear transducers specifically designed to go in the shocks of the new Cadillac's. Eric > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. > > Linear position sensor are on the order of $180 US per > sensor, as you can > see this gets expensive for 2 and maybe 4 sensors (front and back). > > I had thought of using a rotary pot, with a pulley, return > spring, you get > the idea, but from speaking with someone who mentioned they > tried something > similar, they said the rotary pots do not react fast enough for the > frequencies that the shock moves. Instead of the Rotary Pot, > how about > interfacing an optical sensor from a PC mouse in its place, > does anyone > have an idea if the mouse optical sensor could be made to > react fast enough? > > > I have been thinking of maybe a different optical approach, > but I do not > know the easiest way to do this. Maybe a pulsed light / laser, to a > reflector, measure the round trip time, speed of light should > handle any > frequencies that a shock can move at. > > Do some of you engineers out there have any good ideas that > we could tackle > to try to build a cheap way to measure shock position on a > Drag race car. > > Thanks > > Steve F > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Scott_Hay@notes.toyota.com Mon Dec 10 15:34:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:55:26 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:55:26 -0300 From: Scott_Hay@notes.toyota.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: New EFI System Went to PRI last week and saw this system. I have not seen this name before and I was very impressed. I would get it if I were considering F.A.S.T. (formerly Speedpro), Autronic, etc. It is going on sale in the US for $985. Anybody have any experience? http://www.link-electro.co.nz Scott back to lurk/delete mode ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 15:58:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:58:05 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:58:05 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB assembly help > akallotte@juno.com wrote: > > First, > is the 22uf 25v cap in the parts kit for reference C5 (25uf 25v)? Electrolytic capacitors are rated at a value of +/- 20% at best, sometimes worse. So, 25uFis a common substitute for the 22uF value. 22 uF is a preferred value, but many capacitor makers use the closest "logical" value. C1 (10 uF) is the only electro that really has an appreciable effect on the circuit's operation - it controls the "soft start" of the heater. C12 (3.3 uF) also has some effect, but is not as marked at C1. > Next, C2 and C8 call > for .1uf 25v, but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, > and C14 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. The 104 means 10 pF x 10000 (four zeros) or 100,000 or 0.1 uF (p=pico, u=micro). Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 16:00:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:00:55 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:00:55 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success You're stating that as an absolute fact?. You might be missing that the DIY is designed for the average guy to put together, which puts it in an entirely different category. It's not designed as a lab grade or commerical use item. It's just a DIY project. To compare it to anything else is just abusing it's design features. Bruce From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat the > sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than > that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds and > the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't > confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this > properly and safely though. > Kevin > >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts > >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the > >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in > >parallel with R4). > >BobR. > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and > >the > > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate > >of > > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > Thanks, > > > Neil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 16:10:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:10:50 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:10:50 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Mos wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: > > > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? > > At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. : ) > I don't live in > the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. > > Mos. > > PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. > Sorry for the Dee-lay. The car: http://www.lingenfelter.com/packages/427TT.htm An article about it's little brother: http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/2000/May/200005_roadtest_kngsn.xml?keywords=lingenfelter%20corvette (all one URL) There's a fair amount more reading material that can be found with search engines. Shannen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 16:27:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:27:44 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:27:44 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? This is correct. I just did a search through a Honda parts site, and the 49 state model is completely different and MUCH more expensive. Not just the sensor, but the whole exhaust set up. The NB sensor is cheap, that is what you are seeing for under $100. I also have some parts scouts looking for a better price than www.partsbin.com and so far, even with an enticement of a purchase of 10 or more units, no one seems to be able to best that price. BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the bounds of the agreement? Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Kevin _ Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 10:16 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? I believe you need a sensor from a non-CA car. As we know, emission laws are stricter in CA because of smog problems. Therefore, I'm drawing the assumption that the CA version had to run stoich to maintain maximum catalyst efficiency and lowest emissions. You can easily detect stoich with a cheaper, switching narrow-band O2 sensor. In the other states, laws are a little less strict so I'm guessing it was a lean-burn civic VX in 49 states. Just to toss out a question, does anybody know what A:F they ran on the lean-burn side of that VX? I know it couldn't be that lean because its not stratified charge, but I am curious... Kevin >Hey all, > >I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different >and I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it >can't be beat!). > >So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor >1994- for CA only there are three listings; > >Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen >Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 >Bosch $57.60 > >Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > >Thanks, >Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 16:06:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:29:00 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:29:00 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: New EFI System In reading ZONEFUEL, it looks like the fuel table is 6x16. Seems kind of small in my opinion. It would be interesting to see how the columns and rows are laid out. ie what increments they use Bruce From: Subject: New EFI System > Went to PRI last week and saw this system. I have not seen this name > before and I was very impressed. I would get it if I were considering > F.A.S.T. (formerly Speedpro), Autronic, etc. It is going on sale in the US > for $985. > Anybody have any experience? > http://www.link-electro.co.nz > Scott > back to lurk/delete mode ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 16:34:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:34:07 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:34:07 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question I'm not sure, but what about the ride height sensors used on an air-ride car ? Lincoln for example used a hall-effect sensor for determining ride height. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 3:42 PM Subject: Shock Sensor Question > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. > > Linear position sensor are on the order of $180 US per sensor, as you can > see this gets expensive for 2 and maybe 4 sensors (front and back). > > I had thought of using a rotary pot, with a pulley, return spring, you get > the idea, but from speaking with someone who mentioned they tried something > similar, they said the rotary pots do not react fast enough for the > frequencies that the shock moves. Instead of the Rotary Pot, how about > interfacing an optical sensor from a PC mouse in its place, does anyone > have an idea if the mouse optical sensor could be made to react fast enough? > > > I have been thinking of maybe a different optical approach, but I do not > know the easiest way to do this. Maybe a pulsed light / laser, to a > reflector, measure the round trip time, speed of light should handle any > frequencies that a shock can move at. > > Do some of you engineers out there have any good ideas that we could tackle > to try to build a cheap way to measure shock position on a Drag race car. > > Thanks > > Steve F > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 16:23:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:41:15 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:41:15 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor You might investigate just using an oem one that's been hac'd. I'll admit to not knowing anything about a MX-5, but there maybe much cheaper alternatives out there then $$$$ aftermarkets Bruce From: "George Dickey" Subject: MAP Sensor > I'm looking a making a programmable ECU for my Mazda MX-5, anyone > worked with one of these before? > Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as the MX-5 has an > AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the restriction). > I know that a NZ company called Link sell MAP sensors, but I was > hoping to get one a bit cheaper than what their UK distributor asks > (about 100 GBP). > George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From langwadt@ieee.org Mon Dec 10 16:18:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:45:01 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:45:01 -0300 From: Lasse Langwadt Christensen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fuel Atomisation Greg Hermann wrote: > snip > .. Much > more radical approaches to peak and hold are also possible. A _REALLY_ > competent, older EE guy once suggested to me that I take a peek at some of > the print hammer throw circuits that were used in the last and fastest > electromechanical teletypes and printers !! Apparently some of them were > using a (very) brief pulse of something on the order of 230 VDC to build > the flux in the hammer coil _quite_ quickly. Bob felt there was absolutely > no reason why such technology could not be applied to fuel injectors !! > > I rather tend to agree with him, but don't really have the electronic > espertise to pursue it a lot further! > snip The same approach has been used for stepper motor drivers, the idea being using as high a voltage as they'll take but limit the current to a safe value. The simplest way of doing it is to just use a high voltage and a series resistor to limit the current, in a car it would probably be a good idea to use something more advanced, e.g. PWM current limiting or switching between a high and a low voltage, because building a multi ampere, high voltage supply with 12 volt input is not that simple -Lasse ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org Mon Dec 10 16:28:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:45:18 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:45:18 -0300 From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: No Subject ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rrauscher@nni.com Mon Dec 10 16:28:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:45:27 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:45:27 -0300 From: "rr" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! I'm still at work, don't have a PCB here. However, if you are measuring a connection between the junction of R37 and C11 to the output of the 8 v reg, then there is most likely a solder short on the board. I don't believe that the layout is incorrrect as there are several of these units already in use. If you would double check and get back to me I may be able to help further. BobR. On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:16:48 +0000 w.shawsr@att.net wrote: >Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was >Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't >read my post completely. > >GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! > >Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe >even report back to the list??? > > >My previous post stated: > >I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around >with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem >quite >right. Maybe someone could shed some light? > >The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. > The >schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd >but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 >volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would >make >that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? > >Bill > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 16:16:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:47:27 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:47:27 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Greg Hermann" Subject: Turbo Chubby parts > >If anyone has insight on some > >combustion chamber designs for a twin turbo smallblock chevy, I'm > >beginning the parts-buying process for the new engine soon. Now back to > >your regularly scheduled bickering... > >Andris Skulte > I would suggest using heads with "heart" shaped chambers with the plugs > angled toward the exhaust valves, and setting the squish/quench clearance > as tight as you dare. Aluminium heads will generally allow almost a full > point more compression for a given fuel quality/;boost level without > getting into detonation. Forged 4032 alloy (the lower expansion one > compared to 2018) pistons are a good way to go. Internal coatings, > particularly on the piston crowns, are helpful. > Greg And, spend some time smoothing out the chambers, and the edges where the chambers meet the headgasket surface. I routinely run 2-3 more PSI of boost then equal engines, on pump gas, and I'd imagine even more on some sweet smelling fuel. Also, I consider WI done right as a must. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 16:49:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:49:32 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:49:32 -0800 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing I can't remember if Hall's have a bias that shows up at the output but the cap is probably the best way to insure the zero cross. You're probably not going to get the same shape as the magnetic sensor, but good enough to use, yes is my guess. Peter Florance 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Rich M > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 6:37 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing > > > Steve, > It could be that the input signal from the hall effect does not > reach zero. > Hall effect outputs often swing between two voltage levels which are both > above ground. LM1815 requires that the input at least reaches 0V, > preferably > going negative. You could try capacitive coupling of the input > signal to get > a zero crossing signal. > Cheers > Rich > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > > Behalf Of Stephen Webb > > Sent: 10 December 2001 22:52 > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing > > > > > > > > I have an LM1815 "variable reluctance sensor amplifier" IC, which I > > believe is appropriate for my application. I am trying to use > it to sense > > the ignition pulses from a Bosch hall sender distributor. > > > > I prototyped the suggested circuit, but was unable to get any meaningful > > output from it. Does anyone have any experience with these > ICs, and if so > > are there any pitfalls that I might be in right now? (I either get > > seemingly uncorrelated triggers at a very high rate, or no triggering at > > all) > > > > Does the ground reference for the IC have to be the same as the > one going > > into the distributor? > > > > TIA > > > > -Steve > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ---------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > > the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 16:55:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:55:55 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:55:55 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? ----- Original Message ----- From: "skulte" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:22 AM Subject: RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Ditto. I've been "forced" to read through the latest petty bickering > because I'm actually learning. Among the 3 or 4 paragraphs of > chest-thumping, there are the few sentences that are actually about EFI, > not CV's, NDA's, penis size, etc... I learn from those few > sentences, but its unfortunate that 90% of the post is insults and > rebuttals. > > If anyone has insight on some > combustion chamber designs for a twin turbo smallblock chevy, I'm > beginning the parts-buying process for the new engine soon. Now back to > your regularly scheduled bickering... > > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > http://www.skulte.com > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > I hate to add a me-too, but I'm here trying to learn a little about > > EFI. So far I've learned that a number of Americans and Aussies don't > > get along, and there are several who have apparently approached > > godhood in there infinite wisdom and knowledge. On both sides, I > > might add. > > I think perhaps a moderator might be in order, but I can understand > > how one wouldn't want to wish *that* duty on anyone! > > That said, my delete key works well, also; and if that isn't enough - filters! > > > > krw > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 16:57:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:57:45 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:57:45 -0800 From: "Jess Gypin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! If the new (second batch) of PCBs are the same as the first batch, then they work. Jess ----- Original Message ----- From: "rr" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:28 PM Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! > > I'm still at work, don't have a PCB here. However, if you > are measuring a connection between the junction of R37 and > C11 to the output of the 8 v reg, then there is most > likely > a solder short on the board. > > I don't believe that the layout is incorrrect as there are > several of these units already in use. If you would double > check and get back to me I may be able to help further. > > > BobR. > > > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:16:48 +0000 > w.shawsr@att.net wrote: > >Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was > >Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't > >read my post completely. > > > >GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! > > > >Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe > >even report back to the list??? > > > > > >My previous post stated: > > > >I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around > >with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem > >quite > >right. Maybe someone could shed some light? > > > >The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. > > The > >schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd > >but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 > >volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would > >make > >that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? > > > >Bill > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 17:13:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:13:20 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:13:20 -0800 From: Brian L Massey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:27:22 -0800 "efi_student" writes: > I have offered certain people an ... > assembled, tested unit sans sensor for ***cost of components***. ... > > The agreement I have made with them is that they MUST abide > by the user's agreement, AND report their > results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, > I think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's > agreement. > Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the > bounds of the agreement? > > Lance I can't speak for the diyWB team of course, but I'm personally very gratified to see your exceptional post, Lance. The spirit you exhibit above is I think just the kind of person the diyWB team was hoping to share their results with. Way to go. Recommend adding Lance to the roster of those that "get it". Just be sure you don't waste your generosity of spirit building them for people who well *could*, but are just too lazy to assemble it themselves. (But sounds like you've already been selective that way). Again, nice going. A few more like yourself and I might be tempted to reinstate my faith in and respect for mankind. :) BLM ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Mon Dec 10 17:04:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:28:17 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:28:17 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Bill, The one I built works fine, did not require any changes to make it work. However, I had to configure mine to interface to a data recorder on our drag car. The data recorder only has a 5V capability, so I could not power the WBO2 UEGO part of the board from my data recorder. I had to power both the Heater and the UEGO circuits from the same source. This means that I also needed to tie the two grounds together. J4 should be connected to J12 and should be GND in my case. Until I connected J12 to gnd I could not get the board to work either. The board is fine. Steve -----Original Message----- From: w.shawsr@att.net [mailto:w.shawsr@att.net] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:17 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't read my post completely. GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe even report back to the list??? My previous post stated: I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem quite right. Maybe someone could shed some light? The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca Mon Dec 10 17:20:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:39:00 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:39:00 -0300 From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB O2 Success I finished building my WB O2 unit with the list's circuit board and parts kits. As suggested I checked it out first with a light bulb in place of the sensor and everything looked good. Then fired it up with the sensor in place and it worked OK. Thanks again to all the list members who made this possible. I read 4.02V in free air with my Fluke DVM. Drove it down to 0.79V by flooding the sensor with propane from my plumber's torch (unlit of course). Then installed it on my carbureted motorcycle after warming the engine up from the ambient +3C temperature and read 1.82V at idle.........couldn't road test it under load because of the snow drifts in the way. Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and the LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate of heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? Thanks, Neil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dmumert@telusplanet.net Mon Dec 10 17:22:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:40:27 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:40:27 -0300 From: "Dave Mumert" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Hi The output of the 8V regulator goes between the leads of C11. My unpopulated board shows no connection. It would be easy to get a solder bridge between C11 and the trace running between the leads of C11. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "rr" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:28 PM Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! > > I'm still at work, don't have a PCB here. However, if you > are measuring a connection between the junction of R37 and > C11 to the output of the 8 v reg, then there is most > likely > a solder short on the board. > > I don't believe that the layout is incorrrect as there are > several of these units already in use. If you would double > check and get back to me I may be able to help further. > > > BobR. > > > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:16:48 +0000 > w.shawsr@att.net wrote: > >Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was > >Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't > >read my post completely. > > > >GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! > > > >Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe > >even report back to the list??? > > > > > >My previous post stated: > > > >I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around > >with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem > >quite > >right. Maybe someone could shed some light? > > > >The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. > > The > >schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd > >but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 > >volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would > >make > >that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? > > > >Bill > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rncfiles@hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 17:33:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:54:23 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:54:23 -0300 From: "rob files" Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? Hey all, I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different and I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? Thanks, Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 17:54:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:54:45 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:54:45 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? Lance, I want to personally and publicly, Thank You, for truely and completely *getting it*. Your exactly the kinda guy we had in mind with the design. Again, Thanks Bruce AND all 7 of the lil guys are included in saying, thanks. From: "efi_student" Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from > list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the > financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain > people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not > complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a > commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an > assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) > before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with > them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their > results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I > think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. > Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the > bounds of the agreement? > Lance ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 17:57:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:57:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:57:06 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. > > Linear position sensor are on the order of $180 US per sensor, as > you can see this gets expensive for 2 and maybe 4 sensors (front > and back). > > I had thought of using a rotary pot, with a pulley, return > spring, you get the idea, but from speaking with someone who > mentioned they tried something similar, they said the rotary pots > do not react fast enough for the frequencies that the shock moves. > Instead of the Rotary Pot, how about interfacing an optical sensor > from a PC mouse in its place, does anyone have an idea if the > mouse optical sensor could be made to react fast enough? It could react fast enough (given appropriate "gearing") but there's no absolute count available and no recognizable position from each pulse. So you have to keep count. All the time. Any loss in count results in "virtual sag"; i.e. the controller is going to believe that the displacement is different to the actual physical displacement. Lost pulses could be avoided by Gray-coding the wheel and having multiple pickups. > I have been thinking of maybe a different optical approach, but I > do not know the easiest way to do this. Maybe a pulsed light / > laser, to a reflector, measure the round trip time, speed of light > should handle any frequencies that a shock can move at. The speed of signal processing is more likely to be the problem. (vis. Lidar) You're looking at a bandwidth of several hundred Hertz. > Do some of you engineers out there have any good ideas that we > could tackle to try to build a cheap way to measure shock position > on a Drag race car. I guess that rules out the laser-reflector. If it weren't for the noise levels of a drag race car, you could use acoustic resonance of the tube. This changes with the location of the piston within the tube. A microwave might be short enough to resolve the displacement as accurately as you need; the 100 GHz signal might attract HARM. :-) None of these methods seems any cheaper than the linear transducer. Maybe you can get away with a shorter (cheaper) transducer by mounting it in parallel on the same linkage, but with less overall movement. Without seeing the suspension layout, it's difficult to say if you could use a set of rotary encoders instead. They tend to be less costly. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 17:43:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:11:55 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:11:55 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? Just looking at the prices something is wrong. Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce From: "rob files" Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different and > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it can't be > beat!). > So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor 1994- > for CA only there are three listings; > Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 > Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 > Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > Rob ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 18:17:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:17:05 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:17:05 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? So the idea is a car available from an aftermarket tuner? You guys don't read much about imports. There's an entire site devoted to late model Toyota Supras that all make 650+ hp from 3 liters www.to4r.com and most of these guys are using completely stock internals. Of course, Toyota uses that EPA mandated DOHC and 4 valves per cylinder. Kinda reminds me of the days when the GN first hit the streets and a lot of the V-8 guys were furious at being beaten by a little V-6. I might add there are some GNs out there that accelerate at alarming rates too. All for a lot less than either of the cars you linked to. And as amazing as it sounds, a Toyota Supra pulled 0.98g in C&D, Motor Trend, and R&T, absolutely bone stock in 1993. Motor Trend proclaimed this same car "the best stopping car we have tested in the last 30 years" after repeated 60-0 stops in 116 ft. It also bested the ZR-1 according to the same magazines in 1993, a car that cost 50% more. The late model Supra was the benchmark for C-5 development, and even has received top honors for reliability in the premium sports car class. Enough chest pounding. Suffice it to say, if you are going to start talking about "tuned" cars regardless of the developer, you are comparing apples and oranges. That's no different than saying the Bugatti, Porsche GT-1, or Mercedes CLK are not reasonably priced for the average human. I sure wouldn't spend almost $50k in modifications after coughing up the requisite $40somethingK for the base car. I'd have been a lot more agreeable had you said the Z-06 Corvette, despite some quality problems, it is an exceptionally capable automobile that is certainly reasonably affordable, and meets all the other requirements of a fully DOT and EPA compliant street vehicle. Stock for stock, I don't think there is anything out there that is as capable at a reasonable price. As in all cases, YMMV. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Shannen Durphey Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 4:10 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Mos wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: > > > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? > > At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. : ) > I don't live in > the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. > > Mos. > > PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. > Sorry for the Dee-lay. The car: http://www.lingenfelter.com/packages/427TT.htm An article about it's little brother: http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/2000/May/200005_ro adtest_kngsn.xml?keywords=lingenfelter%20corvette (all one URL) There's a fair amount more reading material that can be found with search engines. Shannen ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 18:21:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:21:53 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:21:53 -0800 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Oops, I was looking at R38. I was surprised it was working so well with the grounds 'screwed up' like that! And THAT, Peter, is why I try not to speak in absolutes. But when you can't be heard over the noise, what's a guy to do but try to shout over top of it? Back to your regularly scheduled bickering.... bs > Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:04:56 -0500 > From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com > Subject: RE: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! > > Bill, > > The one I built works fine, did not require any changes to make it work. > > However, I had to configure mine to interface to a data recorder on our drag > car. > The data recorder only has a 5V capability, so I could not power the WBO2 > UEGO part of > the board from my data recorder. > > I had to power both the Heater and the UEGO circuits from the same source. > This > means that I also needed to tie the two grounds together. > > J4 should be connected to J12 and should be GND in my case. Until I > connected J12 to gnd I could not get the board to work either. > > The board is fine. > > Steve > > - -----Original Message----- > From: w.shawsr@att.net [mailto:w.shawsr@att.net] > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:17 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! > > Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was > Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't > read my post completely. > > GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! > > Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe > even report back to the list??? > > My previous post stated: > > I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around > with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem quite > right. Maybe someone could shed some light? > > The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The > schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd > but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 > volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make > that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? > > Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rncfiles@hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 18:06:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:29:18 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:29:18 -0300 From: "rob files" Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? >Just looking at the prices something is wrong. >Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a complete >product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I doubt they >would be selling them at or below cost. >Bruce One key piece of data I should have included is that the parts bin lists all three sensor as having the same list price; $186.52. I agree it sounds fishy, but I was hoping somebody had bought a bosch sensor and could give a part # to cross-reference. Maybe I'll have to buy it and give a report. _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From CJYoungDET@aol.com Mon Dec 10 18:15:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:36:47 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:36:47 -0300 From: CJYoungDET@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: EFI Information --part1_169.5699050.29467fed_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if there were any papers or such materials available that explain the fundamentals for EFI. Any help is greatly appreciated, Christopher Young --part1_169.5699050.29467fed_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if there were any papers or such materials available that explain the fundamentals for EFI.


            Any help is greatly appreciated,
                  Christopher Young --part1_169.5699050.29467fed_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Mon Dec 10 18:08:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:38:46 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:38:46 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? rob files wrote: > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different and > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it can't be > beat!). The following URL (make sure you get it all - your browser may break it up) references the HONDA part 36531-P07-003 and gives the correct result despite being shown as a Bosch product. This is called badge engineering. http://catalog.eautopartscatalog.com/partsbin/quote.jsp?product=36531-P07-003&Submit=GO&partner=partsbin&action=search&cart=&partnerSession=++&usemake= Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 18:44:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:44:44 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:44:44 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Flywheel teeth are not so accurate, but their are so many of them there should be plenty of resolution. A counter of the same module could keep track of crank position. But another sensor is needed to sync the thing. I have some hall effect devices that adjust themselves to the signal level. Having said that, I haven't tried the idea. Has anyone gotten it on a scope? Bruce Roe On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:47:37 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. > > Have you read and compared (from various > manufactureres) anything to support > those statements, and would make them absolute truths?. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 18:44:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:44:46 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:44:46 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: 76-79 Cad port injection EFI Kevin, You want a 76-79 Seville or a 79 Eldo (and 80 in CA) for that setup. 78 on are a usually corroded AU intake with a smaller throttle body. Bruce Roe On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:20:37 -0600 Kevin Wright writes: > Of course, *I* was looking for one with the > Caddy/Olds EFI to plop on my '70 Cutlass with the MegaSquirt. > Kevin Wright ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From brd@paradise.net.nz Mon Dec 10 18:32:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:47:00 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:47:00 -0300 From: "Tony Bryant" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Toyota anything EFI late eighties/early nineties. Nice 5V supply, 0-4.2ish V out. simple to mount works well. I recently bought one for nz$10 at a wrecker. ----- Original Message ----- From: "George Dickey" To: "diy_efi" Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 5:33 AM Subject: MAP Sensor > > Anyway, I'm trying to source a MAP at the moment, as the MX-5 has an > AFM which I'd like to bin (to remove the restriction). > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 18:47:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:47:14 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:47:14 -0800 From: akallotte@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB assembly help > So, 25uFis a common substitute for the 22uF value. 22 uF is a preferred value, but many capacitor makers use the closest "logical" value. Just wanted to be sure. > > Next, C2 and C8 call for .1uf 25v, but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, and C14 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. > The 104 means 10 pF x 10000 (four zeros) or 100,000 or 0.1 uF (p=pico, u=micro). Peter. I found that info after searching the net (yet another way of learning from the WB). I guess I can state my question more simply - I only have 1 cap marked .1uf 25V, but C2 and C8 each call for it. I have 4 little caps marked 104 C5K, which I assume are the .1uf 12V variety, but only three spots for them (C9, C13, C14). Is my parts kit a little off, or does one little cap sub for one big one? Are there any board pics using the group parts kit - so I can visually see what should be where? If there is not, and my board works, I'll gladly post pictures. Also, what's the best/safest way for me to test my board before hooking up a sensor. Thanks for the continued help. ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From habanero@us.ibm.com Mon Dec 10 18:42:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:47:21 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:47:21 -0300 From: "Andrew Theurer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question Carter, Thanks for sticking to the original thread :) The ring gear was brought up in efi332 a while back, and was discarded for a number of reasons including the concerns you wrote about below. One other valid concern: It's quite possible that a tooth will break off, making a difficult situtation much worse :( -Andrew > One problem with using a distributor to generate > timing is the jitter due to mechanical backlash in the > drive. Many use some sort of helical gear arrangement > off of the camshaft, often in common with the oil pump > drive. Any wear in the system will result in timing > innacuracies. To compensate, you would have to run a > more conservative advance map. > > Using the starter ring gearteeth has some issues. The > environment is not friendly; clutch dust, road dirt, > water, bits of metal from the gearteeth, oil leaks > (engine and transmission), heat, vibration, etc. The > frequency of a 150 tooth gear at 9,000 RPM is 2250 Hz. > So pulsewidth is around 440 microseconds. Since the > ECU is already pretty busy, it may not appreciate > handling an interrupt so often. That means some kind > of frequency divider circuitry (and intermediary > signal conditioning if you use a mag pickup). Well > within the state of the art, just more bother. > As for pickups, you have 3 main choices, opto, > inductive, or hall. > Both opto detectors and hall sensors must be able to > handle the frequency (not all can). The opto emitter > and detector, and the hall sensor are semiconductors, > so you must specify parts capable withstanding the > environment. An inductive sensor can handle the > frequency, but the air gap may be critcal and require > fine adjustment. The sensing edge of the ring gear may > also require machining to insure that the runout is > small enough to yield reliable operation. > > With an opto sensor, whether you choose a reflective > or transmissive scheme, the obvious issue is > obscurement of the beam by debris. > > An inductive or hall pickup can be affected by a > buildup of ferrous dust or particles, since the sensor > must be biased with a magnet to detect the teeth. > > Detection of TDC (or equivalent) can be accomplished > by altering one tooth somehow, to give a detectably > different waveform. > > If I was forced to make a choice, I'd probably go with > inductive. The detector itself is more robust. To > combat crud buidup, I would probably fashion a 'wiper' > that would sweep the pickup each revolution. A small > piece of teflon or whatnot on the tip of one geartooth > (maybe 0.02-0.05" thick). Maybe spring load it so the > root of the starter pinion gear could compress it > during starts. > > Lucky for me, I'm not faced with such a choice. > > Carter Shore > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.yahoo.com > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:03:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:03:18 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:03:18 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, not for controlling EFI... Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Tony Bryant > Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > > > Toyota anything EFI late eighties/early nineties. Nice 5V > supply, 0-4.2ish V > out. > simple to mount works well. > > I recently bought one for nz$10 at a wrecker. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 18:45:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:06:45 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:06:45 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: EFI Information Stated like that you'll be looking at papers for years before you get going. I'd suggest that you visit www.tunercat.com, and from there follow the links to the ecmguy's page, in there are several hac's of popular GM ECMs that would give an idea of what an ecm does. Also, at his site, are overviews of what items are editable in various ecms, and that would give some insight as where to head Bruce From: CJYoungDET@aol.com Subject: EFI Information Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if there were any papers or such materials available that explain the fundamentals for EFI. Christopher Young ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:10:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:10:32 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:10:32 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Flywheel teeth are not so accurate, but there are so > many of them there should be plenty of resolution. As well, the angular resolution compared to a much smaller diameter distributor or crank wheel should be better - even allowing for gross machining inaccuracies. > A counter of the same module could keep track of > crank position. But another sensor is needed to sync > the thing. I have some hall effect devices that adjust > themselves to the signal level. This is the job for a small "intelligent" device like a PIC. It can also easily distinguish missing (or extra teeth) easily (eliminating a separate sync pickup). Less than US$5 for 5 MIPs - amazing! Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From yoshi@hotpop.com Mon Dec 10 18:46:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:16:41 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:16:41 -0300 From: "Jacky Chu" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? The correct one I got from the parts pin has Bosch part number 13246 on the box. ----- Original Message ----- From: "rob files" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:06 PM Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > > >Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > >Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a complete > >product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I doubt they > >would be selling them at or below cost. > >Bruce > > One key piece of data I should have included is that the parts bin lists all > three sensor as having the same list price; $186.52. > > I agree it sounds fishy, but I was hoping somebody had bought a bosch sensor > and could give a part # to cross-reference. > > Maybe I'll have to buy it and give a report. > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:18:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:18:33 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:18:33 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB assembly help akallotte@juno.com wrote: > >.. I guess I can state my question more simply - I only have > 1 cap marked .1uf 25V, but C2 and C8 each call for it. I have 4 little > caps marked 104 C5K, which I assume are the .1uf 12V variety, but only > three spots for them (C9, C13, C14). Is my parts kit a little off, or > does one little cap sub for one big one? Sorry, I should have realised the problem - the feedback 0.1 uF capacitor (C7) is specified on the schematic as a "poly" or polyester capacitor. This has a higher tolerance than the "104" decoupling capacitors (sometime called block monolithic caps), and is usually used in applications where the value is actually important (not the case for the 104 caps). So, C7 is the one marked 0.1uf 25V So, the 0.1 uF values are (nominally) the same, but different types of construction. Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:19:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:19:36 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:19:36 -0800 From: CJYoungDET@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor --part1_173.8ddba5.2946d519_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think the one that Megasquirt uses, the Motorola MPX4115, might be what you're looking for. Christopher Young In a message dated 12/10/2001 7:07:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, SAndersen@advan-tek.com writes: > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > not for controlling EFI... > > Steve > --part1_173.8ddba5.2946d519_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think the one that Megasquirt uses, the Motorola MPX4115, might be what you're looking for.

Christopher Young

In a message dated 12/10/2001 7:07:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, SAndersen@advan-tek.com writes:


Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost
applications, either wrecker or new?  I found one at Omega for
like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else
available.  In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost,
not for controlling EFI...

Steve


--part1_173.8ddba5.2946d519_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:24:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:24:25 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:24:25 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Sensor Question Hello Andrew, Thanks for that guys, that was a top rundown for me. Re Carters point about the frequency of input signals interfering more than nescesary: I had considered this, and I was wondering how I would set up all the interupt priorities etc etc. Obviously the timing of the injectors and igntion are of crucial importance, but then again if you miss reading a MAP sensor just as the throttle is undergoing sudden change under big boost (or similar kind of extreme condition) then you could also potentially be in for a bit of detination, or even just irritating hesitation. Then I got to thinking about a modular designed EFI computer, where there is a dedicated micro for input signals, conditioning etc, a micro for the injecting, a micro for the ignition, a micro for user interfacing etc etc, all working off a bus using an agreed protocol. It seems like overkill, but you could use markedly cheaper micros, simplifies problems like input interrupts interfering with output interrupts etc, and also would allow one to build an engine using a normal distributor and fuel injection, and then later down the track as money, time, whatever was no longer an issue, be able to just plug in another daughterboard for ignition, fit the required external components, and save the hassle of buying (building) a full new computer. Thoughts? Ideas? Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 8:42:03 AM, you wrote: AT> Carter, AT> Thanks for sticking to the original thread :) AT> The ring gear was brought up in efi332 a while back, and was discarded for a AT> number of reasons including the concerns you wrote about below. One other AT> valid concern: It's quite possible that a tooth will break off, making a AT> difficult situtation much worse :( AT> -Andrew >> One problem with using a distributor to generate >> timing is the jitter due to mechanical backlash in the >> drive. Many use some sort of helical gear arrangement >> off of the camshaft, often in common with the oil pump >> drive. Any wear in the system will result in timing >> innacuracies. To compensate, you would have to run a >> more conservative advance map. >> >> Using the starter ring gearteeth has some issues. The >> environment is not friendly; clutch dust, road dirt, >> water, bits of metal from the gearteeth, oil leaks >> (engine and transmission), heat, vibration, etc. The >> frequency of a 150 tooth gear at 9,000 RPM is 2250 Hz. >> So pulsewidth is around 440 microseconds. Since the >> ECU is already pretty busy, it may not appreciate >> handling an interrupt so often. That means some kind >> of frequency divider circuitry (and intermediary >> signal conditioning if you use a mag pickup). Well >> within the state of the art, just more bother. >> As for pickups, you have 3 main choices, opto, >> inductive, or hall. >> Both opto detectors and hall sensors must be able to >> handle the frequency (not all can). The opto emitter >> and detector, and the hall sensor are semiconductors, >> so you must specify parts capable withstanding the >> environment. An inductive sensor can handle the >> frequency, but the air gap may be critcal and require >> fine adjustment. The sensing edge of the ring gear may >> also require machining to insure that the runout is >> small enough to yield reliable operation. >> >> With an opto sensor, whether you choose a reflective >> or transmissive scheme, the obvious issue is >> obscurement of the beam by debris. >> >> An inductive or hall pickup can be affected by a >> buildup of ferrous dust or particles, since the sensor >> must be biased with a magnet to detect the teeth. >> >> Detection of TDC (or equivalent) can be accomplished >> by altering one tooth somehow, to give a detectably >> different waveform. >> >> If I was forced to make a choice, I'd probably go with >> inductive. The detector itself is more robust. To >> combat crud buidup, I would probably fashion a 'wiper' >> that would sweep the pickup each revolution. A small >> piece of teflon or whatnot on the tip of one geartooth >> (maybe 0.02-0.05" thick). Maybe spring load it so the >> root of the starter pinion gear could compress it >> during starts. >> >> Lucky for me, I'm not faced with such a choice. >> >> Carter Shore >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Send your FREE holiday greetings online! >> http://greetings.yahoo.com >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- AT> -- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the AT> quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> >> AT> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AT> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) AT> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 18:41:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:24:54 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:24:54 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question While possible, it's not a common occurance on many cars. I can't recall having ever seen a tooth break off. Driving a car with a fubar'd starter can ruin some teeth, but again it's not a common occurance. I've seen many times more reluctor coils in a distributor break then flywheels fail. Some times you just have to play the odds. Bruce From: "Andrew Theurer" Subject: Re: Sensor Question > Thanks for sticking to the original thread :) > The ring gear was brought up in efi332 a while back, and was discarded for a > number of reasons including the concerns you wrote about below. One other > valid concern: It's quite possible that a tooth will break off, making a > difficult situtation much worse :( > -Andrew > > One problem with using a distributor to generate > > timing is the jitter due to mechanical backlash in the > > drive. Many use some sort of helical gear arrangement > > off of the camshaft, often in common with the oil pump > > drive. Any wear in the system will result in timing > > innacuracies. To compensate, you would have to run a > > more conservative advance map. > > Using the starter ring gearteeth has some issues. The > > environment is not friendly; clutch dust, road dirt, > > water, bits of metal from the gearteeth, oil leaks > > (engine and transmission), heat, vibration, etc. The > > frequency of a 150 tooth gear at 9,000 RPM is 2250 Hz. > > So pulsewidth is around 440 microseconds. Since the > > ECU is already pretty busy, it may not appreciate > > handling an interrupt so often. That means some kind > > of frequency divider circuitry (and intermediary > > signal conditioning if you use a mag pickup). Well > > within the state of the art, just more bother. > > As for pickups, you have 3 main choices, opto, > > inductive, or hall. > > Both opto detectors and hall sensors must be able to > > handle the frequency (not all can). The opto emitter > > and detector, and the hall sensor are semiconductors, > > so you must specify parts capable withstanding the > > environment. An inductive sensor can handle the > > frequency, but the air gap may be critcal and require > > fine adjustment. The sensing edge of the ring gear may > > also require machining to insure that the runout is > > small enough to yield reliable operation. > > > > With an opto sensor, whether you choose a reflective > > or transmissive scheme, the obvious issue is > > obscurement of the beam by debris. > > > > An inductive or hall pickup can be affected by a > > buildup of ferrous dust or particles, since the sensor > > must be biased with a magnet to detect the teeth. > > > > Detection of TDC (or equivalent) can be accomplished > > by altering one tooth somehow, to give a detectably > > different waveform. > > > > If I was forced to make a choice, I'd probably go with > > inductive. The detector itself is more robust. To > > combat crud buidup, I would probably fashion a 'wiper' > > that would sweep the pickup each revolution. A small > > piece of teflon or whatnot on the tip of one geartooth > > (maybe 0.02-0.05" thick). Maybe spring load it so the > > root of the starter pinion gear could compress it > > during starts. > > > > Lucky for me, I'm not faced with such a choice. > > > > Carter Shore ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From kiggly@hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 19:15:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:33:16 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:33:16 -0300 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? I believe you need a sensor from a non-CA car. As we know, emission laws are stricter in CA because of smog problems. Therefore, I'm drawing the assumption that the CA version had to run stoich to maintain maximum catalyst efficiency and lowest emissions. You can easily detect stoich with a cheaper, switching narrow-band O2 sensor. In the other states, laws are a little less strict so I'm guessing it was a lean-burn civic VX in 49 states. Just to toss out a question, does anybody know what A:F they ran on the lean-burn side of that VX? I know it couldn't be that lean because its not stratified charge, but I am curious... Kevin >Hey all, > >I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different and >I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it can't be >beat!). > >So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor 1994- >for CA only there are three listings; > >Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 >Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 >Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > >Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > >Thanks, >Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:37:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:37:09 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:37:09 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Hello efi_student, Check out this MPEG of a seriously mental supra packing 900hp: http://www.japanesemotorsport.com.au/supra.mpg Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 1:16:40 PM, you wrote: e> So the idea is a car available from an aftermarket tuner? You guys e> don't read much about imports. There's an entire site devoted to late e> model Toyota Supras that all make 650+ hp from 3 liters www.to4r.com and e> most of these guys are using completely stock internals. Of course, e> Toyota uses that EPA mandated DOHC and 4 valves per cylinder. Kinda e> reminds me of the days when the GN first hit the streets and a lot of e> the V-8 guys were furious at being beaten by a little V-6. I might add e> there are some GNs out there that accelerate at alarming rates too. All e> for a lot less than either of the cars you linked to. e> And as amazing as it sounds, a Toyota Supra pulled 0.98g in C&D, Motor e> Trend, and R&T, absolutely bone stock in 1993. Motor Trend proclaimed e> this same car "the best stopping car we have tested in the last 30 e> years" after repeated 60-0 stops in 116 ft. It also bested the ZR-1 e> according to the same magazines in 1993, a car that cost 50% more. The e> late model Supra was the benchmark for C-5 development, and even has e> received top honors for reliability in the premium sports car class. e> Enough chest pounding. e> Suffice it to say, if you are going to start talking about "tuned" cars e> regardless of the developer, you are comparing apples and oranges. e> That's no different than saying the Bugatti, Porsche GT-1, or Mercedes e> CLK are not reasonably priced for the average human. I sure wouldn't e> spend almost $50k in modifications after coughing up the requisite e> $40somethingK for the base car. I'd have been a lot more agreeable had e> you said the Z-06 Corvette, despite some quality problems, it is an e> exceptionally capable automobile that is certainly reasonably e> affordable, and meets all the other requirements of a fully DOT and EPA e> compliant street vehicle. Stock for stock, I don't think there is e> anything out there that is as capable at a reasonable price. As in all e> cases, YMMV. e> Lance e> -----Original Message----- e> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On e> Behalf Of Shannen Durphey e> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 4:10 PM e> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org e> Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? e> Mos wrote: >> >> On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: >> >> > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? >> >> At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. e> : ) >> I don't live in >> the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. >> >> Mos. >> >> PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. >> e> Sorry for the Dee-lay. e> The car: e> http://www.lingenfelter.com/packages/427TT.htm e> An article about it's little brother: e> http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/2000/May/200005_ro e> adtest_kngsn.xml?keywords=lingenfelter%20corvette e> (all one URL) e> There's a fair amount more reading material that can be found with e> search e> engines. e> Shannen e> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ e> ---- e> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the e> quotes) e> in the body of a message (not the subject) to e> majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org e> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- e> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) e> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:41:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:41:52 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:41:52 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor The most common junk yard donor is a Turbo Sunbird. Thou turbo buicks, Syclones, Typoons have them. Since it's referenced to Absolute, you really looking for a 2 bar sensor (to read 1 bar of boost). Bruce From: "Stephen Andersen" Subject: RE: MAP Sensor > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > not for controlling EFI... > Steve > > Behalf Of Tony Bryant > > Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > > Toyota anything EFI late eighties/early nineties. Nice 5V > > supply, 0-4.2ish V > > out. simple to mount works well. > > I recently bought one for nz$10 at a wrecker. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:45:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:45:37 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:45:37 -0800 From: Daniel and Laura Burk MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM [and how does apply to DIY_EFI??] It's precisely this stuff that made me quit subscribing to DIY_EFI in 1997. I eventually re-subscribed but evidently the same culture is still present in one form or another. Could we please start a list called DIY_FLAMES and send all non-topic stuff there? Thanks. --Daniel Burk [EFI Content here: I received Steve C's DIY_WB parts kit today. I havent counted out the parts, but it looks like enough stuff to build two of them, yes it does... I figured that I'd build 'em up, then plumb in a 10-bit A/D converter, a Microchip PIC, and a 10-bit D/A converter that could linearize stuff based on a table from EEPROM. ] 944Technologist wrote: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Is it true that septics have to learn the names of all the States > > and their capitals, as well as the Presidents because they're > > expected to be illiterate? :-) > > No, we in the US do not teach our "septics" anything. We flush our toilets > and the shit just runs into them. > > FR Wilk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:55:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:55:08 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:55:08 -0800 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:42 Steve Flanagan wrote: > > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock > sensor. > 1) You could use a threaded rod, running inside a plastic tube. Two optosensors pairs attached to the tube, arranged with the light axis perpendicular to the axis of the rod. The beam is arranged so that a thread just obscures, and the root of the thread lets light pass. So as the rod moves, the opto's create a square wave signal. The two sensors are arranged so that the phase of the two square waves is offset, to allow quadrature detection of the direction that the rod is traveling. By knowing the TPI of the rod, you can count the pulses to get the displacement. The output of the quadrature detector tells which direction, to add or subract each pulse. 2) Use a simple linkage from the suspension to an arm connected to a pot mounted on the chassis. As the suspension moves, the arm rotates the pot. Size the arm go get 120 degrees of rotation from full droop to full compress on the suspension. The voltage vs displacement curve is non-linear, but can be easily calibrated. For a good example of a cheap effective adjustable linkage, check out the float adjustment rod attachment system on one of those toilet bowl replacement valves (I'm serious, dammit, just look!). A flat piece of steel engaging the float is bent into a U shape. Spring tension keeps it firmly anchored to the rod, you just pinch the ends to loosen, and slide it to the desired position. Lightweight, cheap, simple, effective, easy to use, an elegant piece IMHO. 3) Get one of the new low cost DRO units that attach to lathes and milling machines. Calaero sells a 0-6" one with 0.001" accuracy for about $60. It has a bus output that can connect to a central controller. Would it stand up to the environment? Dunno, but the machining environment is not very friendly, so maybe so. 4) Get a carbon rod, or a piece of conductive plastic. Attach electrodes to the end, fabricate a metal slider, and voila! giant linear potentiometer. Is four ideas enough for tonight? I'm getting tired (maybe the drugs are kicking in) Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 19:56:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:56:43 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 19:56:43 -0800 From: Daniel and Laura Burk MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit I got mine today: Steve's still hard at work getting these things in the mail. --D Burk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 20:03:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:03:56 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:03:56 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Lance wrote: > > So the idea is a car available from an aftermarket tuner? You guys > don't read much about imports. There's an entire site devoted to late > model Toyota Supras that all make 650+ hp from 3 liters www.to4r.com and > most of these guys are using completely stock internals. Locally there's a 630hp twin turbo Nissan, a 450 hp Mazda Rotary, some others in the 400+hp range. I know what it takes to build those cars, I've seen all too well how they behave. A regional shop that specializes in building high hp imports regularly utilizes our dyno to do their tuning. > Toyota > GN > All for a lot less than either of the cars you linked to. There were a few qualifications that led to the links. The cars had to be streetable and capable of 240 mile per hour speeds. Bernd further reduced the allowable competition by adding items such as leather seats, air conditioning, emissions compliance, crash worthiness compliance, and a slew of other "gotchas" to the list. > > And as amazing as it sounds, a Toyota Supra pulled 0.98g in C&D, Motor > Trend, and R&T, absolutely bone stock in 1993. Motor Trend proclaimed > this same car "the best stopping car we have tested in the last 30 > years" after repeated 60-0 stops in 116 ft. I think there were more than a few people who read that article way back then. Street car braking systems have recieved much more attention in the 8 years since that date than in ten years prior to it. Many of today's "fast" cars have much more capable brakes than their performance counterparts of ten years ago. > It also bested the ZR-1 > according to the same magazines in 1993, a car that cost 50% more. There's a few funny stories about cars that bested the ZR1 in various ways. I've heard a fairly credible story that the LT1 had to be de-tuned for 1992 production so it wouldn't make more power than the ZR1. For a while, the ZR1 was the car that others were compared to. > The > late model Supra was the benchmark for C-5 development, and even has > received top honors for reliability in the premium sports car class. Auto design is competetive, and somebody always gets to spend some time in the limelight. Toyota should be commended for their achievements. Chevy should be flogged, however. The C5 'vette is a great improvement over the C4. But the C3 was only somewhat remarkable when it was introduced in '64, and by the time the chassis was redesigned almost 20 years later, you could buy much better cars for a whole lot less money. > Enough chest pounding. LOL!!! I know the Blue Oval guys get up-in-arms when ya poke 'em. Who knew I'd find someone from the import crowd like that. ; ) > > Suffice it to say, if you are going to start talking about "tuned" cars > regardless of the developer, you are comparing apples and oranges. > That's no different than saying the Bugatti, Porsche GT-1, or Mercedes > CLK are not reasonably priced for the average human. I actually started out talking about ex racecars. They are "streetable and capable of speeds close to 400 km/hr." But Bernd would have none of that. And you certainly didn't miss the point. This sidelined conversation began with a comparison between apples and oranges. I just threw a less expensive orange into the basket. > I sure wouldn't > spend almost $50k in modifications after coughing up the requisite > $40somethingK for the base car. Agreed. But getting 240 mph out of a streetable car is a little more expensive than a pair of HKS turbos, 6 new injectors, and a 200 hp shot of nitrous. > I'd have been a lot more agreeable had > you said the Z-06 Corvette, There are a lot of cars that are more reasonably priced than the car in the link I posted. The Z06 and the 1993 Toyota both fail to meet the "240 mph capable" qualification in stock form. If you know of anyone closer to the grass roots level that has a streetable car that has reached speeds of 200 mph, I love reading about 'em. Shannen > despite some quality problems, it is an > exceptionally capable automobile that is certainly reasonably > affordable, and meets all the other requirements of a fully DOT and EPA > compliant street vehicle. Stock for stock, I don't think there is > anything out there that is as capable at a reasonable price. As in all > cases, YMMV. > > Lance > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Mon Dec 10 19:42:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:05:21 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:05:21 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Shock Sensor Question Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. Linear position sensor are on the order of $180 US per sensor, as you can see this gets expensive for 2 and maybe 4 sensors (front and back). I had thought of using a rotary pot, with a pulley, return spring, you get the idea, but from speaking with someone who mentioned they tried something similar, they said the rotary pots do not react fast enough for the frequencies that the shock moves. Instead of the Rotary Pot, how about interfacing an optical sensor from a PC mouse in its place, does anyone have an idea if the mouse optical sensor could be made to react fast enough? I have been thinking of maybe a different optical approach, but I do not know the easiest way to do this. Maybe a pulsed light / laser, to a reflector, measure the round trip time, speed of light should handle any frequencies that a shock can move at. Do some of you engineers out there have any good ideas that we could tackle to try to build a cheap way to measure shock position on a Drag race car. Thanks Steve F ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 20:05:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:05:52 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:05:52 -0800 From: Daniel and Laura Burk MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) I'll ditto your ditto. skulte wrote: > Ditto. I've been "forced" to read through the latest petty bickering > because I'm actually learning. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 20:07:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:07:39 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:07:39 -0800 From: "Andrew Theurer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? That Supra looks very similar to the one Jun Racing brought to the Salt Flats recently. They updated the bumper and the motor (about 1300 hp). They hit ~250 mph and cliamed the record for whetever class they were in, only to have another car in the same class take the record a little later. -Andrew ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob - Uni" To: "efi_student" Cc: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:40 PM Subject: Re[2]: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? > Hello efi_student, > > Check out this MPEG of a seriously mental supra packing 900hp: > http://www.japanesemotorsport.com.au/supra.mpg > > Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 1:16:40 PM, you wrote: > > e> So the idea is a car available from an aftermarket tuner? You guys > e> don't read much about imports. There's an entire site devoted to late > e> model Toyota Supras that all make 650+ hp from 3 liters www.to4r.com and > e> most of these guys are using completely stock internals. Of course, > e> Toyota uses that EPA mandated DOHC and 4 valves per cylinder. Kinda > e> reminds me of the days when the GN first hit the streets and a lot of > e> the V-8 guys were furious at being beaten by a little V-6. I might add > e> there are some GNs out there that accelerate at alarming rates too. All > e> for a lot less than either of the cars you linked to. > > e> And as amazing as it sounds, a Toyota Supra pulled 0.98g in C&D, Motor > e> Trend, and R&T, absolutely bone stock in 1993. Motor Trend proclaimed > e> this same car "the best stopping car we have tested in the last 30 > e> years" after repeated 60-0 stops in 116 ft. It also bested the ZR-1 > e> according to the same magazines in 1993, a car that cost 50% more. The > e> late model Supra was the benchmark for C-5 development, and even has > e> received top honors for reliability in the premium sports car class. > e> Enough chest pounding. > > e> Suffice it to say, if you are going to start talking about "tuned" cars > e> regardless of the developer, you are comparing apples and oranges. > e> That's no different than saying the Bugatti, Porsche GT-1, or Mercedes > e> CLK are not reasonably priced for the average human. I sure wouldn't > e> spend almost $50k in modifications after coughing up the requisite > e> $40somethingK for the base car. I'd have been a lot more agreeable had > e> you said the Z-06 Corvette, despite some quality problems, it is an > e> exceptionally capable automobile that is certainly reasonably > e> affordable, and meets all the other requirements of a fully DOT and EPA > e> compliant street vehicle. Stock for stock, I don't think there is > e> anything out there that is as capable at a reasonable price. As in all > e> cases, YMMV. > > e> Lance > > e> -----Original Message----- > e> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > e> Behalf Of Shannen Durphey > e> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 4:10 PM > e> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > e> Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? > > > e> Mos wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: > >> > >> > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? > >> > >> At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. > e> : ) > > >> I don't live in > >> the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. > >> > >> Mos. > >> > >> PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. > >> > e> Sorry for the Dee-lay. > e> The car: > e> http://www.lingenfelter.com/packages/427TT.htm > > e> An article about it's little brother: > e> http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/2000/May/200005_ro > e> adtest_kngsn.xml?keywords=lingenfelter%20corvette > > e> (all one URL) > > e> There's a fair amount more reading material that can be found with > e> search > e> engines. > e> Shannen > e> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > e> ---- > e> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > e> quotes) > e> in the body of a message (not the subject) to > e> majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > e> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > e> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > e> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > -- > Best regards, > Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 20:12:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:12:13 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:12:13 -0800 From: Daniel and Laura Burk MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A Andris, My Crane Hi-6 is still going strong after six years and 46,000 miles. The trick is to drill a small hole in the firewall and mount the box in the passenger compartment. I use it in conjunction with an Accel module, Accel 'in-cap' supercoil, Taylor spiral-pro wires, and Bosch platinum plugs. It lights off the mixture to well over 6,000 RPM. --Cheers, Dan skulte wrote: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Kevin Wright wrote: > > > ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > >I'd seriously look to change a table for timing control. > > >They do have a multistep retard box, that I've used without complaint. > > >I have yet to have a Crane box fail. > > >Bruce > > I just caught the above... I will never use a Crane box. Vortech was > including them with their supercharger kits, and nearly everyone I know > with the Vortech has had their Crane box die and get replaced multiple > times. Maybe it's been fixed in the new version, but it's happened too > often for me to use one. My Accel 300+ ignition box has been reliable so > far for 3+ years under the punishment of the oven known as my engine bay > (recently melted most of the wires road racing due to radiant heat from > the turbos). FWIW. > > Andris Skulte > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > Found 'em, thanks. Specs look good; actually a couple > of options > > there. I don't have the option of editing the timing tables, since > > the car is a '70 Cutlass about to receive a MegaSquirt. Maybe when > > the MegaJolt comes down the pipe... the turbos won't happen for a > > while yet. I'm thinking a Hi6R, then add the TRC2 retard control and > > MAP sensor for boost retard when required. > > > > krw > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Kevin Wright" > > >Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > >> ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > >> >I've never had any success with them. > > >> >If it wasn't for NASCAR, I don't think you see them anywhere. > > >> >Bruce > > > > > >> What would you recommend, than? I was going to go with a 6A BTM > > >> (boost retard) when I turbo my Olds. Would Crane or some other > > >> manufacturer be preferable. Anybody else make a boost retard unit? > > >> I'll research the web, of course, but I was hoping someone had > > >> experience/suggestions to make the job quicker. > > >> Kevin Wright > > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > -- > > Kevin Wright > > krwright@wankel.net > > krwright@ev1.net > > http://www.wankel.net/~krwright > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > http://www.skulte.com > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From swebb@netlab.uky.edu Mon Dec 10 19:52:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:13:00 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:13:00 -0300 From: Stephen Webb MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing I have an LM1815 "variable reluctance sensor amplifier" IC, which I believe is appropriate for my application. I am trying to use it to sense the ignition pulses from a Bosch hall sender distributor. I prototyped the suggested circuit, but was unable to get any meaningful output from it. Does anyone have any experience with these ICs, and if so are there any pitfalls that I might be in right now? (I either get seemingly uncorrelated triggers at a very high rate, or no triggering at all) Does the ground reference for the IC have to be the same as the one going into the distributor? TIA -Steve ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From akallotte@juno.com Mon Dec 10 19:58:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:16:46 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:16:46 -0300 From: akallotte@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB assembly help This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ----__JNP_000_4b0f.0dca.3518 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is the first time I've built something like this, so bear with me. I've soldered on all the resistors, which was easy thanks to all the work put into the parts kit. I moved on to the caps and have had to learn how to read them. I'm still confused though. First, is the 22uf 25v cap in the parts kit for reference C5 (25uf 25v)? Next, C2 and C8 call for .1uf 25v, but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, and C14 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. Is the parts kit a little off or am I supposed to substitute something? Thanks for the help and for the project. ----__JNP_000_4b0f.0dca.3518 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is the first time I've built = something like=20 this, so bear with me. I've soldered on all the resistors, which was easy = thanks=20 to all the work put into the parts kit. I moved on to the caps and have had= to=20 learn how to read them. I'm still confused though. First, is the 22uf 25v = cap in=20 the parts kit for reference C5 (25uf 25v)? Next, C2 and C8 call for .1uf = 25v,=20 but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, and= C14=20 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. Is the parts= kit=20 a little off or am I supposed to substitute something? Thanks for the help = and=20 for the project. ----__JNP_000_4b0f.0dca.3518-- ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 20:20:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:20:22 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:20:22 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:42 Steve Flanagan wrote: > > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock > > sensor. Just squeezed this idea out of the subconscious processor: Optic fibre as used in "power glove". The amount of bend in the fibre can be used to measure displacement/angular motion. You could either fix it on the damper so that compression will cause it to flex, or fix it to another suspension member. Either way, you'll have to calibrate it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Mon Dec 10 20:07:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:21:31 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:21:31 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca wrote: > There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in parallel with R4). BobR. > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and the > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate of > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > Thanks, > Neil > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sravet@arm.com Mon Dec 10 19:57:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:22:16 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:22:16 -0300 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question There are small electric motors with integrated position sensors, you could mount one of them and use the position output. This is similar to your mouse idea only already packaged and maybe more rugged. Plus when you're ready for the big leagues you could drive the motor for active suspension control. --steve ps just kidding about the active control part. Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From huw.scourfield@lineone.net Mon Dec 10 19:50:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:23:24 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:23:24 -0300 From: "Huw Scourfield" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: EFI Information Bruce, all, do you ever read people's emails Bruce, this guy just wrote that he wants to "build his own efi system", not hack someone elses GM whatever; - not everyone lives in the good ol' US of A. Anyway does this really further the cause of diy efi? Huw ----- Original Message ----- From: Bruce To: Sent: 10 December 2001 21:45 Subject: Re: EFI Information > > Stated like that you'll be looking at papers for years before you get going. > I'd suggest that you visit www.tunercat.com, and from there follow the links > to the ecmguy's page, in there are several hac's of popular GM ECMs that > would give an idea of what an ecm does. Also, at his site, are overviews of > what items are editable in various ecms, and that would give some insight as > where to head > Bruce > > > > From: CJYoungDET@aol.com > Subject: EFI Information > Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am > interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have > experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if > there were any papers or such materials available that explain the > fundamentals for EFI. > Christopher Young > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Mon Dec 10 19:19:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:27:06 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:27:06 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: WB O2 Success Neil, I power mine with a 16V system. Because of drag race issues, I needed it to heat up as fast as possible. Mine heats up in about 25 Sec. You can change the heat time by changing the heater current. The Notes are on the schematic, you will need to add some R's in Parallel to R4 to alter the Heater current. 1.5 Amps max is recommended. I think the warning was not to heat to fast or you can hurt the sensor. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca [mailto:Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 3:20 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: WB O2 Success I finished building my WB O2 unit with the list's circuit board and parts kits. As suggested I checked it out first with a light bulb in place of the sensor and everything looked good. Then fired it up with the sensor in place and it worked OK. Thanks again to all the list members who made this possible. I read 4.02V in free air with my Fluke DVM. Drove it down to 0.79V by flooding the sensor with propane from my plumber's torch (unlit of course). Then installed it on my carbureted motorcycle after warming the engine up from the ambient +3C temperature and read 1.82V at idle.........couldn't road test it under load because of the snow drifts in the way. Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and the LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate of heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? Thanks, Neil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 20:44:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:44:42 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:44:42 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Also, I consider WI done right as a must. Bruce Whats WI? (water injection?) BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 20:50:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:50:34 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:50:34 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > Bruce > Whats WI? (water injection?) > BW Yes. And, "right" may take a new turn in the not too distant future. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 20:52:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:52:38 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:52:38 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? Tanx BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bob Wooten Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 8:44 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Also, I consider WI done right as a must. Bruce Whats WI? (water injection?) BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 20:57:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:57:28 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 20:57:28 -0800 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success I've got a Horiba and it takes 33 seconds from switch on. Ask me how I know. I added 10 ohms to R4 and the DIY-WB warms up in about 35 seconds. Just a couple more than the Horiba and much quicker on a re-crank than the Horiba which again takes 33 seconds. Ask me how I know. I've had the Horiba for twelve years. later, Mark Of course you can add some more resistor and fire it up quicker. I understand the sound of the porcelin cracking is not an extremely expensive sound. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin _" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:33 PM Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > > I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat the > sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than > that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds and > the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't > confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this > properly and safely though. > > Kevin > > >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts > >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the > >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in > >parallel with R4). > > > >BobR. > > > > > > > > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and > >the > > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate > >of > > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Neil > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > >quotes) > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:01:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:01:51 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:01:51 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So you have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what compromises your willing to make, with each application. Bruce Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the lil guys are around (just trust me on that one). From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > Tanx > BW > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > Bruce > Whats WI? (water injection?) > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From EOA@spartek.com Mon Dec 10 20:47:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:04:44 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:04:44 -0300 From: Eric Aos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question I saw some baluf (?) linear transducers specifically designed to go in the shocks of the new Cadillac's. Eric > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. > > Linear position sensor are on the order of $180 US per > sensor, as you can > see this gets expensive for 2 and maybe 4 sensors (front and back). > > I had thought of using a rotary pot, with a pulley, return > spring, you get > the idea, but from speaking with someone who mentioned they > tried something > similar, they said the rotary pots do not react fast enough for the > frequencies that the shock moves. Instead of the Rotary Pot, > how about > interfacing an optical sensor from a PC mouse in its place, > does anyone > have an idea if the mouse optical sensor could be made to > react fast enough? > > > I have been thinking of maybe a different optical approach, > but I do not > know the easiest way to do this. Maybe a pulsed light / laser, to a > reflector, measure the round trip time, speed of light should > handle any > frequencies that a shock can move at. > > Do some of you engineers out there have any good ideas that > we could tackle > to try to build a cheap way to measure shock position on a > Drag race car. > > Thanks > > Steve F > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:05:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:05:42 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:05:42 -0800 From: "Andris Skulte" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? So far the plan is to build a bulletproof 350ish engine. It'll be from either a Dart or Bowtie block, 6.125" rods, 3.48 stroke ex-NASCAR crank possibly (or Cola or Callies, some sub $1k crank), 4.000 bore, heads with around 210cc intake runners (AFR, Canfield, Victor Jr's), 8.5:1 compression and cam specs based partially on the current engines backpressure vs boost characteristics (measured when I strap this tired mule to the dyno - will be fairly mild with duration), and some custom JE/Venolia/KB pistons. My reasoning is to make a reliable, build it once road racing/street fun engine. I still am considering a 377, but I like the detonation resistance a smaller bore gives you. The question of the hour is whether I'll make more power unshrouding the valves with the larger bore and less boost. I'm planning on going to about .035 quench, but some folks more experienced than I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame front travel at TDC. To knock down compression, I plan on mirroring the combustion chamber shape in the piston, since this should give you the fastest burn time. Some words of wisdom from the previously mentioned turbo folks suggest going with a plain 'ole open bowl piston, but again I'm having a hard time convincing myself that that's the way to go, when the collective theory based knowledge usually says to go with a tight quench and small dish. Any thoughts or comments before I'm committed to building it? Thanks! ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo http://www.skulte.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:09:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:09:54 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:09:54 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB Requests I think there are some commercial units out there in the $1200 range, for those with more money than time/electronics experience. The price is probably dropping too. I wonder if anyone has tried to make a list of the lower priced units available? Bruce Roe On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:27:22 -0800 "efi_student" writes: > BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot > of requests from list members on another list for a > DIY-WB unit. I don't have the > financial resources to help them all out ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rsrich@cwcom.net Mon Dec 10 20:37:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:10:29 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:10:29 -0300 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing Steve, It could be that the input signal from the hall effect does not reach zero. Hall effect outputs often swing between two voltage levels which are both above ground. LM1815 requires that the input at least reaches 0V, preferably going negative. You could try capacitive coupling of the input signal to get a zero crossing signal. Cheers Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Stephen Webb > Sent: 10 December 2001 22:52 > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing > > > > I have an LM1815 "variable reluctance sensor amplifier" IC, which I > believe is appropriate for my application. I am trying to use it to sense > the ignition pulses from a Bosch hall sender distributor. > > I prototyped the suggested circuit, but was unable to get any meaningful > output from it. Does anyone have any experience with these ICs, and if so > are there any pitfalls that I might be in right now? (I either get > seemingly uncorrelated triggers at a very high rate, or no triggering at > all) > > Does the ground reference for the IC have to be the same as the one going > into the distributor? > > TIA > > -Steve > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From kiggly@hotmail.com Mon Dec 10 20:33:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:12:18 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:12:18 -0300 From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: WB O2 Success I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat the sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds and the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this properly and safely though. Kevin >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in >parallel with R4). > >BobR. > > > > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and >the > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate >of > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > > Thanks, > > Neil > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 21:01:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:14:43 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:14:43 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success You're stating that as an absolute fact?. You might be missing that the DIY is designed for the average guy to put together, which puts it in an entirely different category. It's not designed as a lab grade or commerical use item. It's just a DIY project. To compare it to anything else is just abusing it's design features. Bruce From: "Kevin _" Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat the > sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than > that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds and > the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't > confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this > properly and safely though. > Kevin > >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts > >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the > >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in > >parallel with R4). > >BobR. > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and > >the > > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate > >of > > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > Thanks, > > > Neil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Mon Dec 10 21:01:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:14:49 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:14:49 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB assembly help > akallotte@juno.com wrote: > > First, > is the 22uf 25v cap in the parts kit for reference C5 (25uf 25v)? Electrolytic capacitors are rated at a value of +/- 20% at best, sometimes worse. So, 25uFis a common substitute for the 22uF value. 22 uF is a preferred value, but many capacitor makers use the closest "logical" value. C1 (10 uF) is the only electro that really has an appreciable effect on the circuit's operation - it controls the "soft start" of the heater. C12 (3.3 uF) also has some effect, but is not as marked at C1. > Next, C2 and C8 call > for .1uf 25v, but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, > and C14 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. The 104 means 10 pF x 10000 (four zeros) or 100,000 or 0.1 uF (p=pico, u=micro). Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:17:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:17:25 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:17:25 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts I see. I have not worked with WI @ all, so this is a WAG, but this sounds a lot like the wet manifold/dry manifold & which is better debate. My understanding (& I am sure that you have heard a lot from the GN & TType boys) that the hard part about it is getting a RELIABLE, high pressure pump that will not corrode with a water/alcohol mixture. IIRC, this is the same issue (corrosion) that the Alcohol boys have with their fuel just tearing up everything it comes in contact with. How about a high pressure external fuel pump pushing through fogger injectors in the side of my Super ram? I bet that if I use SS nozzles & drill them out I would be able to get a nice spray pattern. Again I am guessing but I bet that in forced induction apps, the value of the pressure w/in the system pushing against the pump affects performance. that being said, a truly slick setup would be one that was pressure compensated for consistency. On a related but different subject, what is the difference between atomization & vaporization. I think that atomization is when you shove a fluid through a hole & it atomizes, meaning it goes into small particles that are more likely to get suspended in air better than larger particles. & vaporization is when something hits something hot & changes states (water to steam for example, exceeds the latent heat of vaporization & changes states. Challenging my physics from way back) Tanx BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:02 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So you have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what compromises your willing to make, with each application. Bruce Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the lil guys are around (just trust me on that one). From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > Tanx > BW > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > Bruce > Whats WI? (water injection?) > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 20:33:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:17:46 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:17:46 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: EFI Information Yes, I did. Did you?. What better way to understand the fundamentals then to see what actually works. Once you see how things are done, you can make descisions about what you want to use or not. He asked a very basic guestion, and I replied with a basic answer. There is more to those sites then hacing, just in case you missed it, that info can be applied in many different ways. Bruce From: "Huw Scourfield" Subject: Re: EFI Information > Bruce, all, do you ever read people's emails Bruce, this guy just wrote that > he wants to "build his own efi system", not hack someone elses GM > whatever; - not everyone lives in the good ol' US of A. Anyway does this > really further the cause of diy efi? > Huw > From: Bruce nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: EFI Information > > Stated like that you'll be looking at papers for years before you get > going. > > I'd suggest that you visit www.tunercat.com, and from there follow the > links > > to the ecmguy's page, in there are several hac's of popular GM ECMs that > > would give an idea of what an ecm does. Also, at his site, are overviews > of > > what items are editable in various ecms, and that would give some insight > as > > where to head > > Bruce > > From: CJYoungDET@aol.com > > Subject: EFI Information > > Hello everyone. I am new to this mailing list. I joined it because I am > > interested in building an EFI system for my car just for a project. I have > > experience in building PCBs and computer programming. I was wondering if > > there were any papers or such materials available that explain the > > fundamentals for EFI. > > Christopher Young ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:20:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:20:57 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:20:57 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) From: "Andris Skulte" Subject: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? > So far the plan is to build a bulletproof 350ish engine. It'll be from > either a Dart or Bowtie block, 6.125" rods, 3.48 stroke ex-NASCAR crank > possibly (or Cola or Callies, some sub $1k crank), 4.000 bore, heads with > around 210cc intake runners (AFR, Canfield, Victor Jr's), 8.5:1 compression > and cam specs based partially on the current engines backpressure vs boost > characteristics (measured when I strap this tired mule to the dyno - will be > fairly mild with duration), and some custom JE/Venolia/KB pistons. > My reasoning is to make a reliable, build it once road racing/street fun > engine. I still am considering a 377, but I like the detonation resistance a > smaller bore gives you. The question of the hour is whether I'll make more > power unshrouding the valves with the larger bore and less boost. I'm > planning on going to about .035 quench, but some folks more experienced than > I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame front travel at > TDC. To knock down compression, I plan on mirroring the combustion chamber > shape in the piston, since this should give you the fastest burn time. Some > words of wisdom from the previously mentioned turbo folks suggest going with > a plain 'ole open bowl piston, but again I'm having a hard time convincing > myself that that's the way to go, when the collective theory based knowledge > usually says to go with a tight quench and small dish. > Any thoughts or comments before I'm committed to building it? Thanks! > Andris Skulte > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > http://www.skulte.com Small as possible chambers Dished pistons 9:1 CR 20 cubes is worth going for Barrier coat the chambers (after smoothing them), but you have to run WI to keep the carbon to a min.. Having power pre boost is a good goal. Little extra compression and bigger motor are great. Might consider off set wrist pins. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:30:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:30:21 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:30:21 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > I see. I have not worked with WI @ all, so this is a WAG, but this sounds a > lot like the wet manifold/dry manifold & which is better debate. Nope, you have to have some wetting of the manifold. In EFI you can just about rule it out. > My > understanding (& I am sure that you have heard a lot from the GN & TType > boys) that the hard part about it is getting a RELIABLE, high pressure pump > that will not corrode with a water/alcohol mixture. IIRC, this is the same > issue (corrosion) that the Alcohol boys have with their fuel just tearing up > everything it comes in contact with. So who needs a high pressure fluid pump?. > How about a high pressure external fuel pump pushing through fogger > injectors in the side of my Super ram? I bet that if I use SS nozzles & > drill them out I would be able to get a nice spray pattern. NOS is operating at like 800 PSI, and you'll probably not have that presure available. Your at least warm on nozzle location. > Again I am guessing but I bet that in forced induction apps, the value of > the pressure w/in the system pushing against the pump affects performance. > that being said, a truly slick setup would be one that was pressure > compensated for consistency. Need a system that just overwhelms that condition. > On a related but different subject, what is the difference between > atomization & vaporization. I think that atomization is when you shove a > fluid through a hole & it atomizes, meaning it goes into small particles > that are more likely to get suspended in air better than larger particles. > & vaporization is when something hits something hot & changes states (water > to steam for example, exceeds the latent heat of vaporization & changes > states. Challenging my physics from way back) Exactly right. You have to decide which you want. Vaporization displaces some volume of air. Also depends on what you think water actually does in the chamber's reaction. Bruce > Tanx > BW > Behalf Of Bruce > Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. > In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So you > have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and > either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two > different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what > compromises your willing to make, with each application. > Bruce > Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the lil > guys are around (just trust me on that one). > From: "Bob Wooten" > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > > Tanx > > BW > > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > Bruce > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:33:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:33:02 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:33:02 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Barrier coat the chambers (after smoothing them), but you have to run WI to keep the carbon to a min.. Bruce Bruce, does keeping the Barrier coating clean maintain the performance of the coating? if so, do you (you being anyone out there, not necessarily BP) know if any of the 2000 HP TT monsters out there now run the coating on their motors? & if they do are they keeping the interior of these motors clean with WI? smells like three benefits from WI, clean chambers, cooler/denser intake charge, & reduction in likelihood of detonation. BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Mon Dec 10 21:10:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:34:13 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:34:13 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Mos wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: > > > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? > > At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. : ) > I don't live in > the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. > > Mos. > > PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. > Sorry for the Dee-lay. The car: http://www.lingenfelter.com/packages/427TT.htm An article about it's little brother: http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/2000/May/200005_roadtest_kngsn.xml?keywords=lingenfelter%20corvette (all one URL) There's a fair amount more reading material that can be found with search engines. Shannen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:42:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:42:15 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:42:15 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Barrier coat the chambers (after smoothing them), but you have to run WI to > keep the carbon to a min.. > Bruce > Bruce, > does keeping the Barrier coating clean maintain the performance of the > coating? if so, do you (you being anyone out there, not necessarily BP) > know if any of the 2000 HP TT monsters out there now run the coating on > their motors? & if they do are they keeping the interior of these motors > clean with WI? Cleanliness isn't the goal. It's keeping the carbon from building up. All I see really working or being an aid on a street motor is the chamber stuff. 2000 HP is a whole new level of problems. > smells like three benefits from WI, clean chambers, cooler/denser intake > charge, & reduction in likelihood of detonation. But, how do you want to weight these items, and what design features will enhance the ones you want to work on?. Bruce > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:45:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:45:27 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:45:27 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts You are SOO good @ keeping us on the edge of our seats. High pressure = easy to maintain nice spray patterns in all conditions, something about "overwhelming the manifold conditions" thing. fogger nozzles for easy availability. I suppose this application could really use someone to come up with a single injector nozzle similar to a fogger nozzle that would be simple to change jets on, or better yet, have a single nozzle/jet for all locations & have a variable jet somewhere else (or pressure, but then we get into critical flow or not). what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased economy & atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a major debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. BUT, what appears to be results of that is, increased resistance to detonation, keeps the cyls clean (old mechanic dude teached me that one) & increases HP, by reducing charge temp (but I have a feeling that this one is open for major debate here). BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:30 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > I see. I have not worked with WI @ all, so this is a WAG, but this sounds a > lot like the wet manifold/dry manifold & which is better debate. Nope, you have to have some wetting of the manifold. In EFI you can just about rule it out. > My > understanding (& I am sure that you have heard a lot from the GN & TType > boys) that the hard part about it is getting a RELIABLE, high pressure pump > that will not corrode with a water/alcohol mixture. IIRC, this is the same > issue (corrosion) that the Alcohol boys have with their fuel just tearing up > everything it comes in contact with. So who needs a high pressure fluid pump?. > How about a high pressure external fuel pump pushing through fogger > injectors in the side of my Super ram? I bet that if I use SS nozzles & > drill them out I would be able to get a nice spray pattern. NOS is operating at like 800 PSI, and you'll probably not have that presure available. Your at least warm on nozzle location. > Again I am guessing but I bet that in forced induction apps, the value of > the pressure w/in the system pushing against the pump affects performance. > that being said, a truly slick setup would be one that was pressure > compensated for consistency. Need a system that just overwhelms that condition. > On a related but different subject, what is the difference between > atomization & vaporization. I think that atomization is when you shove a > fluid through a hole & it atomizes, meaning it goes into small particles > that are more likely to get suspended in air better than larger particles. > & vaporization is when something hits something hot & changes states (water > to steam for example, exceeds the latent heat of vaporization & changes > states. Challenging my physics from way back) Exactly right. You have to decide which you want. Vaporization displaces some volume of air. Also depends on what you think water actually does in the chamber's reaction. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 10 21:27:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:47:00 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:47:00 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? This is correct. I just did a search through a Honda parts site, and the 49 state model is completely different and MUCH more expensive. Not just the sensor, but the whole exhaust set up. The NB sensor is cheap, that is what you are seeing for under $100. I also have some parts scouts looking for a better price than www.partsbin.com and so far, even with an enticement of a purchase of 10 or more units, no one seems to be able to best that price. BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the bounds of the agreement? Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Kevin _ Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 10:16 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? I believe you need a sensor from a non-CA car. As we know, emission laws are stricter in CA because of smog problems. Therefore, I'm drawing the assumption that the CA version had to run stoich to maintain maximum catalyst efficiency and lowest emissions. You can easily detect stoich with a cheaper, switching narrow-band O2 sensor. In the other states, laws are a little less strict so I'm guessing it was a lean-burn civic VX in 49 states. Just to toss out a question, does anybody know what A:F they ran on the lean-burn side of that VX? I know it couldn't be that lean because its not stratified charge, but I am curious... Kevin >Hey all, > >I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different >and I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it >can't be beat!). > >So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor >1994- for CA only there are three listings; > >Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen >Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 >Bosch $57.60 > >Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > >Thanks, >Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:47:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:47:34 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:47:34 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) 8.5:1 compression Might go a bit higher than this with WI. >and cam specs based partially on the current engines backpressure vs boost >characteristics (measured when I strap this tired mule to the dyno - will be >fairly mild with duration), Short duration, high lift, wide lobe centers (mebbe 116). Take a peek at rollers, or even BETTER, mushroom tappets. and some custom JE/Venolia/KB pistons. JE and Venolia use pretty much 2018 alloy forgings (high expansion). KB's are generally cast hyper(ujunkit). TRW uses something that is a proprietary version of 4032 alloy forgings. (Lower expansion) This is a better approach for most anything but a fueler. There are others besides TRW who will do 4032 alloy. > >My reasoning is to make a reliable, build it once road racing/street fun >engine. I still am considering a 377, but I like the detonation resistance a >smaller bore gives you. The side thrust on the bores with a 377 is a pretty serious matter with boost. The question of the hour is whether I'll make more >power unshrouding the valves with the larger bore and less boost. I'm >planning on going to about .035 quench, Go for it !!! but some folks more experienced than >I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame front travel at >TDC. The trick here can be some little channels to sort of "direct" the turbulence as the gas comes out of the squish area--this keeps the turbulence pattern in the chamber more consistent, and avoids the "roughness" these guys are likely talking about. My pet theory is that the "roughness" comes from inconsistent patterns of turbulence in the chambers causing variation in the burn time--sort of as though you were jiggliing the timing. To knock down compression, I plan on mirroring the combustion chamber >shape in the piston, since this should give you the fastest burn time. This sounds good IF you really need to do it. How high would the squeeze be with flat pistons?? Some >words of wisdom from the previously mentioned turbo folks suggest going with >a plain 'ole open bowl piston, NAH. >Any thoughts or comments before I'm committed to building it? Thanks! There you go. Greg > >------------------ >Andris Skulte ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:49:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:49:09 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:49:09 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Agreed on the cleanliness thing, bad choice of words, I get it. don't know about the other things, still have to do homework on the weighted benefits of them all & see which are worth the time & energy. Heck, still need to finish tuning in my VE tables, prolly ought to start there & work up to turbo's (LOL) BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:42 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Barrier coat the chambers (after smoothing them), but you have to run WI to > keep the carbon to a min.. > Bruce > Bruce, > does keeping the Barrier coating clean maintain the performance of the > coating? if so, do you (you being anyone out there, not necessarily BP) > know if any of the 2000 HP TT monsters out there now run the coating on > their motors? & if they do are they keeping the interior of these motors > clean with WI? Cleanliness isn't the goal. It's keeping the carbon from building up. All I see really working or being an aid on a street motor is the chamber stuff. 2000 HP is a whole new level of problems. > smells like three benefits from WI, clean chambers, cooler/denser intake > charge, & reduction in likelihood of detonation. But, how do you want to weight these items, and what design features will enhance the ones you want to work on?. Bruce > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:49:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:49:51 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:49:51 -0800 From: "Bryon Hargis" Subject: Re: WB Requests FJO Inc makes a lower price piece, although I have never heard anything about its accuracy (or lack of). It does have a nice rpm and a/f datalogging software for it. Price would be about 700 for that, and you have to have a laptop. I think its also near 700 if you dont get the datalogging and get the display instead. Bryon "Pardon my html email account, but I couldn't imagine sifting through the flames otherwise" _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 21:52:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:52:47 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:52:47 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts >On a related but different subject, what is the difference between >atomization & vaporization. I think that atomization is when you shove a >fluid through a hole & it atomizes, meaning it goes into small particles >that are more likely to get suspended in air better than larger particles. >& vaporization is when something hits something hot & changes states (water >to steam for example, exceeds the latent heat of vaporization & changes >states. Challenging my physics from way back) You are pretty much right on. Add in the facts that you can't vaporize more than what will produce the "saturated" partial pressure at any given gas temp and that you WON'T vaporize anything unless heat energy equal to the latent heat of vaporization is "available" to do the job, and you pretty much have it. Greg > >Tanx > >BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Mon Dec 10 22:36:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:53:11 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 21:53:11 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question I'm not sure, but what about the ride height sensors used on an air-ride car ? Lincoln for example used a hall-effect sensor for determining ride height. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 3:42 PM Subject: Shock Sensor Question > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. > > Linear position sensor are on the order of $180 US per sensor, as you can > see this gets expensive for 2 and maybe 4 sensors (front and back). > > I had thought of using a rotary pot, with a pulley, return spring, you get > the idea, but from speaking with someone who mentioned they tried something > similar, they said the rotary pots do not react fast enough for the > frequencies that the shock moves. Instead of the Rotary Pot, how about > interfacing an optical sensor from a PC mouse in its place, does anyone > have an idea if the mouse optical sensor could be made to react fast enough? > > > I have been thinking of maybe a different optical approach, but I do not > know the easiest way to do this. Maybe a pulsed light / laser, to a > reflector, measure the round trip time, speed of light should handle any > frequencies that a shock can move at. > > Do some of you engineers out there have any good ideas that we could tackle > to try to build a cheap way to measure shock position on a Drag race car. > > Thanks > > Steve F > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From audserv@exis.net Mon Dec 10 21:36:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:02:03 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:02:03 -0300 From: "Peter Florance" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing I can't remember if Hall's have a bias that shows up at the output but the cap is probably the best way to insure the zero cross. You're probably not going to get the same shape as the magnetic sensor, but good enough to use, yes is my guess. Peter Florance 81 euro 528i w/ 3.5L > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Rich M > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 6:37 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing > > > Steve, > It could be that the input signal from the hall effect does not > reach zero. > Hall effect outputs often swing between two voltage levels which are both > above ground. LM1815 requires that the input at least reaches 0V, > preferably > going negative. You could try capacitive coupling of the input > signal to get > a zero crossing signal. > Cheers > Rich > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > > Behalf Of Stephen Webb > > Sent: 10 December 2001 22:52 > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: LM1815; distributor hall sender sensing > > > > > > > > I have an LM1815 "variable reluctance sensor amplifier" IC, which I > > believe is appropriate for my application. I am trying to use > it to sense > > the ignition pulses from a Bosch hall sender distributor. > > > > I prototyped the suggested circuit, but was unable to get any meaningful > > output from it. Does anyone have any experience with these > ICs, and if so > > are there any pitfalls that I might be in right now? (I either get > > seemingly uncorrelated triggers at a very high rate, or no triggering at > > all) > > > > Does the ground reference for the IC have to be the same as the > one going > > into the distributor? > > > > TIA > > > > -Steve > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ---------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > > the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 22:05:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:05:32 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:05:32 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to tooth dimensions. A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a second crude sync from the cam/distributor. The Hall devices I picked for experiments (MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make do with what we have. Bruce Roe On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:14:08 +1100 Peter Gargano writes: > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > > > Flywheel teeth are not so accurate, but there are so > > many of them there should be plenty of resolution. > > As well, the angular resolution compared to a much smaller > diameter distributor or crank wheel should be better - even > allowing for gross machining inaccuracies. > > > A counter of the same module could keep track of > > crank position. But another sensor is needed to sync > > the thing. I have some hall effect devices that adjust > > themselves to the signal level. > > This is the job for a small "intelligent" device like a PIC. > It can also easily distinguish missing (or extra teeth) easily > (eliminating a separate sync pickup). Less than US$5 for > 5 MIPs - amazing! > > Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Mon Dec 10 21:56:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:15:18 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:15:18 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? ----- Original Message ----- From: "skulte" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:22 AM Subject: RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Ditto. I've been "forced" to read through the latest petty bickering > because I'm actually learning. Among the 3 or 4 paragraphs of > chest-thumping, there are the few sentences that are actually about EFI, > not CV's, NDA's, penis size, etc... I learn from those few > sentences, but its unfortunate that 90% of the post is insults and > rebuttals. > > If anyone has insight on some > combustion chamber designs for a twin turbo smallblock chevy, I'm > beginning the parts-buying process for the new engine soon. Now back to > your regularly scheduled bickering... > > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > http://www.skulte.com > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > I hate to add a me-too, but I'm here trying to learn a little about > > EFI. So far I've learned that a number of Americans and Aussies don't > > get along, and there are several who have apparently approached > > godhood in there infinite wisdom and knowledge. On both sides, I > > might add. > > I think perhaps a moderator might be in order, but I can understand > > how one wouldn't want to wish *that* duty on anyone! > > That said, my delete key works well, also; and if that isn't enough - filters! > > > > krw > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jessmx5@earthlink.net Mon Dec 10 21:58:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:18:04 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:18:04 -0300 From: "Jess Gypin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! If the new (second batch) of PCBs are the same as the first batch, then they work. Jess ----- Original Message ----- From: "rr" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:28 PM Subject: Re: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! > > I'm still at work, don't have a PCB here. However, if you > are measuring a connection between the junction of R37 and > C11 to the output of the 8 v reg, then there is most > likely > a solder short on the board. > > I don't believe that the layout is incorrrect as there are > several of these units already in use. If you would double > check and get back to me I may be able to help further. > > > BobR. > > > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 18:16:48 +0000 > w.shawsr@att.net wrote: > >Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was > >Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't > >read my post completely. > > > >GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! > > > >Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe > >even report back to the list??? > > > > > >My previous post stated: > > > >I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around > >with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem > >quite > >right. Maybe someone could shed some light? > > > >The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. > > The > >schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd > >but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 > >volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would > >make > >that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? > > > >Bill > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 22:28:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:28:46 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:28:46 -0800 From: "James Ballenger" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Photoelectric timing gates Ok, this is a pretty basic question but I am on a time and money budget so I could use the help. I have used a timing gate system that used a reflector, a box, and a cheap lap timer in the past that was quite good at recording lap times. I would like to do something similar and here are the specifications I desire: * Timing accurate to at least .1 seconds (preferably .001 seconds) * Lap time output display that displays individual lap times as opposed to the sum of all previous lap times * Less than $50 total component cost * A possible lap time recording function/output function so that I can upload it to my laptop via a windaq or other equivalent system (a bonus feature if this can be kept under $50 cost) * an easily visible output display of some sort, can be a stopwatch or anything else so long as it works and displays individual lap times * high reliability ( I assume a photoelectric led setup with a non-visible frequency will work fine) And yes, for you hardcore diy guys, I am asking for someone to tell me how to do this because I don't know where to begin. This is the sort of project that I hope will ease me into the realm of basic diy circuit design that will allow me to proceed further in the future. So the bottom line, what is the easiest, simplest, and cheapest method to implement a project of this sort or where might I look for some direction? Thanks, James Ballenger ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From blocklm@juno.com Mon Dec 10 22:12:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:29:52 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:29:52 -0300 From: Brian L Massey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:27:22 -0800 "efi_student" writes: > I have offered certain people an ... > assembled, tested unit sans sensor for ***cost of components***. ... > > The agreement I have made with them is that they MUST abide > by the user's agreement, AND report their > results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, > I think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's > agreement. > Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the > bounds of the agreement? > > Lance I can't speak for the diyWB team of course, but I'm personally very gratified to see your exceptional post, Lance. The spirit you exhibit above is I think just the kind of person the diyWB team was hoping to share their results with. Way to go. Recommend adding Lance to the roster of those that "get it". Just be sure you don't waste your generosity of spirit building them for people who well *could*, but are just too lazy to assemble it themselves. (But sounds like you've already been selective that way). Again, nice going. A few more like yourself and I might be tempted to reinstate my faith in and respect for mankind. :) BLM ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 22:49:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:49:07 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 22:49:07 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: RE: Atomisation -> Interesting...I must admit that I had thought that, under part -> throttle, as the runner velocity was low it was better to inject at -> the narrowest point. I hadn't thought about whether the poorer -> atomisation would countermand this. The TBIs inject as far away from the valve as possible, into the low-pressure (15-19 inches of vacuum) intake tract. There's plenty of *time* for vaporization to occur, plus the sonic flow across the butterfly goes a good job of breaking the fuel up to start with. The port injectors are like pissing into a urinal; the fancy spray patterns the books show only exist for a small part of the injector's duty cycle if you look at one with a strobe. -> I guess we are assuming here that a TBI system will have a larger ID -> than the carb as it will not need a venturi? They run slightly larger butterfly sizes than carburetors on the average, and without the venturis the flow is typically higher. Some TBIs mount the injector in such a way as to restrict air flow, though. Ford's second-generation injection for their DOHC Indy motors went from conventional injection nozzles to injecting into venturis to help atomization. It helped mid-range torque a lot, and dramatically improved fuel consumption; enough to let them eliminate one fuel stop. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 10 22:54:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:14:21 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:14:21 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? Lance, I want to personally and publicly, Thank You, for truely and completely *getting it*. Your exactly the kinda guy we had in mind with the design. Again, Thanks Bruce AND all 7 of the lil guys are included in saying, thanks. From: "efi_student" Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from > list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the > financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain > people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not > complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a > commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an > assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) > before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with > them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their > results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I > think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. > Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the > bounds of the agreement? > Lance ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Mon Dec 10 22:56:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:17:49 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:17:49 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. > > Linear position sensor are on the order of $180 US per sensor, as > you can see this gets expensive for 2 and maybe 4 sensors (front > and back). > > I had thought of using a rotary pot, with a pulley, return > spring, you get the idea, but from speaking with someone who > mentioned they tried something similar, they said the rotary pots > do not react fast enough for the frequencies that the shock moves. > Instead of the Rotary Pot, how about interfacing an optical sensor > from a PC mouse in its place, does anyone have an idea if the > mouse optical sensor could be made to react fast enough? It could react fast enough (given appropriate "gearing") but there's no absolute count available and no recognizable position from each pulse. So you have to keep count. All the time. Any loss in count results in "virtual sag"; i.e. the controller is going to believe that the displacement is different to the actual physical displacement. Lost pulses could be avoided by Gray-coding the wheel and having multiple pickups. > I have been thinking of maybe a different optical approach, but I > do not know the easiest way to do this. Maybe a pulsed light / > laser, to a reflector, measure the round trip time, speed of light > should handle any frequencies that a shock can move at. The speed of signal processing is more likely to be the problem. (vis. Lidar) You're looking at a bandwidth of several hundred Hertz. > Do some of you engineers out there have any good ideas that we > could tackle to try to build a cheap way to measure shock position > on a Drag race car. I guess that rules out the laser-reflector. If it weren't for the noise levels of a drag race car, you could use acoustic resonance of the tube. This changes with the location of the piston within the tube. A microwave might be short enough to resolve the displacement as accurately as you need; the 100 GHz signal might attract HARM. :-) None of these methods seems any cheaper than the linear transducer. Maybe you can get away with a shorter (cheaper) transducer by mounting it in parallel on the same linkage, but with less overall movement. Without seeing the suspension layout, it's difficult to say if you could use a set of rotary encoders instead. They tend to be less costly. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 10 23:23:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:23:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:23:06 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Bob Wooten tapped away at the keyboard with: > You are SOO good @ keeping us on the edge of our seats. Based on what's been written before, he's using compressed air to feed and shear the water for best atomisation. As long as the air flow rate is known/measured, there's not a real problem introducing the extra air. The use of air avoids direct contact with valves, pumps, etc. The only WI components exposed to air AND water are then the injector jets. The jets don't need moving parts. A check valve in the water feed line will prevent the turbo blowing back though that line. A sequence of compressed-air valves can be used to persuade that same valve to close on demand, cutting water flow in the forward direction. > High pressure = easy to maintain nice spray patterns in all conditions, > something about "overwhelming the manifold conditions" thing. > fogger nozzles for easy availability. I suppose this application > could really use someone to come up with a single injector nozzle > similar to a fogger nozzle that would be simple to change jets on, > or better yet, have a single nozzle/jet for all locations & have a > variable jet somewhere else (or pressure, but then we get into > critical flow or not). According to the people who make some money from it, (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. The closer you inject to the inlet valves, the greater the proportion of droplets and from a single injector, the greater the chance of imbalance. A port water-injector minimises vapourization but droplet sizes need to be very small. Distributing the right amount of water to each requires careful tuning and/or management. > what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased > economy & atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? The _least_ amount of water necessary will provide the maximum amount of power as water vapour displaces oxygen. It's better to have tiny droplets of water until the valve closes for compression. > exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a > major debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. Evaporating the droplets in-cylinder doesn't reduce the total oxygen present even when the droplets evaporate and absorb energy during compression (six to seven times the amount of heat as for the same mass of gasoline). The water vapour acts as a "buffer" to the flame front, not only obstructing it at a molecular level, but also to reduce hot spots by absorbing some of their heat. The Gasoline FAQ indicates the degree to which water content in the air (humidity) reduces an engine's Octane number requirements. Order of magnitude is 4 g water per kg of air reducing ONR by one point. (The relationship is not entirely linear.) With a high charge temperature and without becoming saturated, one could add 40 to 60 g of water per kg of inlet air, depending on initial ambient conditions. That's an AWR of between 25:1 and 16:1 for an ONR of between 10 and 15 points. Too much water and the flame front slows too much as the reagents take longer to "find" each other, resulting in less torque. Determining what is "too much" will take some tuning time. Accurate knock detection and some means of measuring torque under controlled loads are a distinct advantage. Well, that's one theory anyway. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From w.shawsr@att.net Mon Dec 10 22:22:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:34:24 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:34:24 -0300 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! Oops, I was looking at R38. I was surprised it was working so well with the grounds 'screwed up' like that! And THAT, Peter, is why I try not to speak in absolutes. But when you can't be heard over the noise, what's a guy to do but try to shout over top of it? Back to your regularly scheduled bickering.... bs > Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 15:04:56 -0500 > From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com > Subject: RE: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! > > Bill, > > The one I built works fine, did not require any changes to make it work. > > However, I had to configure mine to interface to a data recorder on our drag > car. > The data recorder only has a 5V capability, so I could not power the WBO2 > UEGO part of > the board from my data recorder. > > I had to power both the Heater and the UEGO circuits from the same source. > This > means that I also needed to tie the two grounds together. > > J4 should be connected to J12 and should be GND in my case. Until I > connected J12 to gnd I could not get the board to work either. > > The board is fine. > > Steve > > - -----Original Message----- > From: w.shawsr@att.net [mailto:w.shawsr@att.net] > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 1:17 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT ERROR!!! > > Wow, the only one who responded to my previous email was > Peter, and he was so far off base I'd guess he didn't > read my post completely. > > GUYS....THERE IS AN ERROR IN THE DIY-WB PCB LAYOUT!!! > > Could someone pick up an ohmmeter and verify this? Maybe > even report back to the list??? > > My previous post stated: > > I finally powered up my board and I've been poking around > with a meter for an hour or so now. Things don't seem quite > right. Maybe someone could shed some light? > > The schematic and the PCB don't seem to agree on Vgnd. The > schematic shows the junction of R37 and C11 as being Vgnd > but that trace on the PCB connects to the output of the 8 > volt regulator according to my ohmmeter, which would make > that point +4V wrt Vgnd. Whatsupwiddat? > > Bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 10 23:16:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:39:07 -0300 Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2001 23:39:07 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? So the idea is a car available from an aftermarket tuner? You guys don't read much about imports. There's an entire site devoted to late model Toyota Supras that all make 650+ hp from 3 liters www.to4r.com and most of these guys are using completely stock internals. Of course, Toyota uses that EPA mandated DOHC and 4 valves per cylinder. Kinda reminds me of the days when the GN first hit the streets and a lot of the V-8 guys were furious at being beaten by a little V-6. I might add there are some GNs out there that accelerate at alarming rates too. All for a lot less than either of the cars you linked to. And as amazing as it sounds, a Toyota Supra pulled 0.98g in C&D, Motor Trend, and R&T, absolutely bone stock in 1993. Motor Trend proclaimed this same car "the best stopping car we have tested in the last 30 years" after repeated 60-0 stops in 116 ft. It also bested the ZR-1 according to the same magazines in 1993, a car that cost 50% more. The late model Supra was the benchmark for C-5 development, and even has received top honors for reliability in the premium sports car class. Enough chest pounding. Suffice it to say, if you are going to start talking about "tuned" cars regardless of the developer, you are comparing apples and oranges. That's no different than saying the Bugatti, Porsche GT-1, or Mercedes CLK are not reasonably priced for the average human. I sure wouldn't spend almost $50k in modifications after coughing up the requisite $40somethingK for the base car. I'd have been a lot more agreeable had you said the Z-06 Corvette, despite some quality problems, it is an exceptionally capable automobile that is certainly reasonably affordable, and meets all the other requirements of a fully DOT and EPA compliant street vehicle. Stock for stock, I don't think there is anything out there that is as capable at a reasonable price. As in all cases, YMMV. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Shannen Durphey Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 4:10 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Mos wrote: > > On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: > > > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? > > At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. : ) > I don't live in > the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. > > Mos. > > PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. > Sorry for the Dee-lay. The car: http://www.lingenfelter.com/packages/427TT.htm An article about it's little brother: http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/2000/May/200005_ro adtest_kngsn.xml?keywords=lingenfelter%20corvette (all one URL) There's a fair amount more reading material that can be found with search engines. Shannen ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 00:00:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:00:18 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:00:18 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers -> So do "conventional"[1] port injectors at any point in the rev/load -> range produce better fuel delivery then carbs? "Better" in the sense of "more appropriate for the driving conditions at hand?" Yes; port injection (more particularly, timed or "sequential" port injection) can give better cold start and cold idle emissions and driveability than a TBI or most carburetors. The old side constant-vacuum SUs and the like with appropriate manifolding would come danged close, though. -> (I'm presuming that the carbs' superiority only holds true for a -> small subset of available hardware, and does not extend to mass -> market carbs factory fitted to older non-performance cars - is that -> correct [in True. Most carbs were the cheapest things that would do the job. Just like most modern fuel injection systems. Different problem set, different solution set, you know. -> Does it follow that port injected engines without cats spit some -> amount of unburnt fuel out the exhaust? They don't *have* to, particularly if the injectors are small enough to run a decent pulsewidth at low RPM, but the atomization of most injectors is very poor, and will result in unburned fuel going past the exhaust valve. There are people who believe that port injectors shoot at the back of the intake valve, which is hot and vaporizes the fuel, but in most engines this is not true; the injector simply squirts a stream on the port wall or floor, where it's picked up by passing air, catch-as-catch-can. Take a look at any 5.0 Mustang or Tuned Port Chevy and note the injectors are nowhere near the valves. A few new-design engines *do* shoot more or less at the valves, but they're still a minority on the road. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Tue Dec 11 00:16:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:03:09 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:03:09 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: 76-79 Cad port injection EFI Kevin, You want a 76-79 Seville or a 79 Eldo (and 80 in CA) for that setup. 78 on are a usually corroded AU intake with a smaller throttle body. Bruce Roe On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:20:37 -0600 Kevin Wright writes: > Of course, *I* was looking for one with the > Caddy/Olds EFI to plop on my '70 Cutlass with the MegaSquirt. > Kevin Wright ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Mon Dec 10 20:50:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:04:16 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:04:16 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Flywheel teeth are not so accurate, but their are so many of them there should be plenty of resolution. A counter of the same module could keep track of crank position. But another sensor is needed to sync the thing. I have some hall effect devices that adjust themselves to the signal level. Having said that, I haven't tried the idea. Has anyone gotten it on a scope? Bruce Roe On Sun, 9 Dec 2001 23:47:37 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > Flywheel teeth are not made very accurately. > > Have you read and compared (from various > manufactureres) anything to support > those statements, and would make them absolute truths?. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From akallotte@juno.com Mon Dec 10 23:49:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:04:20 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:04:20 -0300 From: akallotte@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB assembly help > So, 25uFis a common substitute for the 22uF value. 22 uF is a preferred value, but many capacitor makers use the closest "logical" value. Just wanted to be sure. > > Next, C2 and C8 call for .1uf 25v, but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, and C14 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. > The 104 means 10 pF x 10000 (four zeros) or 100,000 or 0.1 uF (p=pico, u=micro). Peter. I found that info after searching the net (yet another way of learning from the WB). I guess I can state my question more simply - I only have 1 cap marked .1uf 25V, but C2 and C8 each call for it. I have 4 little caps marked 104 C5K, which I assume are the .1uf 12V variety, but only three spots for them (C9, C13, C14). Is my parts kit a little off, or does one little cap sub for one big one? Are there any board pics using the group parts kit - so I can visually see what should be where? If there is not, and my board works, I'll gladly post pictures. Also, what's the best/safest way for me to test my board before hooking up a sensor. Thanks for the continued help. ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 00:06:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:06:00 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:06:00 -0800 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB assembly help > I guess I can state my question more simply - I > only have 1 cap marked .1uf 25V, but C2 and C8 each > call for it. I have 4 little caps marked 104 C5K, > which I assume are the .1uf 12V variety, but only > three spots for them (C9, C13, C14). Is my parts > kit a little off, or does one little cap sub for > one big one? I had the same question/confusion, on the schematic C2 is labeled as a "disc" capacitor, it's the flat circular cap about 3/8" diameter ( 10mm if I do my metric conversion correctly ). By the process of elimination, C8 is the fourth "monolithic" cap, yes the 12V rating is a little low, I'm not worried about it but if you are you can substitute a 0.1uF disc cap w/ a voltage rating over 18V, since the D9 zener diode will "clamp" the input voltage to 18V. In most cases C8 will see from 12.6 to 13.8V, so it should do fine as is. I think Bruce P. was the first to mention this, watch the placement of C7 & C10 so the leads don't short to the traces running underneath them. I positioned my caps so the gap between the leads is centered over the trace, alternatively you can put a square of electrical tape under the caps or insulating sleeves such as heat shrink tubing over the leads. > Also, what's the best/safest way for me to test my > board before hooking up a sensor. As has been mentioned before, consider using a brake light bulb to simulate the sensor's heater. regards, phil __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Mon Dec 10 23:47:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:18:14 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:18:14 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, not for controlling EFI... Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Tony Bryant > Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > > > Toyota anything EFI late eighties/early nineties. Nice 5V > supply, 0-4.2ish V > out. > simple to mount works well. > > I recently bought one for nz$10 at a wrecker. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Tue Dec 11 00:14:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:24:10 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:24:10 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Flywheel teeth are not so accurate, but there are so > many of them there should be plenty of resolution. As well, the angular resolution compared to a much smaller diameter distributor or crank wheel should be better - even allowing for gross machining inaccuracies. > A counter of the same module could keep track of > crank position. But another sensor is needed to sync > the thing. I have some hall effect devices that adjust > themselves to the signal level. This is the job for a small "intelligent" device like a PIC. It can also easily distinguish missing (or extra teeth) easily (eliminating a separate sync pickup). Less than US$5 for 5 MIPs - amazing! Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 00:29:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:29:46 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:29:46 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse in programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the high end Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us] The TBIs inject as far away from the valve as possible, into the low-pressure (15-19 inches of vacuum) intake tract. There's plenty of *time* for vaporization to occur, plus the sonic flow across the butterfly goes a good job of breaking the fuel up to start with. The port injectors are like pissing into a urinal; the fancy spray patterns the books show only exist for a small part of the injector's duty cycle if you look at one with a strobe. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Tue Dec 11 00:22:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:34:54 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:34:54 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB assembly help akallotte@juno.com wrote: > >.. I guess I can state my question more simply - I only have > 1 cap marked .1uf 25V, but C2 and C8 each call for it. I have 4 little > caps marked 104 C5K, which I assume are the .1uf 12V variety, but only > three spots for them (C9, C13, C14). Is my parts kit a little off, or > does one little cap sub for one big one? Sorry, I should have realised the problem - the feedback 0.1 uF capacitor (C7) is specified on the schematic as a "poly" or polyester capacitor. This has a higher tolerance than the "104" decoupling capacitors (sometime called block monolithic caps), and is usually used in applications where the value is actually important (not the case for the 104 caps). So, C7 is the one marked 0.1uf 25V So, the 0.1 uF values are (nominally) the same, but different types of construction. Peter. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From CJYoungDET@aol.com Tue Dec 11 00:18:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:34:58 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:34:58 -0300 From: CJYoungDET@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor --part1_173.8ddba5.2946d519_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think the one that Megasquirt uses, the Motorola MPX4115, might be what you're looking for. Christopher Young In a message dated 12/10/2001 7:07:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, SAndersen@advan-tek.com writes: > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > not for controlling EFI... > > Steve > --part1_173.8ddba5.2946d519_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think the one that Megasquirt uses, the Motorola MPX4115, might be what you're looking for.

Christopher Young

In a message dated 12/10/2001 7:07:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, SAndersen@advan-tek.com writes:


Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost
applications, either wrecker or new?  I found one at Omega for
like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else
available.  In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost,
not for controlling EFI...

Steve


--part1_173.8ddba5.2946d519_boundary-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Tue Dec 11 00:24:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:36:49 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:36:49 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Sensor Question Hello Andrew, Thanks for that guys, that was a top rundown for me. Re Carters point about the frequency of input signals interfering more than nescesary: I had considered this, and I was wondering how I would set up all the interupt priorities etc etc. Obviously the timing of the injectors and igntion are of crucial importance, but then again if you miss reading a MAP sensor just as the throttle is undergoing sudden change under big boost (or similar kind of extreme condition) then you could also potentially be in for a bit of detination, or even just irritating hesitation. Then I got to thinking about a modular designed EFI computer, where there is a dedicated micro for input signals, conditioning etc, a micro for the injecting, a micro for the ignition, a micro for user interfacing etc etc, all working off a bus using an agreed protocol. It seems like overkill, but you could use markedly cheaper micros, simplifies problems like input interrupts interfering with output interrupts etc, and also would allow one to build an engine using a normal distributor and fuel injection, and then later down the track as money, time, whatever was no longer an issue, be able to just plug in another daughterboard for ignition, fit the required external components, and save the hassle of buying (building) a full new computer. Thoughts? Ideas? Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 8:42:03 AM, you wrote: AT> Carter, AT> Thanks for sticking to the original thread :) AT> The ring gear was brought up in efi332 a while back, and was discarded for a AT> number of reasons including the concerns you wrote about below. One other AT> valid concern: It's quite possible that a tooth will break off, making a AT> difficult situtation much worse :( AT> -Andrew >> One problem with using a distributor to generate >> timing is the jitter due to mechanical backlash in the >> drive. Many use some sort of helical gear arrangement >> off of the camshaft, often in common with the oil pump >> drive. Any wear in the system will result in timing >> innacuracies. To compensate, you would have to run a >> more conservative advance map. >> >> Using the starter ring gearteeth has some issues. The >> environment is not friendly; clutch dust, road dirt, >> water, bits of metal from the gearteeth, oil leaks >> (engine and transmission), heat, vibration, etc. The >> frequency of a 150 tooth gear at 9,000 RPM is 2250 Hz. >> So pulsewidth is around 440 microseconds. Since the >> ECU is already pretty busy, it may not appreciate >> handling an interrupt so often. That means some kind >> of frequency divider circuitry (and intermediary >> signal conditioning if you use a mag pickup). Well >> within the state of the art, just more bother. >> As for pickups, you have 3 main choices, opto, >> inductive, or hall. >> Both opto detectors and hall sensors must be able to >> handle the frequency (not all can). The opto emitter >> and detector, and the hall sensor are semiconductors, >> so you must specify parts capable withstanding the >> environment. An inductive sensor can handle the >> frequency, but the air gap may be critcal and require >> fine adjustment. The sensing edge of the ring gear may >> also require machining to insure that the runout is >> small enough to yield reliable operation. >> >> With an opto sensor, whether you choose a reflective >> or transmissive scheme, the obvious issue is >> obscurement of the beam by debris. >> >> An inductive or hall pickup can be affected by a >> buildup of ferrous dust or particles, since the sensor >> must be biased with a magnet to detect the teeth. >> >> Detection of TDC (or equivalent) can be accomplished >> by altering one tooth somehow, to give a detectably >> different waveform. >> >> If I was forced to make a choice, I'd probably go with >> inductive. The detector itself is more robust. To >> combat crud buidup, I would probably fashion a 'wiper' >> that would sweep the pickup each revolution. A small >> piece of teflon or whatnot on the tip of one geartooth >> (maybe 0.02-0.05" thick). Maybe spring load it so the >> root of the starter pinion gear could compress it >> during starts. >> >> Lucky for me, I'm not faced with such a choice. >> >> Carter Shore >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Send your FREE holiday greetings online! >> http://greetings.yahoo.com >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- AT> -- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the AT> quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> >> AT> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- AT> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) AT> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Tue Dec 11 00:40:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:53:19 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:53:19 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Hello efi_student, Check out this MPEG of a seriously mental supra packing 900hp: http://www.japanesemotorsport.com.au/supra.mpg Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 1:16:40 PM, you wrote: e> So the idea is a car available from an aftermarket tuner? You guys e> don't read much about imports. There's an entire site devoted to late e> model Toyota Supras that all make 650+ hp from 3 liters www.to4r.com and e> most of these guys are using completely stock internals. Of course, e> Toyota uses that EPA mandated DOHC and 4 valves per cylinder. Kinda e> reminds me of the days when the GN first hit the streets and a lot of e> the V-8 guys were furious at being beaten by a little V-6. I might add e> there are some GNs out there that accelerate at alarming rates too. All e> for a lot less than either of the cars you linked to. e> And as amazing as it sounds, a Toyota Supra pulled 0.98g in C&D, Motor e> Trend, and R&T, absolutely bone stock in 1993. Motor Trend proclaimed e> this same car "the best stopping car we have tested in the last 30 e> years" after repeated 60-0 stops in 116 ft. It also bested the ZR-1 e> according to the same magazines in 1993, a car that cost 50% more. The e> late model Supra was the benchmark for C-5 development, and even has e> received top honors for reliability in the premium sports car class. e> Enough chest pounding. e> Suffice it to say, if you are going to start talking about "tuned" cars e> regardless of the developer, you are comparing apples and oranges. e> That's no different than saying the Bugatti, Porsche GT-1, or Mercedes e> CLK are not reasonably priced for the average human. I sure wouldn't e> spend almost $50k in modifications after coughing up the requisite e> $40somethingK for the base car. I'd have been a lot more agreeable had e> you said the Z-06 Corvette, despite some quality problems, it is an e> exceptionally capable automobile that is certainly reasonably e> affordable, and meets all the other requirements of a fully DOT and EPA e> compliant street vehicle. Stock for stock, I don't think there is e> anything out there that is as capable at a reasonable price. As in all e> cases, YMMV. e> Lance e> -----Original Message----- e> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On e> Behalf Of Shannen Durphey e> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 4:10 PM e> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org e> Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? e> Mos wrote: >> >> On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: >> >> > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? >> >> At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. e> : ) >> I don't live in >> the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. >> >> Mos. >> >> PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. >> e> Sorry for the Dee-lay. e> The car: e> http://www.lingenfelter.com/packages/427TT.htm e> An article about it's little brother: e> http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/2000/May/200005_ro e> adtest_kngsn.xml?keywords=lingenfelter%20corvette e> (all one URL) e> There's a fair amount more reading material that can be found with e> search e> engines. e> Shannen e> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ e> ---- e> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the e> quotes) e> in the body of a message (not the subject) to e> majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org e> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- e> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) e> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 00:42:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:58:06 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 00:58:06 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor The most common junk yard donor is a Turbo Sunbird. Thou turbo buicks, Syclones, Typoons have them. Since it's referenced to Absolute, you really looking for a 2 bar sensor (to read 1 bar of boost). Bruce From: "Stephen Andersen" Subject: RE: MAP Sensor > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > not for controlling EFI... > Steve > > Behalf Of Tony Bryant > > Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > > Toyota anything EFI late eighties/early nineties. Nice 5V > > supply, 0-4.2ish V > > out. simple to mount works well. > > I recently bought one for nz$10 at a wrecker. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ws6transam@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 00:45:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:02:13 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:02:13 -0300 From: Daniel and Laura Burk MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SPAM [and how does apply to DIY_EFI??] It's precisely this stuff that made me quit subscribing to DIY_EFI in 1997. I eventually re-subscribed but evidently the same culture is still present in one form or another. Could we please start a list called DIY_FLAMES and send all non-topic stuff there? Thanks. --Daniel Burk [EFI Content here: I received Steve C's DIY_WB parts kit today. I havent counted out the parts, but it looks like enough stuff to build two of them, yes it does... I figured that I'd build 'em up, then plumb in a 10-bit A/D converter, a Microchip PIC, and a 10-bit D/A converter that could linearize stuff based on a table from EEPROM. ] 944Technologist wrote: > From: "Bernd Felsche" > > Is it true that septics have to learn the names of all the States > > and their capitals, as well as the Presidents because they're > > expected to be illiterate? :-) > > No, we in the US do not teach our "septics" anything. We flush our toilets > and the shit just runs into them. > > FR Wilk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ws6transam@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 00:56:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:15:40 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:15:40 -0300 From: Daniel and Laura Burk MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Steve's Parts Kit I got mine today: Steve's still hard at work getting these things in the mail. --D Burk ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clshore@yahoo.com Tue Dec 11 00:54:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:19:45 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:19:45 -0300 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:42 Steve Flanagan wrote: > > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock > sensor. > 1) You could use a threaded rod, running inside a plastic tube. Two optosensors pairs attached to the tube, arranged with the light axis perpendicular to the axis of the rod. The beam is arranged so that a thread just obscures, and the root of the thread lets light pass. So as the rod moves, the opto's create a square wave signal. The two sensors are arranged so that the phase of the two square waves is offset, to allow quadrature detection of the direction that the rod is traveling. By knowing the TPI of the rod, you can count the pulses to get the displacement. The output of the quadrature detector tells which direction, to add or subract each pulse. 2) Use a simple linkage from the suspension to an arm connected to a pot mounted on the chassis. As the suspension moves, the arm rotates the pot. Size the arm go get 120 degrees of rotation from full droop to full compress on the suspension. The voltage vs displacement curve is non-linear, but can be easily calibrated. For a good example of a cheap effective adjustable linkage, check out the float adjustment rod attachment system on one of those toilet bowl replacement valves (I'm serious, dammit, just look!). A flat piece of steel engaging the float is bent into a U shape. Spring tension keeps it firmly anchored to the rod, you just pinch the ends to loosen, and slide it to the desired position. Lightweight, cheap, simple, effective, easy to use, an elegant piece IMHO. 3) Get one of the new low cost DRO units that attach to lathes and milling machines. Calaero sells a 0-6" one with 0.001" accuracy for about $60. It has a bus output that can connect to a central controller. Would it stand up to the environment? Dunno, but the machining environment is not very friendly, so maybe so. 4) Get a carbon rod, or a piece of conductive plastic. Attach electrodes to the end, fabricate a metal slider, and voila! giant linear potentiometer. Is four ideas enough for tonight? I'm getting tired (maybe the drugs are kicking in) Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ws6transam@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 01:05:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:23:04 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:23:04 -0300 From: Daniel and Laura Burk MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) I'll ditto your ditto. skulte wrote: > Ditto. I've been "forced" to read through the latest petty bickering > because I'm actually learning. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Tue Dec 11 01:02:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:24:21 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:24:21 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? Lance wrote: > > So the idea is a car available from an aftermarket tuner? You guys > don't read much about imports. There's an entire site devoted to late > model Toyota Supras that all make 650+ hp from 3 liters www.to4r.com and > most of these guys are using completely stock internals. Locally there's a 630hp twin turbo Nissan, a 450 hp Mazda Rotary, some others in the 400+hp range. I know what it takes to build those cars, I've seen all too well how they behave. A regional shop that specializes in building high hp imports regularly utilizes our dyno to do their tuning. > Toyota > GN > All for a lot less than either of the cars you linked to. There were a few qualifications that led to the links. The cars had to be streetable and capable of 240 mile per hour speeds. Bernd further reduced the allowable competition by adding items such as leather seats, air conditioning, emissions compliance, crash worthiness compliance, and a slew of other "gotchas" to the list. > > And as amazing as it sounds, a Toyota Supra pulled 0.98g in C&D, Motor > Trend, and R&T, absolutely bone stock in 1993. Motor Trend proclaimed > this same car "the best stopping car we have tested in the last 30 > years" after repeated 60-0 stops in 116 ft. I think there were more than a few people who read that article way back then. Street car braking systems have recieved much more attention in the 8 years since that date than in ten years prior to it. Many of today's "fast" cars have much more capable brakes than their performance counterparts of ten years ago. > It also bested the ZR-1 > according to the same magazines in 1993, a car that cost 50% more. There's a few funny stories about cars that bested the ZR1 in various ways. I've heard a fairly credible story that the LT1 had to be de-tuned for 1992 production so it wouldn't make more power than the ZR1. For a while, the ZR1 was the car that others were compared to. > The > late model Supra was the benchmark for C-5 development, and even has > received top honors for reliability in the premium sports car class. Auto design is competetive, and somebody always gets to spend some time in the limelight. Toyota should be commended for their achievements. Chevy should be flogged, however. The C5 'vette is a great improvement over the C4. But the C3 was only somewhat remarkable when it was introduced in '64, and by the time the chassis was redesigned almost 20 years later, you could buy much better cars for a whole lot less money. > Enough chest pounding. LOL!!! I know the Blue Oval guys get up-in-arms when ya poke 'em. Who knew I'd find someone from the import crowd like that. ; ) > > Suffice it to say, if you are going to start talking about "tuned" cars > regardless of the developer, you are comparing apples and oranges. > That's no different than saying the Bugatti, Porsche GT-1, or Mercedes > CLK are not reasonably priced for the average human. I actually started out talking about ex racecars. They are "streetable and capable of speeds close to 400 km/hr." But Bernd would have none of that. And you certainly didn't miss the point. This sidelined conversation began with a comparison between apples and oranges. I just threw a less expensive orange into the basket. > I sure wouldn't > spend almost $50k in modifications after coughing up the requisite > $40somethingK for the base car. Agreed. But getting 240 mph out of a streetable car is a little more expensive than a pair of HKS turbos, 6 new injectors, and a 200 hp shot of nitrous. > I'd have been a lot more agreeable had > you said the Z-06 Corvette, There are a lot of cars that are more reasonably priced than the car in the link I posted. The Z06 and the 1993 Toyota both fail to meet the "240 mph capable" qualification in stock form. If you know of anyone closer to the grass roots level that has a streetable car that has reached speeds of 200 mph, I love reading about 'em. Shannen > despite some quality problems, it is an > exceptionally capable automobile that is certainly reasonably > affordable, and meets all the other requirements of a fully DOT and EPA > compliant street vehicle. Stock for stock, I don't think there is > anything out there that is as capable at a reasonable price. As in all > cases, YMMV. > > Lance > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From habanero@us.ibm.com Tue Dec 11 01:13:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:29:47 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:29:47 -0300 From: "Andrew Theurer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? That Supra looks very similar to the one Jun Racing brought to the Salt Flats recently. They updated the bumper and the motor (about 1300 hp). They hit ~250 mph and cliamed the record for whetever class they were in, only to have another car in the same class take the record a little later. -Andrew ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob - Uni" To: "efi_student" Cc: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:40 PM Subject: Re[2]: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? > Hello efi_student, > > Check out this MPEG of a seriously mental supra packing 900hp: > http://www.japanesemotorsport.com.au/supra.mpg > > Tuesday, December 11, 2001, 1:16:40 PM, you wrote: > > e> So the idea is a car available from an aftermarket tuner? You guys > e> don't read much about imports. There's an entire site devoted to late > e> model Toyota Supras that all make 650+ hp from 3 liters www.to4r.com and > e> most of these guys are using completely stock internals. Of course, > e> Toyota uses that EPA mandated DOHC and 4 valves per cylinder. Kinda > e> reminds me of the days when the GN first hit the streets and a lot of > e> the V-8 guys were furious at being beaten by a little V-6. I might add > e> there are some GNs out there that accelerate at alarming rates too. All > e> for a lot less than either of the cars you linked to. > > e> And as amazing as it sounds, a Toyota Supra pulled 0.98g in C&D, Motor > e> Trend, and R&T, absolutely bone stock in 1993. Motor Trend proclaimed > e> this same car "the best stopping car we have tested in the last 30 > e> years" after repeated 60-0 stops in 116 ft. It also bested the ZR-1 > e> according to the same magazines in 1993, a car that cost 50% more. The > e> late model Supra was the benchmark for C-5 development, and even has > e> received top honors for reliability in the premium sports car class. > e> Enough chest pounding. > > e> Suffice it to say, if you are going to start talking about "tuned" cars > e> regardless of the developer, you are comparing apples and oranges. > e> That's no different than saying the Bugatti, Porsche GT-1, or Mercedes > e> CLK are not reasonably priced for the average human. I sure wouldn't > e> spend almost $50k in modifications after coughing up the requisite > e> $40somethingK for the base car. I'd have been a lot more agreeable had > e> you said the Z-06 Corvette, despite some quality problems, it is an > e> exceptionally capable automobile that is certainly reasonably > e> affordable, and meets all the other requirements of a fully DOT and EPA > e> compliant street vehicle. Stock for stock, I don't think there is > e> anything out there that is as capable at a reasonable price. As in all > e> cases, YMMV. > > e> Lance > > e> -----Original Message----- > e> From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > e> Behalf Of Shannen Durphey > e> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 4:10 PM > e> To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > e> Subject: Re: Reasonably priced at 2 million dollars?? > > > e> Mos wrote: > >> > >> On Sat, 8 Dec 2001, Shannen Durphey wrote: > >> > >> > Care to make a guess as to which vehicle? > >> > >> At the risk of beginning another tangent; no, no guess. > e> : ) > > >> I don't live in > >> the US and consequently have no idea what that vehicle is. > >> > >> Mos. > >> > >> PS. Yes, I would like to know. URLs of specs would be nice too please. > >> > e> Sorry for the Dee-lay. > e> The car: > e> http://www.lingenfelter.com/packages/427TT.htm > > e> An article about it's little brother: > e> http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/roadtests/2000/May/200005_ro > e> adtest_kngsn.xml?keywords=lingenfelter%20corvette > > e> (all one URL) > > e> There's a fair amount more reading material that can be found with > e> search > e> engines. > e> Shannen > e> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > e> ---- > e> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > e> quotes) > e> in the body of a message (not the subject) to > e> majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > e> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > e> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > e> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > -- > Best regards, > Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 01:31:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:31:44 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:31:44 -0800 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation This is indeed what is done on high output Ford Cosworth 2.0L DOHC Turbo Engines (>400bhp). The port injectors are used for light/medium load running and the second set firing into the trumpets are switched in for higher load. The Sierra RS500 was fitted with the trumpet injectors from the factory , although mainly for homologation purposes, the road spec car at 200bhp only actually operated the port injectors. Cheers Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of bill.shurvinton@nokia.com > Sent: 11 December 2001 08:29 > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: Atomisation > > > As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at > high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse in > programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the > high end > > Bill > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 11 01:19:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:35:00 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:35:00 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 17:42 Steve Flanagan wrote: > > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock > > sensor. Just squeezed this idea out of the subconscious processor: Optic fibre as used in "power glove". The amount of bend in the fibre can be used to measure displacement/angular motion. You could either fix it on the damper so that compression will cause it to flex, or fix it to another suspension member. Either way, you'll have to calibrate it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ws6transam@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 01:11:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:39:38 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 01:39:38 -0300 From: Daniel and Laura Burk MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MSD 6A Andris, My Crane Hi-6 is still going strong after six years and 46,000 miles. The trick is to drill a small hole in the firewall and mount the box in the passenger compartment. I use it in conjunction with an Accel module, Accel 'in-cap' supercoil, Taylor spiral-pro wires, and Bosch platinum plugs. It lights off the mixture to well over 6,000 RPM. --Cheers, Dan skulte wrote: > On Wed, 28 Nov 2001, Kevin Wright wrote: > > > ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > >I'd seriously look to change a table for timing control. > > >They do have a multistep retard box, that I've used without complaint. > > >I have yet to have a Crane box fail. > > >Bruce > > I just caught the above... I will never use a Crane box. Vortech was > including them with their supercharger kits, and nearly everyone I know > with the Vortech has had their Crane box die and get replaced multiple > times. Maybe it's been fixed in the new version, but it's happened too > often for me to use one. My Accel 300+ ignition box has been reliable so > far for 3+ years under the punishment of the oven known as my engine bay > (recently melted most of the wires road racing due to radiant heat from > the turbos). FWIW. > > Andris Skulte > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > > > Found 'em, thanks. Specs look good; actually a couple > of options > > there. I don't have the option of editing the timing tables, since > > the car is a '70 Cutlass about to receive a MegaSquirt. Maybe when > > the MegaJolt comes down the pipe... the turbos won't happen for a > > while yet. I'm thinking a Hi6R, then add the TRC2 retard control and > > MAP sensor for boost retard when required. > > > > krw > > > > > > > > > > >From: "Kevin Wright" > > >Subject: Re: MSD 6A > > >> ...and lo, thus spake Bruce on 11/27/01: > > >> >I've never had any success with them. > > >> >If it wasn't for NASCAR, I don't think you see them anywhere. > > >> >Bruce > > > > > >> What would you recommend, than? I was going to go with a 6A BTM > > >> (boost retard) when I turbo my Olds. Would Crane or some other > > >> manufacturer be preferable. Anybody else make a boost retard unit? > > >> I'll research the web, of course, but I was hoping someone had > > >> experience/suggestions to make the job quicker. > > >> Kevin Wright > > > > > > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > -- > > Kevin Wright > > krwright@wankel.net > > krwright@ev1.net > > http://www.wankel.net/~krwright > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > http://www.skulte.com > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 01:50:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:05:35 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:05:35 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > Bruce > Whats WI? (water injection?) > BW Yes. And, "right" may take a new turn in the not too distant future. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 01:51:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:05:49 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:05:49 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? Tanx BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bob Wooten Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 8:44 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Also, I consider WI done right as a must. Bruce Whats WI? (water injection?) BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 01:44:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:06:17 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:06:17 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Also, I consider WI done right as a must. Bruce Whats WI? (water injection?) BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 02:14:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:14:30 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:14:30 -0800 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. How about a rotary (optical, potentiometer, whatever) encoder at the hinge where a control arm attaches to the chassis? What is the application anyway? Sensing acceleration of the unsprung mass would be much more rugged and wideband, just epoxy a good accelerometer to a convenient place on the suspension. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 02:01:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:14:37 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:14:37 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So you have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what compromises your willing to make, with each application. Bruce Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the lil guys are around (just trust me on that one). From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > Tanx > BW > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > Bruce > Whats WI? (water injection?) > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com Tue Dec 11 14:57:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:15:12 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:15:12 -0300 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success I've got a Horiba and it takes 33 seconds from switch on. Ask me how I know. I added 10 ohms to R4 and the DIY-WB warms up in about 35 seconds. Just a couple more than the Horiba and much quicker on a re-crank than the Horiba which again takes 33 seconds. Ask me how I know. I've had the Horiba for twelve years. later, Mark Of course you can add some more resistor and fire it up quicker. I understand the sound of the porcelin cracking is not an extremely expensive sound. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin _" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:33 PM Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > > I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat the > sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than > that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds and > the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't > confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this > properly and safely though. > > Kevin > > >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts > >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the > >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in > >parallel with R4). > > > >BobR. > > > > > > > > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and > >the > > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate > >of > > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Neil > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > >quotes) > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From skulte@skulte.com Tue Dec 11 02:03:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:16:43 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:16:43 -0300 From: "Andris Skulte" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? So far the plan is to build a bulletproof 350ish engine. It'll be from either a Dart or Bowtie block, 6.125" rods, 3.48 stroke ex-NASCAR crank possibly (or Cola or Callies, some sub $1k crank), 4.000 bore, heads with around 210cc intake runners (AFR, Canfield, Victor Jr's), 8.5:1 compression and cam specs based partially on the current engines backpressure vs boost characteristics (measured when I strap this tired mule to the dyno - will be fairly mild with duration), and some custom JE/Venolia/KB pistons. My reasoning is to make a reliable, build it once road racing/street fun engine. I still am considering a 377, but I like the detonation resistance a smaller bore gives you. The question of the hour is whether I'll make more power unshrouding the valves with the larger bore and less boost. I'm planning on going to about .035 quench, but some folks more experienced than I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame front travel at TDC. To knock down compression, I plan on mirroring the combustion chamber shape in the piston, since this should give you the fastest burn time. Some words of wisdom from the previously mentioned turbo folks suggest going with a plain 'ole open bowl piston, but again I'm having a hard time convincing myself that that's the way to go, when the collective theory based knowledge usually says to go with a tight quench and small dish. Any thoughts or comments before I'm committed to building it? Thanks! ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo http://www.skulte.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Tue Dec 11 01:13:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:23:50 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:23:50 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB Requests I think there are some commercial units out there in the $1200 range, for those with more money than time/electronics experience. The price is probably dropping too. I wonder if anyone has tried to make a list of the lower priced units available? Bruce Roe On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:27:22 -0800 "efi_student" writes: > BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot > of requests from list members on another list for a > DIY-WB unit. I don't have the > financial resources to help them all out ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 02:16:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:31:08 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:31:08 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts I see. I have not worked with WI @ all, so this is a WAG, but this sounds a lot like the wet manifold/dry manifold & which is better debate. My understanding (& I am sure that you have heard a lot from the GN & TType boys) that the hard part about it is getting a RELIABLE, high pressure pump that will not corrode with a water/alcohol mixture. IIRC, this is the same issue (corrosion) that the Alcohol boys have with their fuel just tearing up everything it comes in contact with. How about a high pressure external fuel pump pushing through fogger injectors in the side of my Super ram? I bet that if I use SS nozzles & drill them out I would be able to get a nice spray pattern. Again I am guessing but I bet that in forced induction apps, the value of the pressure w/in the system pushing against the pump affects performance. that being said, a truly slick setup would be one that was pressure compensated for consistency. On a related but different subject, what is the difference between atomization & vaporization. I think that atomization is when you shove a fluid through a hole & it atomizes, meaning it goes into small particles that are more likely to get suspended in air better than larger particles. & vaporization is when something hits something hot & changes states (water to steam for example, exceeds the latent heat of vaporization & changes states. Challenging my physics from way back) Tanx BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:02 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So you have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what compromises your willing to make, with each application. Bruce Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the lil guys are around (just trust me on that one). From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > Tanx > BW > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > Bruce > Whats WI? (water injection?) > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 02:21:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:33:10 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:33:10 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) From: "Andris Skulte" Subject: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? > So far the plan is to build a bulletproof 350ish engine. It'll be from > either a Dart or Bowtie block, 6.125" rods, 3.48 stroke ex-NASCAR crank > possibly (or Cola or Callies, some sub $1k crank), 4.000 bore, heads with > around 210cc intake runners (AFR, Canfield, Victor Jr's), 8.5:1 compression > and cam specs based partially on the current engines backpressure vs boost > characteristics (measured when I strap this tired mule to the dyno - will be > fairly mild with duration), and some custom JE/Venolia/KB pistons. > My reasoning is to make a reliable, build it once road racing/street fun > engine. I still am considering a 377, but I like the detonation resistance a > smaller bore gives you. The question of the hour is whether I'll make more > power unshrouding the valves with the larger bore and less boost. I'm > planning on going to about .035 quench, but some folks more experienced than > I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame front travel at > TDC. To knock down compression, I plan on mirroring the combustion chamber > shape in the piston, since this should give you the fastest burn time. Some > words of wisdom from the previously mentioned turbo folks suggest going with > a plain 'ole open bowl piston, but again I'm having a hard time convincing > myself that that's the way to go, when the collective theory based knowledge > usually says to go with a tight quench and small dish. > Any thoughts or comments before I'm committed to building it? Thanks! > Andris Skulte > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > http://www.skulte.com Small as possible chambers Dished pistons 9:1 CR 20 cubes is worth going for Barrier coat the chambers (after smoothing them), but you have to run WI to keep the carbon to a min.. Having power pre boost is a good goal. Little extra compression and bigger motor are great. Might consider off set wrist pins. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 02:30:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:42:30 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:42:30 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > I see. I have not worked with WI @ all, so this is a WAG, but this sounds a > lot like the wet manifold/dry manifold & which is better debate. Nope, you have to have some wetting of the manifold. In EFI you can just about rule it out. > My > understanding (& I am sure that you have heard a lot from the GN & TType > boys) that the hard part about it is getting a RELIABLE, high pressure pump > that will not corrode with a water/alcohol mixture. IIRC, this is the same > issue (corrosion) that the Alcohol boys have with their fuel just tearing up > everything it comes in contact with. So who needs a high pressure fluid pump?. > How about a high pressure external fuel pump pushing through fogger > injectors in the side of my Super ram? I bet that if I use SS nozzles & > drill them out I would be able to get a nice spray pattern. NOS is operating at like 800 PSI, and you'll probably not have that presure available. Your at least warm on nozzle location. > Again I am guessing but I bet that in forced induction apps, the value of > the pressure w/in the system pushing against the pump affects performance. > that being said, a truly slick setup would be one that was pressure > compensated for consistency. Need a system that just overwhelms that condition. > On a related but different subject, what is the difference between > atomization & vaporization. I think that atomization is when you shove a > fluid through a hole & it atomizes, meaning it goes into small particles > that are more likely to get suspended in air better than larger particles. > & vaporization is when something hits something hot & changes states (water > to steam for example, exceeds the latent heat of vaporization & changes > states. Challenging my physics from way back) Exactly right. You have to decide which you want. Vaporization displaces some volume of air. Also depends on what you think water actually does in the chamber's reaction. Bruce > Tanx > BW > Behalf Of Bruce > Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. > In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So you > have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and > either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two > different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what > compromises your willing to make, with each application. > Bruce > Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the lil > guys are around (just trust me on that one). > From: "Bob Wooten" > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > > Tanx > > BW > > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > Bruce > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 02:32:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:45:40 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:45:40 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Barrier coat the chambers (after smoothing them), but you have to run WI to keep the carbon to a min.. Bruce Bruce, does keeping the Barrier coating clean maintain the performance of the coating? if so, do you (you being anyone out there, not necessarily BP) know if any of the 2000 HP TT monsters out there now run the coating on their motors? & if they do are they keeping the interior of these motors clean with WI? smells like three benefits from WI, clean chambers, cooler/denser intake charge, & reduction in likelihood of detonation. BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 02:42:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:53:48 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 02:53:48 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Barrier coat the chambers (after smoothing them), but you have to run WI to > keep the carbon to a min.. > Bruce > Bruce, > does keeping the Barrier coating clean maintain the performance of the > coating? if so, do you (you being anyone out there, not necessarily BP) > know if any of the 2000 HP TT monsters out there now run the coating on > their motors? & if they do are they keeping the interior of these motors > clean with WI? Cleanliness isn't the goal. It's keeping the carbon from building up. All I see really working or being an aid on a street motor is the chamber stuff. 2000 HP is a whole new level of problems. > smells like three benefits from WI, clean chambers, cooler/denser intake > charge, & reduction in likelihood of detonation. But, how do you want to weight these items, and what design features will enhance the ones you want to work on?. Bruce > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Tue Dec 11 02:50:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:01:00 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:01:00 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) 8.5:1 compression Might go a bit higher than this with WI. >and cam specs based partially on the current engines backpressure vs boost >characteristics (measured when I strap this tired mule to the dyno - will be >fairly mild with duration), Short duration, high lift, wide lobe centers (mebbe 116). Take a peek at rollers, or even BETTER, mushroom tappets. and some custom JE/Venolia/KB pistons. JE and Venolia use pretty much 2018 alloy forgings (high expansion). KB's are generally cast hyper(ujunkit). TRW uses something that is a proprietary version of 4032 alloy forgings. (Lower expansion) This is a better approach for most anything but a fueler. There are others besides TRW who will do 4032 alloy. > >My reasoning is to make a reliable, build it once road racing/street fun >engine. I still am considering a 377, but I like the detonation resistance a >smaller bore gives you. The side thrust on the bores with a 377 is a pretty serious matter with boost. The question of the hour is whether I'll make more >power unshrouding the valves with the larger bore and less boost. I'm >planning on going to about .035 quench, Go for it !!! but some folks more experienced than >I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame front travel at >TDC. The trick here can be some little channels to sort of "direct" the turbulence as the gas comes out of the squish area--this keeps the turbulence pattern in the chamber more consistent, and avoids the "roughness" these guys are likely talking about. My pet theory is that the "roughness" comes from inconsistent patterns of turbulence in the chambers causing variation in the burn time--sort of as though you were jiggliing the timing. To knock down compression, I plan on mirroring the combustion chamber >shape in the piston, since this should give you the fastest burn time. This sounds good IF you really need to do it. How high would the squeeze be with flat pistons?? Some >words of wisdom from the previously mentioned turbo folks suggest going with >a plain 'ole open bowl piston, NAH. >Any thoughts or comments before I'm committed to building it? Thanks! There you go. Greg > >------------------ >Andris Skulte ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 02:48:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:01:00 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:01:00 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Agreed on the cleanliness thing, bad choice of words, I get it. don't know about the other things, still have to do homework on the weighted benefits of them all & see which are worth the time & energy. Heck, still need to finish tuning in my VE tables, prolly ought to start there & work up to turbo's (LOL) BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:42 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Barrier coat the chambers (after smoothing them), but you have to run WI to > keep the carbon to a min.. > Bruce > Bruce, > does keeping the Barrier coating clean maintain the performance of the > coating? if so, do you (you being anyone out there, not necessarily BP) > know if any of the 2000 HP TT monsters out there now run the coating on > their motors? & if they do are they keeping the interior of these motors > clean with WI? Cleanliness isn't the goal. It's keeping the carbon from building up. All I see really working or being an aid on a street motor is the chamber stuff. 2000 HP is a whole new level of problems. > smells like three benefits from WI, clean chambers, cooler/denser intake > charge, & reduction in likelihood of detonation. But, how do you want to weight these items, and what design features will enhance the ones you want to work on?. Bruce > BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 02:44:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:03:21 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:03:21 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts You are SOO good @ keeping us on the edge of our seats. High pressure = easy to maintain nice spray patterns in all conditions, something about "overwhelming the manifold conditions" thing. fogger nozzles for easy availability. I suppose this application could really use someone to come up with a single injector nozzle similar to a fogger nozzle that would be simple to change jets on, or better yet, have a single nozzle/jet for all locations & have a variable jet somewhere else (or pressure, but then we get into critical flow or not). what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased economy & atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a major debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. BUT, what appears to be results of that is, increased resistance to detonation, keeps the cyls clean (old mechanic dude teached me that one) & increases HP, by reducing charge temp (but I have a feeling that this one is open for major debate here). BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 9:30 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > I see. I have not worked with WI @ all, so this is a WAG, but this sounds a > lot like the wet manifold/dry manifold & which is better debate. Nope, you have to have some wetting of the manifold. In EFI you can just about rule it out. > My > understanding (& I am sure that you have heard a lot from the GN & TType > boys) that the hard part about it is getting a RELIABLE, high pressure pump > that will not corrode with a water/alcohol mixture. IIRC, this is the same > issue (corrosion) that the Alcohol boys have with their fuel just tearing up > everything it comes in contact with. So who needs a high pressure fluid pump?. > How about a high pressure external fuel pump pushing through fogger > injectors in the side of my Super ram? I bet that if I use SS nozzles & > drill them out I would be able to get a nice spray pattern. NOS is operating at like 800 PSI, and you'll probably not have that presure available. Your at least warm on nozzle location. > Again I am guessing but I bet that in forced induction apps, the value of > the pressure w/in the system pushing against the pump affects performance. > that being said, a truly slick setup would be one that was pressure > compensated for consistency. Need a system that just overwhelms that condition. > On a related but different subject, what is the difference between > atomization & vaporization. I think that atomization is when you shove a > fluid through a hole & it atomizes, meaning it goes into small particles > that are more likely to get suspended in air better than larger particles. > & vaporization is when something hits something hot & changes states (water > to steam for example, exceeds the latent heat of vaporization & changes > states. Challenging my physics from way back) Exactly right. You have to decide which you want. Vaporization displaces some volume of air. Also depends on what you think water actually does in the chamber's reaction. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Tue Dec 11 02:55:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:06:22 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:06:22 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts >On a related but different subject, what is the difference between >atomization & vaporization. I think that atomization is when you shove a >fluid through a hole & it atomizes, meaning it goes into small particles >that are more likely to get suspended in air better than larger particles. >& vaporization is when something hits something hot & changes states (water >to steam for example, exceeds the latent heat of vaporization & changes >states. Challenging my physics from way back) You are pretty much right on. Add in the facts that you can't vaporize more than what will produce the "saturated" partial pressure at any given gas temp and that you WON'T vaporize anything unless heat energy equal to the latent heat of vaporization is "available" to do the job, and you pretty much have it. Greg > >Tanx > >BW ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From b_hargis@hotmail.com Tue Dec 11 02:48:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:16:40 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:16:40 -0300 From: "Bryon Hargis" Subject: Re: WB Requests FJO Inc makes a lower price piece, although I have never heard anything about its accuracy (or lack of). It does have a nice rpm and a/f datalogging software for it. Price would be about 700 for that, and you have to have a laptop. I think its also near 700 if you dont get the datalogging and get the display instead. Bryon "Pardon my html email account, but I couldn't imagine sifting through the flames otherwise" _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Tue Dec 11 03:40:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:18:09 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:18:09 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to tooth dimensions. A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a second crude sync from the cam/distributor. The Hall devices I picked for experiments (MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make do with what we have. Bruce Roe On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:14:08 +1100 Peter Gargano writes: > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > > > Flywheel teeth are not so accurate, but there are so > > many of them there should be plenty of resolution. > > As well, the angular resolution compared to a much smaller > diameter distributor or crank wheel should be better - even > allowing for gross machining inaccuracies. > > > A counter of the same module could keep track of > > crank position. But another sensor is needed to sync > > the thing. I have some hall effect devices that adjust > > themselves to the signal level. > > This is the job for a small "intelligent" device like a PIC. > It can also easily distinguish missing (or extra teeth) easily > (eliminating a separate sync pickup). Less than US$5 for > 5 MIPs - amazing! > > Peter ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From vtjballeng@yifan.net Tue Dec 11 03:14:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:44:43 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:44:43 -0300 From: "James Ballenger" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Photoelectric timing gates Ok, this is a pretty basic question but I am on a time and money budget so I could use the help. I have used a timing gate system that used a reflector, a box, and a cheap lap timer in the past that was quite good at recording lap times. I would like to do something similar and here are the specifications I desire: * Timing accurate to at least .1 seconds (preferably .001 seconds) * Lap time output display that displays individual lap times as opposed to the sum of all previous lap times * Less than $50 total component cost * A possible lap time recording function/output function so that I can upload it to my laptop via a windaq or other equivalent system (a bonus feature if this can be kept under $50 cost) * an easily visible output display of some sort, can be a stopwatch or anything else so long as it works and displays individual lap times * high reliability ( I assume a photoelectric led setup with a non-visible frequency will work fine) And yes, for you hardcore diy guys, I am asking for someone to tell me how to do this because I don't know where to begin. This is the sort of project that I hope will ease me into the realm of basic diy circuit design that will allow me to proceed further in the future. So the bottom line, what is the easiest, simplest, and cheapest method to implement a project of this sort or where might I look for some direction? Thanks, James Ballenger ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 03:50:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:50:37 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 03:50:37 -0800 From: George Dickey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests Hi Here is a unit I found on the Maita (MX5) forum. Never used it, no connection, etc http://www.geocities.com/francillion/ -- George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Mon Dec 10 22:46:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 04:02:58 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 04:02:58 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: RE: Atomisation -> Interesting...I must admit that I had thought that, under part -> throttle, as the runner velocity was low it was better to inject at -> the narrowest point. I hadn't thought about whether the poorer -> atomisation would countermand this. The TBIs inject as far away from the valve as possible, into the low-pressure (15-19 inches of vacuum) intake tract. There's plenty of *time* for vaporization to occur, plus the sonic flow across the butterfly goes a good job of breaking the fuel up to start with. The port injectors are like pissing into a urinal; the fancy spray patterns the books show only exist for a small part of the injector's duty cycle if you look at one with a strobe. -> I guess we are assuming here that a TBI system will have a larger ID -> than the carb as it will not need a venturi? They run slightly larger butterfly sizes than carburetors on the average, and without the venturis the flow is typically higher. Some TBIs mount the injector in such a way as to restrict air flow, though. Ford's second-generation injection for their DOHC Indy motors went from conventional injection nozzles to injecting into venturis to help atomization. It helped mid-range torque a lot, and dramatically improved fuel consumption; enough to let them eliminate one fuel stop. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 11 04:22:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 04:59:26 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 04:59:26 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Bob Wooten tapped away at the keyboard with: > You are SOO good @ keeping us on the edge of our seats. Based on what's been written before, he's using compressed air to feed and shear the water for best atomisation. As long as the air flow rate is known/measured, there's not a real problem introducing the extra air. The use of air avoids direct contact with valves, pumps, etc. The only WI components exposed to air AND water are then the injector jets. The jets don't need moving parts. A check valve in the water feed line will prevent the turbo blowing back though that line. A sequence of compressed-air valves can be used to persuade that same valve to close on demand, cutting water flow in the forward direction. > High pressure = easy to maintain nice spray patterns in all conditions, > something about "overwhelming the manifold conditions" thing. > fogger nozzles for easy availability. I suppose this application > could really use someone to come up with a single injector nozzle > similar to a fogger nozzle that would be simple to change jets on, > or better yet, have a single nozzle/jet for all locations & have a > variable jet somewhere else (or pressure, but then we get into > critical flow or not). According to the people who make some money from it, (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. The closer you inject to the inlet valves, the greater the proportion of droplets and from a single injector, the greater the chance of imbalance. A port water-injector minimises vapourization but droplet sizes need to be very small. Distributing the right amount of water to each requires careful tuning and/or management. > what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased > economy & atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? The _least_ amount of water necessary will provide the maximum amount of power as water vapour displaces oxygen. It's better to have tiny droplets of water until the valve closes for compression. > exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a > major debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. Evaporating the droplets in-cylinder doesn't reduce the total oxygen present even when the droplets evaporate and absorb energy during compression (six to seven times the amount of heat as for the same mass of gasoline). The water vapour acts as a "buffer" to the flame front, not only obstructing it at a molecular level, but also to reduce hot spots by absorbing some of their heat. The Gasoline FAQ indicates the degree to which water content in the air (humidity) reduces an engine's Octane number requirements. Order of magnitude is 4 g water per kg of air reducing ONR by one point. (The relationship is not entirely linear.) With a high charge temperature and without becoming saturated, one could add 40 to 60 g of water per kg of inlet air, depending on initial ambient conditions. That's an AWR of between 25:1 and 16:1 for an ONR of between 10 and 15 points. Too much water and the flame front slows too much as the reagents take longer to "find" each other, resulting in less torque. Determining what is "too much" will take some tuning time. Accurate knock detection and some means of measuring torque under controlled loads are a distinct advantage. Well, that's one theory anyway. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Tue Dec 11 02:12:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:12:35 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:12:35 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers -> So do "conventional"[1] port injectors at any point in the rev/load -> range produce better fuel delivery then carbs? "Better" in the sense of "more appropriate for the driving conditions at hand?" Yes; port injection (more particularly, timed or "sequential" port injection) can give better cold start and cold idle emissions and driveability than a TBI or most carburetors. The old side constant-vacuum SUs and the like with appropriate manifolding would come danged close, though. -> (I'm presuming that the carbs' superiority only holds true for a -> small subset of available hardware, and does not extend to mass -> market carbs factory fitted to older non-performance cars - is that -> correct [in True. Most carbs were the cheapest things that would do the job. Just like most modern fuel injection systems. Different problem set, different solution set, you know. -> Does it follow that port injected engines without cats spit some -> amount of unburnt fuel out the exhaust? They don't *have* to, particularly if the injectors are small enough to run a decent pulsewidth at low RPM, but the atomization of most injectors is very poor, and will result in unburned fuel going past the exhaust valve. There are people who believe that port injectors shoot at the back of the intake valve, which is hot and vaporizes the fuel, but in most engines this is not true; the injector simply squirts a stream on the port wall or floor, where it's picked up by passing air, catch-as-catch-can. Take a look at any 5.0 Mustang or Tuned Port Chevy and note the injectors are nowhere near the valves. A few new-design engines *do* shoot more or less at the valves, but they're still a minority on the road. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ilphayunterhay@yahoo.com Tue Dec 11 05:05:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:14:30 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:14:30 -0300 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB assembly help > I guess I can state my question more simply - I > only have 1 cap marked .1uf 25V, but C2 and C8 each > call for it. I have 4 little caps marked 104 C5K, > which I assume are the .1uf 12V variety, but only > three spots for them (C9, C13, C14). Is my parts > kit a little off, or does one little cap sub for > one big one? I had the same question/confusion, on the schematic C2 is labeled as a "disc" capacitor, it's the flat circular cap about 3/8" diameter ( 10mm if I do my metric conversion correctly ). By the process of elimination, C8 is the fourth "monolithic" cap, yes the 12V rating is a little low, I'm not worried about it but if you are you can substitute a 0.1uF disc cap w/ a voltage rating over 18V, since the D9 zener diode will "clamp" the input voltage to 18V. In most cases C8 will see from 12.6 to 13.8V, so it should do fine as is. I think Bruce P. was the first to mention this, watch the placement of C7 & C10 so the leads don't short to the traces running underneath them. I positioned my caps so the gap between the leads is centered over the trace, alternatively you can put a square of electrical tape under the caps or insulating sleeves such as heat shrink tubing over the leads. > Also, what's the best/safest way for me to test my > board before hooking up a sensor. As has been mentioned before, consider using a brake light bulb to simulate the sensor's heater. regards, phil __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 05:15:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:15:24 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:15:24 -0800 From: "Jess Gypin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests Here is one type. I worked with him for a group buy for the Miata power list that I am part of. He may be interested in another group buy. http://www.geocities.com/francillion/ Jess ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 21:13 PM Subject: WB Requests > I think there are some commercial units out there > in the $1200 range, for those with more money > than time/electronics experience. The price is > probably dropping too. I wonder if anyone has > tried to make a list of the lower priced units available? > > Bruce Roe > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:27:22 -0800 "efi_student" > writes: > > > BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot > > of requests from list members on another list for a > > DIY-WB unit. I don't have the > > financial resources to help them all out > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 05:20:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:20:27 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:20:27 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor Yup, 2bar, not one. Thanks Bruce. I also noticed that I said that the Omega transducer was $5, but it is actually $50-$60... Dunno what I was smoking... Steve > Behalf Of Bruce > Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > > The most common junk yard donor is a Turbo Sunbird. > Thou turbo buicks, Syclones, Typoons have them. > Since it's referenced to Absolute, you really looking for a 2 > bar sensor (to > read 1 bar of boost). > Bruce > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 05:48:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:48:11 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:48:11 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question bcroe@juno.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:14:08 +1100 Peter Gargano > writes: > > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > > A counter of the same module could keep track of > > > crank position. But another sensor is needed to sync > > > the thing. I have some hall effect devices that adjust > > > themselves to the signal level. > > This is the job for a small "intelligent" device like a PIC. > > It can also easily distinguish missing (or extra teeth) easily > > (eliminating a separate sync pickup). Less than US$5 for > > 5 MIPs - amazing! > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > tooth dimensions. > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. Anybody who wants to try this could save themselves re-inventing the wheel by reading SAE Paper 1999-01-0203 "Enhanced Engine Position Acquisition & Treatment" by Patrick Leiteinturier and Joseph Benning of Siemens. It describes how to eliminate errors resulting from tooth geometry and other factors. The maths looks complicated but can be understood if accompanied by a glass of wine or three. The paper also appears in SAE publication SP-1418 "Electronic Engine Controls 1999" (which is where I found it). The latter also contains papers on integrated in-connector control electronics for NOx sensors, ion current sensing, individual cylinder fuel control with a switching oxygen sensor; and a dozen other similar papers. Only three or four of the papers are probably too obtuse to be relevant to diy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Tue Dec 11 05:29:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:51:11 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:51:11 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse in programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the high end Bill -----Original Message----- From: ext Dave Williams [mailto:dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us] The TBIs inject as far away from the valve as possible, into the low-pressure (15-19 inches of vacuum) intake tract. There's plenty of *time* for vaporization to occur, plus the sonic flow across the butterfly goes a good job of breaking the fuel up to start with. The port injectors are like pissing into a urinal; the fancy spray patterns the books show only exist for a small part of the injector's duty cycle if you look at one with a strobe. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 05:52:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:52:14 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 05:52:14 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bernd Felsche" > According to the people who make some money from it, > (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where > you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's > no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for > vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler > (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. Owww, so since they do it for monwy they must know all the answers. > The closer you inject to the inlet valves, the greater the > proportion of droplets and from a single injector, the greater the > chance of imbalance. A port water-injector minimises vapourization > but droplet sizes need to be very small. Distributing the right > amount of water to each requires careful tuning and/or management. > > what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased > > economy & atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? > The _least_ amount of water necessary will provide the maximum > amount of power as water vapour displaces oxygen. It's better to > have tiny droplets of water until the valve closes for compression. , again an instant reply without thinking things thru. > > exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a > > major debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. > Evaporating the droplets in-cylinder doesn't reduce the total oxygen > present even when the droplets evaporate and absorb energy during > compression (six to seven times the amount of heat as for the same > mass of gasoline). The water vapour acts as a "buffer" to the flame > front, not only obstructing it at a molecular level, but also to > reduce hot spots by absorbing some of their heat. > The Gasoline FAQ indicates the degree to which water content in the > air (humidity) reduces an engine's Octane number requirements. Order > of magnitude is 4 g water per kg of air reducing ONR by one point. > (The relationship is not entirely linear.) Getting to sound like trvia pursuit. > With a high charge temperature and without becoming saturated, one > could add 40 to 60 g of water per kg of inlet air, depending on > initial ambient conditions. That's an AWR of between 25:1 and 16:1 > for an ONR of between 10 and 15 points. > Too much water and the flame front slows too much as the reagents > take longer to "find" each other, resulting in less torque. > Determining what is "too much" will take some tuning time. Accurate > knock detection and some means of measuring torque under controlled > loads are a distinct advantage. > Well, that's one theory anyway. Yep, good old theory, sure beats getting ones hand dirty, and actually seeing what is going on. Yep, tuning, does take time, and EXPERIMENTION. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 06:04:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:04:36 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:04:36 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomisation From: Subject: RE: Atomisation > As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at > high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse in > programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the > high end > Bill I'll give you this: I played with webers, and for a time one tuning aid was moving the carb around. ie, long vs short runners with a corresponding change in air horn lenght. Again some theories just fall apart for what you'd think would make sense. The only real way to test things like this, is building a rig where you can EXPERIMENT, and see what really works. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 06:40:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:40:42 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:40:42 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts & increases HP, by >reducing charge temp (but I have a feeling that this one is open for major >debate here). > >BW > Not quite what I have been trying to say. The cooling during the compression stroke reduces the negative work taken from the crank to do the compression significantly. The cooler peak temp ALSO reduces the positive work available during the power stroke, but this reduction is marginally less than the reduction in negative work mentioned above. A slight net gain in output is the end result. BUT--the lower peak temp ALSO results in less heat rejection to the water jackets, which means some additional gain in power and efficiency will be there. The reduction in pressures that goes hand in hand with the lower temps means lower friction and bearing loads, so more gains in power and efficiency, as well as better mechanical durability. The reduction in temps also translates to better mechanical durability. If you build the engine knowing you are going to use WI, you can also build in a higher mechanical compression ratio (for the intended fuel), and reap more power and efficiency gains there. Try reading it this way, then argue away ! :-) Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 06:44:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:44:16 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:44:16 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: WB assembly help To calculate the Caps, the numbers are relative to a Pico Farad = 1 x 10^(-12) So a 104 Cap should be thought of 10x10^(4) Pico Farads. Which is the same as 10x10^(4) X 1 Pico Farad = 10x10^4 X 1x10^(-12) = 1 x 10^(-7) = .1 x 10^(-6) = 0.1 uF A 105 cap would then equal 1uF. Steve -----Original Message----- From: akallotte@juno.com [mailto:akallotte@juno.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 5:59 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: WB assembly help This is the first time I've built something like this, so bear with me. I've soldered on all the resistors, which was easy thanks to all the work put into the parts kit. I moved on to the caps and have had to learn how to read them. I'm still confused though. First, is the 22uf 25v cap in the parts kit for reference C5 (25uf 25v)? Next, C2 and C8 call for .1uf 25v, but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, and C14 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. Is the parts kit a little off or am I supposed to substitute something? Thanks for the help and for the project. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 06:45:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:45:27 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:45:27 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question At 12:40 AM 12/11/01, bcroe@juno.com wrote: >Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents >a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be >moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the >the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to >tooth dimensions. > >A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. >But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something >else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a >second crude sync from the cam/distributor. > >The Hall devices I picked for experiments >(MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things >including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, >and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could >do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice >missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of >us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make >do with what we have. > >Bruce Roe > Right on, Bruce! GReg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 06:45:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:45:51 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:45:51 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Steve, Could you steer me to one of these, Are these cheaper then the linear position sensors? sf -----Original Message----- From: steve ravet [mailto:sravet@arm.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 5:58 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question There are small electric motors with integrated position sensors, you could mount one of them and use the position output. This is similar to your mouse idea only already packaged and maybe more rugged. Plus when you're ready for the big leagues you could drive the motor for active suspension control. --steve ps just kidding about the active control part. Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rsrich@cwcom.net Tue Dec 11 06:28:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:49:53 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 06:49:53 -0300 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation This is indeed what is done on high output Ford Cosworth 2.0L DOHC Turbo Engines (>400bhp). The port injectors are used for light/medium load running and the second set firing into the trumpets are switched in for higher load. The Sierra RS500 was fitted with the trumpet injectors from the factory , although mainly for homologation purposes, the road spec car at 200bhp only actually operated the port injectors. Cheers Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of bill.shurvinton@nokia.com > Sent: 11 December 2001 08:29 > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: RE: Atomisation > > > As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at > high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse in > programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the > high end > > Bill > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 07:10:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:10:32 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:10:32 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomization vs Vaporization Robert, Good info, But what can we do as engine tuners to control Atomization vs Vaporization? I am asking specifically for a turbo application. The only things I can play with are Intercooler Temp (which I want as cold as possible), Boost (which I also want as high as possible), Fuel Pressure, and Injector Pulse width. Are you better off with a Harder - Shorter spray or a Softer - Longer spray (High fuel pressure vs Low Fuel pressure?) Here is a question I asked a week or two ago: Does the temp of the Air coming out of the intercooler effect the atomization process? Can too cold of an air charge hurt atomization???????? One last thing, what effect does a temp change on air do the requirement for the fuel? Lets say you can get the air charge to go from 130 deg C to say 100 deg C, how much fuel should be added. Can you simply use the PV=nrT (converting to Deg K) formula and consider it a linear function. Thanks Steve -----Original Message----- From: Robert Harris [mailto:bob@bobthecomputerguy.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:54 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Atomization vs Vaporization Revist Ideal Gas Laws. The absorbtion of heat in the intake tract and the cylinder prior to combustion is not to affect the energy release of combustion, it is to both reduce the work of induction and to increase the amount of the inducted charge. The heat of vaporization of fuel is large with respect to the inducted air mass and thus can cause significant changes in the temperature and thus total quantity of inlet charge. Liquid fuel atomized to 10 microns or less ( you will see that number many times ) burns not as a liquid - droplet by droplet - as essentially identical to a pre-mixed gas. A liquid "vaporized" has transitions to a gas state - with a significant size change. Water expands approx 1800 times going to steam - fuel significantly less, but the resultant vapor molecule is orders of magnitude greater in size than the liquid. Atomized - preferably to 10 micron or less - fuel absorbs heat - thus cooling the intake charge and increasing the fresh charge inductable - without appreciatory changing the size of the fuel particle Vaporization the fuel absorbs the heat, but since a state change is involved, it greatly expands the space occupied by the fuel. The benefits of cooling are offset by the loss of space by vaporization. Atomize - not vaporize. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 07:18:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:18:56 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:18:56 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation I thought you would say that. Mind you remote injector mounts are fairly cheap, even for bought units (jenvey dynamics). So my engine, in first iteration will end up with 9 injector mounts. 2 in the TB 4 at the end of the runners (effectively port injectors) 2 squirting into the trumpets 1 squirting into the air box (worked for lotus) I think a good nights sleep is required, followed by looking up the prices for 1000cc/min P&H injectors. -----Original Message----- From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 2:05 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Atomisation From: Subject: RE: Atomisation > As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at > high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse in > programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the > high end > Bill I'll give you this: I played with webers, and for a time one tuning aid was moving the carb around. ie, long vs short runners with a corresponding change in air horn lenght. Again some theories just fall apart for what you'd think would make sense. The only real way to test things like this, is building a rig where you can EXPERIMENT, and see what really works. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From brian@dessent.net Tue Dec 11 07:14:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:29:17 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:29:17 -0300 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. How about a rotary (optical, potentiometer, whatever) encoder at the hinge where a control arm attaches to the chassis? What is the application anyway? Sensing acceleration of the unsprung mass would be much more rugged and wideband, just epoxy a good accelerometer to a convenient place on the suspension. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 07:42:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:42:34 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 07:42:34 -0800 From: "Andrew Theurer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests Their controller box is only $362 USD, and they sell the NTK sensor for only $220 USD. If you bought the sensor from partsbin, you could get WB for under $500. Also, their simple AFR display is ~$100. I have feedback from a couple of owners, and they are very pleased. Considering what else is out there, that's a really good deal for the non-diyer. -Andrew > FJO Inc makes a lower price piece, although I have never heard anything > about its accuracy (or lack of). It does have a nice rpm and a/f > datalogging software for it. Price would be about 700 for that, and you > have to have a laptop. I think its also near 700 if you dont get the > datalogging and get the display instead. > > Bryon > "Pardon my html email account, but I couldn't imagine sifting through the > flames otherwise" > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 08:53:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 08:53:37 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 08:53:37 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Atomization vs Vaporization At 10:03 AM 12/11/01, Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: >Robert, > >Good info, > >But what can we do as engine tuners to control Atomization vs Vaporization? > >I am asking specifically for a turbo application. > >The only things I can play with are Intercooler Temp (which I want as cold >as possible), Boost (which I also want as high as possible), Fuel Pressure, >and Injector Pulse width. A cooler inlet tract retards vaporization, generally a good thing. For one thing, both fuel and water reach their saturation partial vapor pressure at a much lower level in cooler air. > >Are you better off with a Harder - Shorter spray or a Softer - Longer spray >(High fuel pressure vs Low Fuel pressure?) High fuel pressure and smaller injectors tend to produce better (finer) atomization. Pintle type injectors (Bosch design) tend to produce better atomization than ball or disc type injectors ( Rochester or Lucas designs, respectively). Unfortunately, the ball and disc design injectors offer a wide dynamic range than the pintle type do. (More compromises here.) Kinsler Fuel Injection has some pretty good info on the various injector designs. To me these facts present a pretty good argument in favor of staged injectors. > >Here is a question I asked a week or two ago: > >Does the temp of the Air coming out of the intercooler effect the >atomization process? Can too cold of an air charge hurt atomization???????? Not much effect on atomization from charge air temp. As mentioned above, there is an effect on vaporization. > >One last thing, what effect does a temp change on air do the requirement for >the fuel? Lets say you can get the air charge to go from 130 deg C to say >100 deg C, how much fuel should be added. Can you simply use the PV=nrT >(converting to Deg K) formula and consider it a linear function. Yep. Fuel mass flow requirement is going to depend very strongly on inlet tract air density. (Don't expect a perfectly direct relationship, though: VE drops somewhat as inlet tract air density increases because pressure losses in the ports, etc. increase with air density.) > >Thanks > >Steve Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 09:08:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:08:15 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:08:15 -0800 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question all electronics usually has a good selection of surplus DC motors (they have a stepper attached to an iris -- there's a great project lurking there somewhere). Prices for these small motors is usually in the $1-$20 range. They currently only show one with an encoder. It's a 40 RPM gear motor which means you probably can't turn the shaft by hand, so you'd have to separate the encoder from the motor. Below are some URLs for surplus electronics places that you might want to have a look at : http://www.allelectronics.com http://www.allelectronics.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?category=400&item=DCM-174&type=store http://www.eio.com/ http://www.halted.com/ http://www.falls.igs.net/~testequipment/ http://www.bgmicro.com/index.htm http://www.mcmelectronics.com/welcome.jhtml The comment about having to accurately count pulses was right on, but that may not be too big of an issue for 1/4 mile. The idea of investigating what the manufacturers used for ride control was a good one, I think I'd look into that before using this encoder idea. --steve Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > > Steve, > > Could you steer me to one of these, Are these cheaper then the linear > position sensors? > > sf -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 09:09:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:09:06 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:09:06 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? What is the other list, would be curious what they discuss? -----Original Message----- From: efi_student [mailto:efi.student@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 7:27 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? This is correct. I just did a search through a Honda parts site, and the 49 state model is completely different and MUCH more expensive. Not just the sensor, but the whole exhaust set up. The NB sensor is cheap, that is what you are seeing for under $100. I also have some parts scouts looking for a better price than www.partsbin.com and so far, even with an enticement of a purchase of 10 or more units, no one seems to be able to best that price. BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the bounds of the agreement? Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Kevin _ Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 10:16 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? I believe you need a sensor from a non-CA car. As we know, emission laws are stricter in CA because of smog problems. Therefore, I'm drawing the assumption that the CA version had to run stoich to maintain maximum catalyst efficiency and lowest emissions. You can easily detect stoich with a cheaper, switching narrow-band O2 sensor. In the other states, laws are a little less strict so I'm guessing it was a lean-burn civic VX in 49 states. Just to toss out a question, does anybody know what A:F they ran on the lean-burn side of that VX? I know it couldn't be that lean because its not stratified charge, but I am curious... Kevin >Hey all, > >I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different >and I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it >can't be beat!). > >So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor >1994- for CA only there are three listings; > >Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen >Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 >Bosch $57.60 > >Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > >Thanks, >Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 09:13:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:13:29 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:13:29 -0800 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Water Injection When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports here that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal coolant - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - read the reports. Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power change ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the reports again. Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher pressures can be consumed in a cylinder. Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but by severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary research. If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same for most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in Heywood or read the research at NACA. Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From georged@lsil.com Tue Dec 11 08:50:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:14:00 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:14:00 -0300 From: George Dickey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests Hi Here is a unit I found on the Maita (MX5) forum. Never used it, no connection, etc http://www.geocities.com/francillion/ -- George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 09:24:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:24:10 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:24:10 -0800 From: "Huw Scourfield" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DIY EFI Since I've been prompted to suggest a site for reading, gleaning info on the DIY EFI I thought I'd at least start a thread on the subject(especially with an eye on recent ramblings etc, maybe it's time to return to EFI), and perhaps a bit later will post some URLs for reference. Please feel free to add/defame as neccassary). Requirement: accurate ignition timing. To do this requires at least a representation of where the egine is, ie cam sensor. From this can be calculated engine speed, needed for one dimension of the ignition map. Also required is a representation of engine load, this can be from a throttle position sensor or manifold pressure sensor. This gives the second dimension of the ignition map. The values programmed into this map may be derived in all sorts of ways, but they will always have to be corrected for real world/ideal values. Other corrections would be for coolant temperature, air temperature, maybe barometric pressure(depending on where you live, halfway up Pikes Peak etc.). For an ECU /OEMs to work out what site in the map it needs to be requires, 1, a reading of engine speed,- this merely comes from time difference between cam sensor events.(OK it can/should be done from crank events, but I'm trying to keep this simple). One important point to bear in mind is that the cam event signal must be sufficiently in advance of the required (maximum advance) spark event. On reading a cam event the ECU must read the load sensor, then read the map value for that load and speed from the ignition map. Then it must somehow convert the degrees of advance in the map to degrees of delay from the cam event. The ECU obviously does not work in degrees, but in microseconds, therefore for each and every ignition event a conversion has to be done from microseconds to degrees, then back again from degrees to microseconds. Also bear in mind that the corrections for coolant temp , barometric pressure etc. would have to be added the degrees result before conversion. It sounds quite complicated but with modern microcontrollers having built in capture(to measure microseconds between cam events), and compare(to output the required ign pulse) ports it really is not that difficult to grasp. For Fuelling, the basic requirement(disregarding sequental injection) is merely to squirt the right amount of fuel into each, or all inlet ports. Timing is not of great importance, but quantity is. Fuelling is much simpler an issue for the ECU and comes down to reading of sensors and corresponding maps, then adding the necessary corrections. Maybe later. Huw ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 09:52:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:52:23 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:52:23 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests At a glance not too bad, if you like spending big bucks. Closer examination show a serial cable leading to the sensor. And the oem connector is missing. So where is the calibration resistor?. In the photo the resolution isn't great enough to see what might be a replaceable resistor. If it's calibration data is encrpyted in the chip, then they have you locked in to buying their sensor at what ever they want to charge. Another reason to just do a DIY-WB. Bruce From: "George Dickey" Subject: Re: WB Requests > Here is a unit I found on the Maita (MX5) forum. Never used it, no > connection, etc > http://www.geocities.com/francillion/ > George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 09:55:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:55:40 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 09:55:40 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: WB O2 Success Mark, Have you done any data comparison with the WBO2 and your Horiba. Would be curious how this great kit brought forward by the hard work of several DIYers compares to the likes of a Horiba. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Mark S. Riley [mailto:turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:58 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: WB O2 Success I've got a Horiba and it takes 33 seconds from switch on. Ask me how I know. I added 10 ohms to R4 and the DIY-WB warms up in about 35 seconds. Just a couple more than the Horiba and much quicker on a re-crank than the Horiba which again takes 33 seconds. Ask me how I know. I've had the Horiba for twelve years. later, Mark Of course you can add some more resistor and fire it up quicker. I understand the sound of the porcelin cracking is not an extremely expensive sound. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin _" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:33 PM Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > > I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat the > sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than > that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds and > the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't > confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this > properly and safely though. > > Kevin > > >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts > >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the > >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in > >parallel with R4). > > > >BobR. > > > > > > > > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and > >the > > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate > >of > > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Neil > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > >quotes) > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 10:31:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:31:44 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:31:44 -0800 From: "Perry, Scott" Subject: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s First of all, does anyone have any high quality pictures of their completed, functioning wideband with all the wiring attached and everything? I'm a complete novice with electronics, and it would be a great help to have a good visual reference to check my work with. Brian Renegar posted a decent picture of his mostly complete WB on another list (thanks Brian!), but I'd like to see one with all the wiring in place. Also, maybe the answer lies somewhere among the mountain of posts on this list, but I'm also a bit confused about this whole calibrating resistor business. Assuming I'm using the standard DIY PCB and electronics provided by the group purchases, and have the "standard" Civic NTK WB sensor purchased from The PartsBin, what calibrating resistor do I need to complete this board?? Why wasn't this provided in the parts kit? Also, just to make sure it's really as obvious as it appears, I just mount the resistor on the board where it says CalR, right? Sorry for my ignorance. :-) TIA! --Scott ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 10:32:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:32:47 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:32:47 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomisation But: Does complexity always equal better?. Or are you talking about, all these locations while you experiment to see what really works?. Have you thought of how you'll balance all of these?. You can't start an injector at 0, there will be jump in AFR when it first turns on. How will you synch others off, as more come on, or are you going to try and blend the two?. How much time are you going to budget for trying to sort this all out?. Just playing devils advocate Bruce From: Subject: RE: Atomisation > I thought you would say that. Mind you remote injector mounts are fairly > cheap, even for bought units (jenvey dynamics). > So my engine, in first iteration will end up with 9 injector mounts. > 2 in the TB > 4 at the end of the runners (effectively port injectors) > 2 squirting into the trumpets > 1 squirting into the air box (worked for lotus) > I think a good nights sleep is required, followed by looking up the > prices for 1000cc/min P&H injectors. > From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Subject: Re: Atomisation > From: > Subject: RE: Atomisation > > As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at > > high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse > in programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the > > high end > > Bill > I'll give you this: > I played with webers, and for a time one tuning aid was moving the carb > around. ie, long vs short runners with a corresponding change in air > horn > lenght. Again some theories just fall apart for what you'd think would > make sense. The only real way to test things like this, is building a > rig where you can EXPERIMENT, and see what really works. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Tue Dec 11 10:04:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:36:04 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:36:04 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor Yup, 2bar, not one. Thanks Bruce. I also noticed that I said that the Omega transducer was $5, but it is actually $50-$60... Dunno what I was smoking... Steve > Behalf Of Bruce > Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > > The most common junk yard donor is a Turbo Sunbird. > Thou turbo buicks, Syclones, Typoons have them. > Since it's referenced to Absolute, you really looking for a 2 > bar sensor (to > read 1 bar of boost). > Bruce > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jessmx5@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 10:15:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:36:04 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:36:04 -0300 From: "Jess Gypin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests Here is one type. I worked with him for a group buy for the Miata power list that I am part of. He may be interested in another group buy. http://www.geocities.com/francillion/ Jess ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 21:13 PM Subject: WB Requests > I think there are some commercial units out there > in the $1200 range, for those with more money > than time/electronics experience. The price is > probably dropping too. I wonder if anyone has > tried to make a list of the lower priced units available? > > Bruce Roe > > On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 16:27:22 -0800 "efi_student" > writes: > > > BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot > > of requests from list members on another list for a > > DIY-WB unit. I don't have the > > financial resources to help them all out > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 10:42:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:42:11 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:42:11 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > Also, maybe the answer lies somewhere among the mountain of posts on this list, but I'm also a bit confused about this whole calibrating resistor business. Assuming I'm using the standard DIY PCB and electronics provided by the group purchases, and have the "standard" Civic NTK WB sensor purchased from The PartsBin, what calibrating resistor do I need to complete this board?? Why wasn't this provided in the parts kit? the calibration resistor is molded into the connector housing of the sensor. There are 5 wires going to the sensor, but 7 going to the connector for the sensor. > Also, just to make sure it's really as obvious as it appears, I just mount the resistor on the board where it says CalR, right? It's far easier to just run those two connections to the connector and just use the resistor in the sensor's connector. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 10:53:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:53:58 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 10:53:58 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: RE: Atomisation -> As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, -> at high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more -> finesse in programming I would guess but should give great -> atomisation up at the high end Of course! But when it's on an ordinary passenger car instead of a race car, we call it "throttle body injection"... For any independent-runner setup, like the common Weber-pattern throttle bodies, moving the injector to above the butterfly will help a lot. Flow across the butterfly is sonic at low to medium angles, which breaks up the fuel nicely. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 11 10:47:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:04:37 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:04:37 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question bcroe@juno.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:14:08 +1100 Peter Gargano > writes: > > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > > A counter of the same module could keep track of > > > crank position. But another sensor is needed to sync > > > the thing. I have some hall effect devices that adjust > > > themselves to the signal level. > > This is the job for a small "intelligent" device like a PIC. > > It can also easily distinguish missing (or extra teeth) easily > > (eliminating a separate sync pickup). Less than US$5 for > > 5 MIPs - amazing! > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > tooth dimensions. > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. Anybody who wants to try this could save themselves re-inventing the wheel by reading SAE Paper 1999-01-0203 "Enhanced Engine Position Acquisition & Treatment" by Patrick Leiteinturier and Joseph Benning of Siemens. It describes how to eliminate errors resulting from tooth geometry and other factors. The maths looks complicated but can be understood if accompanied by a glass of wine or three. The paper also appears in SAE publication SP-1418 "Electronic Engine Controls 1999" (which is where I found it). The latter also contains papers on integrated in-connector control electronics for NOx sensors, ion current sensing, individual cylinder fuel control with a switching oxygen sensor; and a dozen other similar papers. Only three or four of the papers are probably too obtuse to be relevant to diy. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 10:52:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:12:28 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:12:28 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bernd Felsche" > According to the people who make some money from it, > (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where > you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's > no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for > vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler > (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. Owww, so since they do it for monwy they must know all the answers. > The closer you inject to the inlet valves, the greater the > proportion of droplets and from a single injector, the greater the > chance of imbalance. A port water-injector minimises vapourization > but droplet sizes need to be very small. Distributing the right > amount of water to each requires careful tuning and/or management. > > what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased > > economy & atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? > The _least_ amount of water necessary will provide the maximum > amount of power as water vapour displaces oxygen. It's better to > have tiny droplets of water until the valve closes for compression. , again an instant reply without thinking things thru. > > exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a > > major debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. > Evaporating the droplets in-cylinder doesn't reduce the total oxygen > present even when the droplets evaporate and absorb energy during > compression (six to seven times the amount of heat as for the same > mass of gasoline). The water vapour acts as a "buffer" to the flame > front, not only obstructing it at a molecular level, but also to > reduce hot spots by absorbing some of their heat. > The Gasoline FAQ indicates the degree to which water content in the > air (humidity) reduces an engine's Octane number requirements. Order > of magnitude is 4 g water per kg of air reducing ONR by one point. > (The relationship is not entirely linear.) Getting to sound like trvia pursuit. > With a high charge temperature and without becoming saturated, one > could add 40 to 60 g of water per kg of inlet air, depending on > initial ambient conditions. That's an AWR of between 25:1 and 16:1 > for an ONR of between 10 and 15 points. > Too much water and the flame front slows too much as the reagents > take longer to "find" each other, resulting in less torque. > Determining what is "too much" will take some tuning time. Accurate > knock detection and some means of measuring torque under controlled > loads are a distinct advantage. > Well, that's one theory anyway. Yep, good old theory, sure beats getting ones hand dirty, and actually seeing what is going on. Yep, tuning, does take time, and EXPERIMENTION. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 11:14:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:14:20 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:14:20 -0800 From: "Perry, Scott" Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s > the calibration resistor is molded into the connector housing > of the sensor. > There are 5 wires going to the sensor, but 7 going to the > connector for the > sensor. Thanks Bruce. A light flipped on shortly after I sent this. That makes sense now. For some reason I originally had it in my head that this calibrating resistor was part of the car's wiring harness connector, not the O2 sensor connector. I'm straightened out on that now. > > Also, just to make sure it's really as obvious as it > appears, I just mount > the resistor on the board where it says CalR, right? > > It's far easier to just run those two connections to the > connector and just use the resistor in the sensor's connector. But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... --Scott ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 11:15:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:15:41 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:15:41 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY EFI From: "Huw Scourfield" > Requirement: > accurate ignition timing. > To do this requires at least a representation of where the egine is, ie cam > sensor. From this can be calculated engine speed, needed for one dimension > of the ignition map. Also required is a representation of engine load, this > can be from a throttle position sensor or manifold pressure sensor. This > gives the second dimension of the > ignition map. > The values programmed into this map may be derived in all sorts of ways, but > they will always have to be corrected for real world/ideal values. With that said, all of a sudden the need for .00000003d ignition accuracy just fell to the way side. You have to leave a slight bit of head room in whatever timing you want to run to keep the Knock Sensor / Plug readings right anyway. So long as the error is a constant then .0000000003d or 2.3d doesn't matter as far as resolution goes. If your having to cut things to 1d accuracy, your in some high stakes Pro Racing field or just in it for the ego satidfaction of being able to claim, .000000000003d accuracy in my book. > Other > corrections would be for coolant temperature, air temperature, maybe > barometric pressure(depending on where you live, halfway up Pikes Peak > etc.). All of those are valid. > For an ECU /OEMs to work out what site in the map it needs to be requires, > 1, a reading of engine speed,- this merely comes from time difference > between cam sensor events.(OK it can/should be done from crank events, but > I'm trying to keep this simple). One important point to bear in mind is that > the cam event signal must be sufficiently in advance of the required > (maximum advance) spark event. On reading a cam event the ECU must read the > load sensor, then read the map value for that load and speed from the > ignition map. > Then it must somehow convert the degrees of advance in the map to degrees of > delay from the cam event. The ECU obviously does not work in degrees, but in > microseconds, therefore for each and every ignition event a conversion has > to be done from microseconds to degrees, then back again from degrees to > microseconds. Also bear in mind that the corrections for coolant temp , > barometric pressure etc. would have to be added the degrees result before > conversion. > It sounds quite complicated but with modern microcontrollers having built in > capture(to measure microseconds between cam events), and compare(to output > the required ign pulse) ports it really is not that difficult to grasp. > > For Fuelling, the basic requirement(disregarding sequental injection) is > merely to squirt the right amount of fuel into each, or all inlet ports. > Timing is not of great importance, but quantity is. Fuelling is much simpler > an issue for the ECU and comes down to reading of sensors and corresponding > maps, then adding the necessary corrections. Maybe later. Maybe there are some issures at low speed where the injector timing is somewhat important. Might reference them off of a sensor event. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 11:04:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:17:59 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:17:59 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomisation From: Subject: RE: Atomisation > As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at > high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse in > programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the > high end > Bill I'll give you this: I played with webers, and for a time one tuning aid was moving the carb around. ie, long vs short runners with a corresponding change in air horn lenght. Again some theories just fall apart for what you'd think would make sense. The only real way to test things like this, is building a rig where you can EXPERIMENT, and see what really works. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 11:20:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:20:35 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:20:35 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe obviously). Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 11:43:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:43:19 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:43:19 -0800 From: Ron Schroeder Subject: RE: Atomisation At 09:21 AM 12/11/01 -0500, you wrote: > For any independent-runner setup, like the common Weber-pattern >throttle bodies, moving the injector to above the butterfly will help a >lot. Flow across the butterfly is sonic at low to medium angles, which >breaks up the fuel nicely. So....would a small single barrel TBI for each cyl. be better than PFI? Ron Schroeder WD8CDH E. E. S. wd8cdh@bnl.gov rjs@bnl.gov 631 344-4561 Day 631 286-5677 Nite ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 11:44:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:44:55 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 11:44:55 -0800 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success posted the info back when I finished the DIY-WB back Aug or Sept. As near as I could tell from about 11:1 up to 18:1 they matched within .1 air fuel ratio. I've used the DIY-WB on my Dynojet and tuned with it comparing it to the wide band on the Dynojet also. Within a tenth or so. It changes so fast. The Horiba and the Dynojet match within about a tenth or so. It varies slightly as it runs. I think the sensor placement in the pipe makes a difference and you can't put 2 in the exact same spot. So you have slight differences that are very close. I don't have any problem trusting the reading off the DIY-WB. Just think, If you didn't have 2 or 3 to look at, you wouldn't see any difference to be able to pick at. I've got 3 different wide bands with 3 different displays. Makes comparisons interesting. Usually get several people watching different ones and discuss what happened. We're not looking for the edge when that's happening. Some people are good observers and others need a video camera to watch the replay. Curly, Moe and Joe all live in the neighborhood ;} Later, Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:44 PM Subject: RE: WB O2 Success > Mark, > > Have you done any data comparison with the WBO2 and your Horiba. Would be > curious how this great kit brought forward by the hard work of several > DIYers compares to the likes of a Horiba. > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark S. Riley [mailto:turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:58 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > > > I've got a Horiba and it takes 33 seconds from switch on. Ask me how I know. > I added 10 ohms to R4 and the DIY-WB warms up in about 35 seconds. Just a > couple more than the Horiba and much quicker on a re-crank than the Horiba > which again takes 33 seconds. Ask me how I know. I've had the Horiba for > twelve years. later, Mark > > Of course you can add some more resistor and fire it up quicker. I > understand the sound of the porcelin cracking is not an extremely expensive > sound. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kevin _" > To: > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:33 PM > Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > > > > > > I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat > the > > sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than > > that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds > and > > the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't > > confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this > > properly and safely though. > > > > Kevin > > > > >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts > > >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the > > >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in > > >parallel with R4). > > > > > >BobR. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and > > >the > > > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit > too > > > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate > > >of > > > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Neil > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > > >quotes) > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Tue Dec 11 11:43:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:02:22 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:02:22 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: WB assembly help To calculate the Caps, the numbers are relative to a Pico Farad = 1 x 10^(-12) So a 104 Cap should be thought of 10x10^(4) Pico Farads. Which is the same as 10x10^(4) X 1 Pico Farad = 10x10^4 X 1x10^(-12) = 1 x 10^(-7) = .1 x 10^(-6) = 0.1 uF A 105 cap would then equal 1uF. Steve -----Original Message----- From: akallotte@juno.com [mailto:akallotte@juno.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 5:59 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: WB assembly help This is the first time I've built something like this, so bear with me. I've soldered on all the resistors, which was easy thanks to all the work put into the parts kit. I moved on to the caps and have had to learn how to read them. I'm still confused though. First, is the 22uf 25v cap in the parts kit for reference C5 (25uf 25v)? Next, C2 and C8 call for .1uf 25v, but I only have 1 tantulim(sp) disc type cap with that rating. C9, C13, and C14 call for .1uf 12v, but I have four little caps marked 104 C5K. Is the parts kit a little off or am I supposed to substitute something? Thanks for the help and for the project. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Tue Dec 11 11:43:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:02:22 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:02:22 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts & increases HP, by >reducing charge temp (but I have a feeling that this one is open for major >debate here). > >BW > Not quite what I have been trying to say. The cooling during the compression stroke reduces the negative work taken from the crank to do the compression significantly. The cooler peak temp ALSO reduces the positive work available during the power stroke, but this reduction is marginally less than the reduction in negative work mentioned above. A slight net gain in output is the end result. BUT--the lower peak temp ALSO results in less heat rejection to the water jackets, which means some additional gain in power and efficiency will be there. The reduction in pressures that goes hand in hand with the lower temps means lower friction and bearing loads, so more gains in power and efficiency, as well as better mechanical durability. The reduction in temps also translates to better mechanical durability. If you build the engine knowing you are going to use WI, you can also build in a higher mechanical compression ratio (for the intended fuel), and reap more power and efficiency gains there. Try reading it this way, then argue away ! :-) Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Tue Dec 11 11:48:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:02:22 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:02:22 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question At 12:40 AM 12/11/01, bcroe@juno.com wrote: >Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents >a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be >moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the >the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to >tooth dimensions. > >A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. >But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something >else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a >second crude sync from the cam/distributor. > >The Hall devices I picked for experiments >(MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things >including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, >and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could >do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice >missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of >us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make >do with what we have. > >Bruce Roe > Right on, Bruce! GReg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Tue Dec 11 11:45:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:02:33 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:02:33 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Steve, Could you steer me to one of these, Are these cheaper then the linear position sensors? sf -----Original Message----- From: steve ravet [mailto:sravet@arm.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 5:58 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question There are small electric motors with integrated position sensors, you could mount one of them and use the position output. This is similar to your mouse idea only already packaged and maybe more rugged. Plus when you're ready for the big leagues you could drive the motor for active suspension control. --steve ps just kidding about the active control part. Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Tue Dec 11 12:03:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:37:25 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:37:25 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomization vs Vaporization Robert, Good info, But what can we do as engine tuners to control Atomization vs Vaporization? I am asking specifically for a turbo application. The only things I can play with are Intercooler Temp (which I want as cold as possible), Boost (which I also want as high as possible), Fuel Pressure, and Injector Pulse width. Are you better off with a Harder - Shorter spray or a Softer - Longer spray (High fuel pressure vs Low Fuel pressure?) Here is a question I asked a week or two ago: Does the temp of the Air coming out of the intercooler effect the atomization process? Can too cold of an air charge hurt atomization???????? One last thing, what effect does a temp change on air do the requirement for the fuel? Lets say you can get the air charge to go from 130 deg C to say 100 deg C, how much fuel should be added. Can you simply use the PV=nrT (converting to Deg K) formula and consider it a linear function. Thanks Steve -----Original Message----- From: Robert Harris [mailto:bob@bobthecomputerguy.com] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:54 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Atomization vs Vaporization Revist Ideal Gas Laws. The absorbtion of heat in the intake tract and the cylinder prior to combustion is not to affect the energy release of combustion, it is to both reduce the work of induction and to increase the amount of the inducted charge. The heat of vaporization of fuel is large with respect to the inducted air mass and thus can cause significant changes in the temperature and thus total quantity of inlet charge. Liquid fuel atomized to 10 microns or less ( you will see that number many times ) burns not as a liquid - droplet by droplet - as essentially identical to a pre-mixed gas. A liquid "vaporized" has transitions to a gas state - with a significant size change. Water expands approx 1800 times going to steam - fuel significantly less, but the resultant vapor molecule is orders of magnitude greater in size than the liquid. Atomized - preferably to 10 micron or less - fuel absorbs heat - thus cooling the intake charge and increasing the fresh charge inductable - without appreciatory changing the size of the fuel particle Vaporization the fuel absorbs the heat, but since a state change is involved, it greatly expands the space occupied by the fuel. The benefits of cooling are offset by the loss of space by vaporization. Atomize - not vaporize. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Tue Dec 11 12:17:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:39:13 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 12:39:13 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation I thought you would say that. Mind you remote injector mounts are fairly cheap, even for bought units (jenvey dynamics). So my engine, in first iteration will end up with 9 injector mounts. 2 in the TB 4 at the end of the runners (effectively port injectors) 2 squirting into the trumpets 1 squirting into the air box (worked for lotus) I think a good nights sleep is required, followed by looking up the prices for 1000cc/min P&H injectors. -----Original Message----- From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 2:05 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Atomisation From: Subject: RE: Atomisation > As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at > high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse in > programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the > high end > Bill I'll give you this: I played with webers, and for a time one tuning aid was moving the carb around. ie, long vs short runners with a corresponding change in air horn lenght. Again some theories just fall apart for what you'd think would make sense. The only real way to test things like this, is building a rig where you can EXPERIMENT, and see what really works. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 13:04:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:04:59 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:04:59 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? This is well within the intent. And thank you for helping out others with the DIY-WB. BobR. efi_student wrote: > This is correct. I just did a search through a Honda parts site, and > the 49 state model is completely different and MUCH more expensive. Not > just the sensor, but the whole exhaust set up. The NB sensor is cheap, > that is what you are seeing for under $100. I also have some parts > scouts looking for a better price than www.partsbin.com and so far, even > with an enticement of a purchase of 10 or more units, no one seems to be > able to best that price. > > BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from > list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the > financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain > people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not > complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a > commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an > assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) > before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with > them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their > results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I > think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. > Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the > bounds of the agreement? > > Lance > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From habanero@us.ibm.com Tue Dec 11 12:48:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:07:04 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:07:04 -0300 From: "Andrew Theurer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests Their controller box is only $362 USD, and they sell the NTK sensor for only $220 USD. If you bought the sensor from partsbin, you could get WB for under $500. Also, their simple AFR display is ~$100. I have feedback from a couple of owners, and they are very pleased. Considering what else is out there, that's a really good deal for the non-diyer. -Andrew > FJO Inc makes a lower price piece, although I have never heard anything > about its accuracy (or lack of). It does have a nice rpm and a/f > datalogging software for it. Price would be about 700 for that, and you > have to have a laptop. I think its also near 700 if you dont get the > datalogging and get the display instead. > > Bryon > "Pardon my html email account, but I couldn't imagine sifting through the > flames otherwise" > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 13:09:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:09:12 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 13:09:12 -0800 From: "Don DRI05 Ricciardiello" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success Neil, Congratulations, sounds great. Just a tuning question for you. How does your bike idle? The 1.82v readout suggests it's quite rich. Perhaps it's because of the cold ambient temp or was the choke still out at this point? Cheers Don From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca@diy-efi.org on 10/12/2001 14:20 CST Please respond to diy_efi@diy-efi.org Sent by: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org cc: Subject: WB O2 Success ........ I read 4.02V in free air with my Fluke DVM. Drove it down to 0.79V by flooding the sensor with propane from my plumber's torch (unlit of course). Then installed it on my carbureted motorcycle after warming the engine up from the ambient +3C temperature and read 1.82V at idle.........couldn't road test it under load because of the snow drifts in the way. ........... Thanks, Neil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 14:03:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:03:35 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:03:35 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Okay, I will reply to myself since after doing some research, I am back to DIY mode. The LabJack USB data acq unit DOES have a counter, but none of the canned software you get with it supports it at reasonable sample rates. Someone had mentioned taking a square wave rpm signal, and turning it into an analog voltage using an LM2917 or somesuch and some wiring. Can anyone provide me with some insight (or preferably DETAILED instructions ;) on how to do this? I will still need to do some programming to get maximum sample rate on about 6 signals, but with the built in counter, I am limited to 2 samples/sec which is not nearly adequate. With the counter and custom software I can probably get 16 samples/sec, but with the rpm as an analog voltage I can get 25 samples/second with 6 channels... Any input? Offline is fine if no-one on the list is interested... Thanks, Steve > Behalf Of Stephen Andersen > Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal > > Thanks for the pointer. I am actually thinking about buying > the USB logger board ($99) which has a built-in 32bit counter. > I can snag the rpm signal to the DME in my car and multiply it > by 20 to get rpm (So I'm told). I think with the 8 single > ended inputs I can record enough (including the WB) for some > decent tuning data... > > Not exactly DIY though!!! > > Thanks, > Steve > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 11 14:03:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:03:44 -0800 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:03:44 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you $2.08 each in Q1 at Allied is steep? It's LM3914N-1 now BTW. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Tue Dec 11 13:58:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:24:48 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:24:48 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? What is the other list, would be curious what they discuss? -----Original Message----- From: efi_student [mailto:efi.student@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 7:27 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? This is correct. I just did a search through a Honda parts site, and the 49 state model is completely different and MUCH more expensive. Not just the sensor, but the whole exhaust set up. The NB sensor is cheap, that is what you are seeing for under $100. I also have some parts scouts looking for a better price than www.partsbin.com and so far, even with an enticement of a purchase of 10 or more units, no one seems to be able to best that price. BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the bounds of the agreement? Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Kevin _ Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 10:16 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? I believe you need a sensor from a non-CA car. As we know, emission laws are stricter in CA because of smog problems. Therefore, I'm drawing the assumption that the CA version had to run stoich to maintain maximum catalyst efficiency and lowest emissions. You can easily detect stoich with a cheaper, switching narrow-band O2 sensor. In the other states, laws are a little less strict so I'm guessing it was a lean-burn civic VX in 49 states. Just to toss out a question, does anybody know what A:F they ran on the lean-burn side of that VX? I know it couldn't be that lean because its not stratified charge, but I am curious... Kevin >Hey all, > >I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different >and I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it >can't be beat!). > >So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor >1994- for CA only there are three listings; > >Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen >Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 >Bosch $57.60 > >Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > >Thanks, >Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Tue Dec 11 13:56:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:24:57 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:24:57 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Atomization vs Vaporization At 10:03 AM 12/11/01, Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: >Robert, > >Good info, > >But what can we do as engine tuners to control Atomization vs Vaporization? > >I am asking specifically for a turbo application. > >The only things I can play with are Intercooler Temp (which I want as cold >as possible), Boost (which I also want as high as possible), Fuel Pressure, >and Injector Pulse width. A cooler inlet tract retards vaporization, generally a good thing. For one thing, both fuel and water reach their saturation partial vapor pressure at a much lower level in cooler air. > >Are you better off with a Harder - Shorter spray or a Softer - Longer spray >(High fuel pressure vs Low Fuel pressure?) High fuel pressure and smaller injectors tend to produce better (finer) atomization. Pintle type injectors (Bosch design) tend to produce better atomization than ball or disc type injectors ( Rochester or Lucas designs, respectively). Unfortunately, the ball and disc design injectors offer a wide dynamic range than the pintle type do. (More compromises here.) Kinsler Fuel Injection has some pretty good info on the various injector designs. To me these facts present a pretty good argument in favor of staged injectors. > >Here is a question I asked a week or two ago: > >Does the temp of the Air coming out of the intercooler effect the >atomization process? Can too cold of an air charge hurt atomization???????? Not much effect on atomization from charge air temp. As mentioned above, there is an effect on vaporization. > >One last thing, what effect does a temp change on air do the requirement for >the fuel? Lets say you can get the air charge to go from 130 deg C to say >100 deg C, how much fuel should be added. Can you simply use the PV=nrT >(converting to Deg K) formula and consider it a linear function. Yep. Fuel mass flow requirement is going to depend very strongly on inlet tract air density. (Don't expect a perfectly direct relationship, though: VE drops somewhat as inlet tract air density increases because pressure losses in the ports, etc. increase with air density.) > >Thanks > >Steve Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sravet@arm.com Tue Dec 11 14:02:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:25:26 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 14:25:26 -0300 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question all electronics usually has a good selection of surplus DC motors (they have a stepper attached to an iris -- there's a great project lurking there somewhere). Prices for these small motors is usually in the $1-$20 range. They currently only show one with an encoder. It's a 40 RPM gear motor which means you probably can't turn the shaft by hand, so you'd have to separate the encoder from the motor. Below are some URLs for surplus electronics places that you might want to have a look at : http://www.allelectronics.com http://www.allelectronics.com/cgi-bin/category.cgi?category=400&item=DCM-174&type=store http://www.eio.com/ http://www.halted.com/ http://www.falls.igs.net/~testequipment/ http://www.bgmicro.com/index.htm http://www.mcmelectronics.com/welcome.jhtml The comment about having to accurately count pulses was right on, but that may not be too big of an issue for 1/4 mile. The idea of investigating what the manufacturers used for ride control was a good one, I think I'd look into that before using this encoder idea. --steve Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > > Steve, > > Could you steer me to one of these, Are these cheaper then the linear > position sensors? > > sf -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bob@bobthecomputerguy.com Tue Dec 11 14:22:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:11:52 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:11:52 -0300 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Water Injection When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports here that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal coolant - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - read the reports. Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power change ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the reports again. Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher pressures can be consumed in a cylinder. Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but by severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary research. If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same for most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in Heywood or read the research at NACA. Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 14:34:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:22:46 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:22:46 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests At a glance not too bad, if you like spending big bucks. Closer examination show a serial cable leading to the sensor. And the oem connector is missing. So where is the calibration resistor?. In the photo the resolution isn't great enough to see what might be a replaceable resistor. If it's calibration data is encrpyted in the chip, then they have you locked in to buying their sensor at what ever they want to charge. Another reason to just do a DIY-WB. Bruce From: "George Dickey" Subject: Re: WB Requests > Here is a unit I found on the Maita (MX5) forum. Never used it, no > connection, etc > http://www.geocities.com/francillion/ > George ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Tue Dec 11 14:44:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:23:04 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:23:04 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: WB O2 Success Mark, Have you done any data comparison with the WBO2 and your Horiba. Would be curious how this great kit brought forward by the hard work of several DIYers compares to the likes of a Horiba. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Mark S. Riley [mailto:turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:58 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: WB O2 Success I've got a Horiba and it takes 33 seconds from switch on. Ask me how I know. I added 10 ohms to R4 and the DIY-WB warms up in about 35 seconds. Just a couple more than the Horiba and much quicker on a re-crank than the Horiba which again takes 33 seconds. Ask me how I know. I've had the Horiba for twelve years. later, Mark Of course you can add some more resistor and fire it up quicker. I understand the sound of the porcelin cracking is not an extremely expensive sound. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin _" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:33 PM Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > > I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat the > sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than > that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds and > the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't > confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this > properly and safely though. > > Kevin > > >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts > >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the > >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in > >parallel with R4). > > > >BobR. > > > > > > > > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and > >the > > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit too > > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate > >of > > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Neil > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > >quotes) > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Huw.Scourfield@btinternet.com Mon Dec 10 22:10:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:23:13 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 15:23:13 -0300 From: "Huw Scourfield" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DIY EFI Since I've been prompted to suggest a site for reading, gleaning info on the DIY EFI I thought I'd at least start a thread on the subject(especially with an eye on recent ramblings etc, maybe it's time to return to EFI), and perhaps a bit later will post some URLs for reference. Please feel free to add/defame as neccassary). Requirement: accurate ignition timing. To do this requires at least a representation of where the egine is, ie cam sensor. From this can be calculated engine speed, needed for one dimension of the ignition map. Also required is a representation of engine load, this can be from a throttle position sensor or manifold pressure sensor. This gives the second dimension of the ignition map. The values programmed into this map may be derived in all sorts of ways, but they will always have to be corrected for real world/ideal values. Other corrections would be for coolant temperature, air temperature, maybe barometric pressure(depending on where you live, halfway up Pikes Peak etc.). For an ECU /OEMs to work out what site in the map it needs to be requires, 1, a reading of engine speed,- this merely comes from time difference between cam sensor events.(OK it can/should be done from crank events, but I'm trying to keep this simple). One important point to bear in mind is that the cam event signal must be sufficiently in advance of the required (maximum advance) spark event. On reading a cam event the ECU must read the load sensor, then read the map value for that load and speed from the ignition map. Then it must somehow convert the degrees of advance in the map to degrees of delay from the cam event. The ECU obviously does not work in degrees, but in microseconds, therefore for each and every ignition event a conversion has to be done from microseconds to degrees, then back again from degrees to microseconds. Also bear in mind that the corrections for coolant temp , barometric pressure etc. would have to be added the degrees result before conversion. It sounds quite complicated but with modern microcontrollers having built in capture(to measure microseconds between cam events), and compare(to output the required ign pulse) ports it really is not that difficult to grasp. For Fuelling, the basic requirement(disregarding sequental injection) is merely to squirt the right amount of fuel into each, or all inlet ports. Timing is not of great importance, but quantity is. Fuelling is much simpler an issue for the ECU and comes down to reading of sensors and corresponding maps, then adding the necessary corrections. Maybe later. Huw ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 15:32:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:03:50 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:03:50 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomisation But: Does complexity always equal better?. Or are you talking about, all these locations while you experiment to see what really works?. Have you thought of how you'll balance all of these?. You can't start an injector at 0, there will be jump in AFR when it first turns on. How will you synch others off, as more come on, or are you going to try and blend the two?. How much time are you going to budget for trying to sort this all out?. Just playing devils advocate Bruce From: Subject: RE: Atomisation > I thought you would say that. Mind you remote injector mounts are fairly > cheap, even for bought units (jenvey dynamics). > So my engine, in first iteration will end up with 9 injector mounts. > 2 in the TB > 4 at the end of the runners (effectively port injectors) > 2 squirting into the trumpets > 1 squirting into the air box (worked for lotus) > I think a good nights sleep is required, followed by looking up the > prices for 1000cc/min P&H injectors. > From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] > Subject: Re: Atomisation > From: > Subject: RE: Atomisation > > As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, at > > high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more finesse > in programming I would guess but should give great atomisation up at the > > high end > > Bill > I'll give you this: > I played with webers, and for a time one tuning aid was moving the carb > around. ie, long vs short runners with a corresponding change in air > horn > lenght. Again some theories just fall apart for what you'd think would > make sense. The only real way to test things like this, is building a > rig where you can EXPERIMENT, and see what really works. > Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From perry@sapphire.spdc.ti.com Tue Dec 11 15:29:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:05:33 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:05:33 -0300 From: "Perry, Scott" Subject: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s First of all, does anyone have any high quality pictures of their completed, functioning wideband with all the wiring attached and everything? I'm a complete novice with electronics, and it would be a great help to have a good visual reference to check my work with. Brian Renegar posted a decent picture of his mostly complete WB on another list (thanks Brian!), but I'd like to see one with all the wiring in place. Also, maybe the answer lies somewhere among the mountain of posts on this list, but I'm also a bit confused about this whole calibrating resistor business. Assuming I'm using the standard DIY PCB and electronics provided by the group purchases, and have the "standard" Civic NTK WB sensor purchased from The PartsBin, what calibrating resistor do I need to complete this board?? Why wasn't this provided in the parts kit? Also, just to make sure it's really as obvious as it appears, I just mount the resistor on the board where it says CalR, right? Sorry for my ignorance. :-) TIA! --Scott ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Tue Dec 11 11:21:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:07:59 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:07:59 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: RE: Atomisation -> As a matter of interest have you ever tried remote injectors where, -> at high RPM you squirt into the trumpet. Requires a little more -> finesse in programming I would guess but should give great -> atomisation up at the high end Of course! But when it's on an ordinary passenger car instead of a race car, we call it "throttle body injection"... For any independent-runner setup, like the common Weber-pattern throttle bodies, moving the injector to above the butterfly will help a lot. Flow across the butterfly is sonic at low to medium angles, which breaks up the fuel nicely. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 15:42:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:09:39 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:09:39 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > Also, maybe the answer lies somewhere among the mountain of posts on this list, but I'm also a bit confused about this whole calibrating resistor business. Assuming I'm using the standard DIY PCB and electronics provided by the group purchases, and have the "standard" Civic NTK WB sensor purchased from The PartsBin, what calibrating resistor do I need to complete this board?? Why wasn't this provided in the parts kit? the calibration resistor is molded into the connector housing of the sensor. There are 5 wires going to the sensor, but 7 going to the connector for the sensor. > Also, just to make sure it's really as obvious as it appears, I just mount the resistor on the board where it says CalR, right? It's far easier to just run those two connections to the connector and just use the resistor in the sensor's connector. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 16:20:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:44:00 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:44:00 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe obviously). Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From perry@sapphire.spdc.ti.com Tue Dec 11 16:11:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:44:42 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:44:42 -0300 From: "Perry, Scott" Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s > the calibration resistor is molded into the connector housing > of the sensor. > There are 5 wires going to the sensor, but 7 going to the > connector for the > sensor. Thanks Bruce. A light flipped on shortly after I sent this. That makes sense now. For some reason I originally had it in my head that this calibrating resistor was part of the car's wiring harness connector, not the O2 sensor connector. I'm straightened out on that now. > > Also, just to make sure it's really as obvious as it > appears, I just mount > the resistor on the board where it says CalR, right? > > It's far easier to just run those two connections to the > connector and just use the resistor in the sensor's connector. But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... --Scott ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 16:15:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:46:13 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 16:46:13 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY EFI From: "Huw Scourfield" > Requirement: > accurate ignition timing. > To do this requires at least a representation of where the egine is, ie cam > sensor. From this can be calculated engine speed, needed for one dimension > of the ignition map. Also required is a representation of engine load, this > can be from a throttle position sensor or manifold pressure sensor. This > gives the second dimension of the > ignition map. > The values programmed into this map may be derived in all sorts of ways, but > they will always have to be corrected for real world/ideal values. With that said, all of a sudden the need for .00000003d ignition accuracy just fell to the way side. You have to leave a slight bit of head room in whatever timing you want to run to keep the Knock Sensor / Plug readings right anyway. So long as the error is a constant then .0000000003d or 2.3d doesn't matter as far as resolution goes. If your having to cut things to 1d accuracy, your in some high stakes Pro Racing field or just in it for the ego satidfaction of being able to claim, .000000000003d accuracy in my book. > Other > corrections would be for coolant temperature, air temperature, maybe > barometric pressure(depending on where you live, halfway up Pikes Peak > etc.). All of those are valid. > For an ECU /OEMs to work out what site in the map it needs to be requires, > 1, a reading of engine speed,- this merely comes from time difference > between cam sensor events.(OK it can/should be done from crank events, but > I'm trying to keep this simple). One important point to bear in mind is that > the cam event signal must be sufficiently in advance of the required > (maximum advance) spark event. On reading a cam event the ECU must read the > load sensor, then read the map value for that load and speed from the > ignition map. > Then it must somehow convert the degrees of advance in the map to degrees of > delay from the cam event. The ECU obviously does not work in degrees, but in > microseconds, therefore for each and every ignition event a conversion has > to be done from microseconds to degrees, then back again from degrees to > microseconds. Also bear in mind that the corrections for coolant temp , > barometric pressure etc. would have to be added the degrees result before > conversion. > It sounds quite complicated but with modern microcontrollers having built in > capture(to measure microseconds between cam events), and compare(to output > the required ign pulse) ports it really is not that difficult to grasp. > > For Fuelling, the basic requirement(disregarding sequental injection) is > merely to squirt the right amount of fuel into each, or all inlet ports. > Timing is not of great importance, but quantity is. Fuelling is much simpler > an issue for the ECU and comes down to reading of sensors and corresponding > maps, then adding the necessary corrections. Maybe later. Maybe there are some issures at low speed where the injector timing is somewhat important. Might reference them off of a sensor event. Bruce ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rjs@bnl.gov Tue Dec 11 16:42:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:44:39 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:44:39 -0300 From: Ron Schroeder Subject: RE: Atomisation At 09:21 AM 12/11/01 -0500, you wrote: > For any independent-runner setup, like the common Weber-pattern >throttle bodies, moving the injector to above the butterfly will help a >lot. Flow across the butterfly is sonic at low to medium angles, which >breaks up the fuel nicely. So....would a small single barrel TBI for each cyl. be better than PFI? Ron Schroeder WD8CDH E. E. S. wd8cdh@bnl.gov rjs@bnl.gov 631 344-4561 Day 631 286-5677 Nite ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com Wed Dec 12 05:45:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:44:39 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:44:39 -0300 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success posted the info back when I finished the DIY-WB back Aug or Sept. As near as I could tell from about 11:1 up to 18:1 they matched within .1 air fuel ratio. I've used the DIY-WB on my Dynojet and tuned with it comparing it to the wide band on the Dynojet also. Within a tenth or so. It changes so fast. The Horiba and the Dynojet match within about a tenth or so. It varies slightly as it runs. I think the sensor placement in the pipe makes a difference and you can't put 2 in the exact same spot. So you have slight differences that are very close. I don't have any problem trusting the reading off the DIY-WB. Just think, If you didn't have 2 or 3 to look at, you wouldn't see any difference to be able to pick at. I've got 3 different wide bands with 3 different displays. Makes comparisons interesting. Usually get several people watching different ones and discuss what happened. We're not looking for the edge when that's happening. Some people are good observers and others need a video camera to watch the replay. Curly, Moe and Joe all live in the neighborhood ;} Later, Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:44 PM Subject: RE: WB O2 Success > Mark, > > Have you done any data comparison with the WBO2 and your Horiba. Would be > curious how this great kit brought forward by the hard work of several > DIYers compares to the likes of a Horiba. > > Steve > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark S. Riley [mailto:turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:58 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > > > I've got a Horiba and it takes 33 seconds from switch on. Ask me how I know. > I added 10 ohms to R4 and the DIY-WB warms up in about 35 seconds. Just a > couple more than the Horiba and much quicker on a re-crank than the Horiba > which again takes 33 seconds. Ask me how I know. I've had the Horiba for > twelve years. later, Mark > > Of course you can add some more resistor and fire it up quicker. I > understand the sound of the porcelin cracking is not an extremely expensive > sound. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kevin _" > To: > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:33 PM > Subject: Re: WB O2 Success > > > > > > I don't know exactly how the DIY-WB board's circuitry is set up to heat > the > > sensor, but I do know you should be able to heat it a bunch quicker than > > that. The production NTK driver box heats the sensor in about 5 seconds > and > > the Horriba driver box heats the sensor in less than 10 seconds. I can't > > confirm that you can just drop down the resistance to accomplish this > > properly and safely though. > > > > Kevin > > > > >There should be some 15 ohm resistors left over from the parts > > >kit. Add some of these time across R4 (the big 1 ohm), until the > > >sensor warms up between 45 and 60 seconds. (That is in > > >parallel with R4). > > > > > >BobR. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Question: It takes exactly four minutes for the sensor to heat up and > > >the > > > > LED to light. Is four minutes heating time typical? This is a bit > too > > > > long for my liking. I assume that there is a need to control the rate > > >of > > > > heating the sensor or else we wouldn't have the elaborate heater power > > > > supply. I would like to shorten the heating time if possible. Any > > > > comments on what the effect of shortening the heating time would be? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Neil > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > > >quotes) > > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dricciardiello@qantas.com.au Tue Dec 11 19:09:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:34:47 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:34:47 -0300 From: "Don DRI05 Ricciardiello" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success Neil, Congratulations, sounds great. Just a tuning question for you. How does your bike idle? The 1.82v readout suggests it's quite rich. Perhaps it's because of the cold ambient temp or was the choke still out at this point? Cheers Don From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca@diy-efi.org on 10/12/2001 14:20 CST Please respond to diy_efi@diy-efi.org Sent by: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org cc: Subject: WB O2 Success ........ I read 4.02V in free air with my Fluke DVM. Drove it down to 0.79V by flooding the sensor with propane from my plumber's torch (unlit of course). Then installed it on my carbureted motorcycle after warming the engine up from the ambient +3C temperature and read 1.82V at idle.........couldn't road test it under load because of the snow drifts in the way. ........... Thanks, Neil ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Tue Dec 11 18:08:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:35:20 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 18:35:20 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? This is well within the intent. And thank you for helping out others with the DIY-WB. BobR. efi_student wrote: > This is correct. I just did a search through a Honda parts site, and > the 49 state model is completely different and MUCH more expensive. Not > just the sensor, but the whole exhaust set up. The NB sensor is cheap, > that is what you are seeing for under $100. I also have some parts > scouts looking for a better price than www.partsbin.com and so far, even > with an enticement of a purchase of 10 or more units, no one seems to be > able to best that price. > > BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from > list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the > financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain > people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not > complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a > commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an > assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) > before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with > them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their > results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I > think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. > Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the > bounds of the agreement? > > Lance > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Tue Dec 11 18:47:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:32:05 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:32:05 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Okay, I will reply to myself since after doing some research, I am back to DIY mode. The LabJack USB data acq unit DOES have a counter, but none of the canned software you get with it supports it at reasonable sample rates. Someone had mentioned taking a square wave rpm signal, and turning it into an analog voltage using an LM2917 or somesuch and some wiring. Can anyone provide me with some insight (or preferably DETAILED instructions ;) on how to do this? I will still need to do some programming to get maximum sample rate on about 6 signals, but with the built in counter, I am limited to 2 samples/sec which is not nearly adequate. With the counter and custom software I can probably get 16 samples/sec, but with the rpm as an analog voltage I can get 25 samples/second with 6 channels... Any input? Offline is fine if no-one on the list is interested... Thanks, Steve > Behalf Of Stephen Andersen > Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal > > Thanks for the pointer. I am actually thinking about buying > the USB logger board ($99) which has a built-in 32bit counter. > I can snag the rpm signal to the DME in my car and multiply it > by 20 to get rpm (So I'm told). I think with the 8 single > ended inputs I can record enough (including the WB) for some > decent tuning data... > > Not exactly DIY though!!! > > Thanks, > Steve > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Tue Dec 11 19:03:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:36:19 -0300 Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 19:36:19 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you $2.08 each in Q1 at Allied is steep? It's LM3914N-1 now BTW. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:42:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:42:16 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:42:16 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Audi DI Well, you can't complain about the 1.9TDI. 150BHP. For a car application that is very impressive in a diesel. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Dotson" Seems pretty weak for a 10. To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:43:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:43:39 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:43:39 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > High pressure = easy to maintain nice spray patterns in all conditions, > something about "overwhelming the manifold conditions" thing. You can subscribe to two or more schools on how you want the water applied. Brute simple dumb, or go with the wizz bang stuff. If you go with the first, then the couple PSI difference ain't gonna really matter in relationship to the flow. ie, say your running 24 PSI of boost and turning it on at 18. 6 PSI variance, as compared to 200 PSI is no big deal. If you trying to run a system at 40 PSI that 6 is rather meaningful. > fogger nozzles for easy availability. I suppose this application could > really use someone to come up with a single injector nozzle similar to a > fogger nozzle that would be simple to change jets on, or better yet, have a > single nozzle/jet for all locations & have a variable jet somewhere else (or > pressure, but then we get into critical flow or not). A hole in a brass fitting is good enough when you have lots of PSI behind things. > what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased economy & > atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? WI for economy?. OK, but have a huge tank. Vaporization will cool the charge temperature, and atomization will make power. IMO, you'll use an intercooler for the temp., and then worry about atomization for power. > exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a major > debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. BUT, what > appears to be results of that is, increased resistance to detonation, keeps > the cyls clean (old mechanic dude teached me that one) & increases HP, by > reducing charge temp (but I have a feeling that this one is open for major > debate here). Try the archives, jun/jul of 00 (maybe 99). There is a very interesting post by Mr Harris that gives a great insight into what really happens with WI, in the chamber's reaction. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:43:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:43:51 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:43:51 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. Every Audi turbo since the early 80s thru mid 90s used the flywheel teeth for timing. Why? Because signals derived from the cam suffer from backlash in the cam drive and similarly for the distributor. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:44:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:44:28 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:44:28 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Water Injection And heaven-forbid you mention that a TBI system results in an engine with a higher VE (hence power) then it would when port injected. And folks wonder how I can spend so much time on this stuff ! BobR. Robert Harris wrote: > When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, > misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might > just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject > when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. > > Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports here > that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to > destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. > > http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ > > Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal coolant > - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough > that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - read > the reports. > > Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power change > ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the > reports again. > > Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. > Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for > fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major > increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher pressures > can be consumed in a cylinder. > > Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but by > severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. > > The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use > computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to > destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary > research. > > If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of > their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same for > most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in Heywood > or read the research at NACA. > > Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:45:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:45:16 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:45:16 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Why do I keep thinking that a tooth could be lowered enough to skip the sensor and still work for the starter? Then use a retriggerable SS to detect the missing tooth. BobR. bcroe@juno.com wrote: > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > tooth dimensions. > > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. > > The Hall devices I picked for experiments > (MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things > including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, > and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could > do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice > missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of > us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make > do with what we have. > > Bruce Roe ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:45:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:45:37 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:45:37 -0800 From: A79coupe@aol.com Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Is there a way to use the signal for the tach as a source for RPM? I'm not sure if the tach converts frequency to analog movement of the needle, or if the frequency is converted elsewhere and fed to the tach as a voltage. Maybe we could pirate an old tach and pick up the analog voltage as an input to the data acq. module. In a message dated Tue, 11 Dec 2001 5:10:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, Stephen Andersen writes: > Okay, I will reply to myself since after doing some research, > I am back to DIY mode. > > The LabJack USB data acq unit DOES have a counter, but none of the > canned software you get with it supports it at reasonable sample rates. > > Someone had mentioned taking a square wave rpm signal, and turning it > into an analog voltage using an LM2917 or somesuch and some wiring. > Can anyone provide me with some insight (or preferably DETAILED instructions > ;) on how to do this? > > I will still need to do some programming to get maximum sample rate > on about 6 signals, but with the built in counter, I am limited to > 2 samples/sec which is not nearly adequate. With the counter and custom > software I can probably get 16 samples/sec, but with the rpm as an analog > voltage I can get 25 samples/second with 6 channels... > > Any input? Offline is fine if no-one on the list is interested... > > Thanks, > Steve > > > Behalf Of Stephen Andersen > > Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal > > > > Thanks for the pointer. I am actually thinking about buying > > the USB logger board ($99) which has a built-in 32bit counter. > > I can snag the rpm signal to the DME in my car and multiply it > > by 20 to get rpm (So I'm told). I think with the 8 single > > ended inputs I can record enough (including the WB) for some > > decent tuning data... > > > > Not exactly DIY though!!! > > > > Thanks, > > Steve > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:45:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:45:52 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:45:52 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > tooth dimensions. > > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. Audi tubo engines use an extra pin in the rear of the flywheel with a second sensor. The pin is at 62 deg BTDC on Cyl 1 (it's silly to put the timing reference at TDC on any cyl - put it at max advance plus calculation time BTDC - your choice of cyl). A single window hall sensor in the distributor takes care of compression/exhaust stroke issues - the window is 20 degrees wide as I recall - distributor position isn't critical. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:46:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:46:19 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:46:19 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [ADMIN] Off topic posts There has been too much noise over the last few days. I do not want to see any more discussion of legal systems. I especially don't want to see abusive/insulting posts or posts containing bad language. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:46:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:46:35 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:46:35 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question > > While possible, it's not a common occurance on many cars. I can't recall > having ever seen a tooth break off. Driving a car with a fubar'd starter > can ruin some teeth, but again it's not a common occurance. > I've seen many times more reluctor coils in a distributor break then > flywheels fail. > Some times you just have to play the odds. Only time I've heard of flywheel teeth breaking was when someone's injectors leaked and hydro-locked a cylinder. Seems the starter was stronger than the teeth. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:47:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:47:03 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:47:03 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car is launching and driving down track. We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is critical to maximizing the performance. sf -----Original Message----- From: Brian Dessent [mailto:brian@dessent.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 5:14 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. How about a rotary (optical, potentiometer, whatever) encoder at the hinge where a control arm attaches to the chassis? What is the application anyway? Sensing acceleration of the unsprung mass would be much more rugged and wideband, just epoxy a good accelerometer to a convenient place on the suspension. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:47:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:47:37 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:47:37 -0800 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: diy-wb bar graph display Actually, i was looking at $2.91 each from digikey. $11.64 for 4 to do one display, or nearly as much as one of Steve's kits for the contoller. I wasn't complaining and its still not expensive when compared to the price of a comerical unit. I was just really thinking aloud that a group buy would be very beneficial (~63 kits would save $6.57/kit on those 4 chips alone). So, i may organize a group buy in January, if there is interest. I'm in the middle of graduating, moving and starting a new job right now tho. David -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Orin Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 4:04 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you $2.08 each in Q1 at Allied is steep? It's LM3914N-1 now BTW. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:47:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:47:48 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:47:48 -0800 From: "Jeff Meager" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s The calibration resistor is IN the sensor - if you pull apart the plug you'll see it in there. Also, fuel injector plugs line up in size with the calibration resistor, so if you don't use the plug, you can hack up an injector plug to fit the calibration resistor into inside the box. Jeff -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Perry, Scott Sent: Wednesday, 12 December 2001 2:30 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s First of all, does anyone have any high quality pictures of their completed, functioning wideband with all the wiring attached and everything? I'm a complete novice with electronics, and it would be a great help to have a good visual reference to check my work with. Brian Renegar posted a decent picture of his mostly complete WB on another list (thanks Brian!), but I'd like to see one with all the wiring in place. Also, maybe the answer lies somewhere among the mountain of posts on this list, but I'm also a bit confused about this whole calibrating resistor business. Assuming I'm using the standard DIY PCB and electronics provided by the group purchases, and have the "standard" Civic NTK WB sensor purchased from The PartsBin, what calibrating resistor do I need to complete this board?? Why wasn't this provided in the parts kit? Also, just to make sure it's really as obvious as it appears, I just mount the resistor on the board where it says CalR, right? Sorry for my ignorance. :-) TIA! --Scott ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:49:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:49:15 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:49:15 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display Orin wrote: > > > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you > > $2.08 each in Q1 at Allied is steep? It's LM3914N-1 now BTW. http://www.digikey.com/scripts/US/DKSUS.dll?keywordsearch?vendor=150&mpart=PIC16F872-I/SP 16F872 -> 5 MIPs, 5 x A/D (10 bit), SPI, 22 I/O pins, 2 k words program = US$4.63 at DigiKey (no LED driver chips required for a DOT display) Peter. (I have no affiliation with MicroChip, and in fact I can't believe how antiquated their PIC instruction set is - but they ARE amazing value) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:02:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:49:48 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:49:48 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb calibration with NB Both WB and NB sensors are already in agreement on stoich. The calibration problem for WB is as you move away from stoich. So you can't use a NB to calibrate a WB, although it could give a sanity check that things are at least working. Bruce Roe > From: "Kevin _" > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > I think it would be very easy to do without a lab > bench and to just calibrate a stoich point using a > regular switching O2 sensor in the same stream > as the UEGO. > Kevin ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:50:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:50:27 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:50:27 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Good research, thanks. Bruce Roe On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 21:47:13 +0800 (WST) Bernd Felsche writes: > Anybody who wants to try this could save themselves re-inventing the > wheel by reading SAE Paper 1999-01-0203 "Enhanced Engine Position > Acquisition & Treatment" by Patrick Leiteinturier and Joseph Benning > of Siemens. It describes how to eliminate errors resulting from > tooth geometry and other factors. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:51:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:51:09 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:51:09 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts In regards to what Bruce? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:50 PM Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > From: "Bob Wooten" > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > Bruce > > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > BW > > Yes. > And, "right" may take a new turn in the not too distant future. > > Bruce > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:51:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:51:17 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:51:17 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts What would be the benefits of each way Bruce? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:01 AM Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. > In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So you > have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and > either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two > different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what > compromises your willing to make, with each application. > Bruce > Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the lil > guys are around (just trust me on that one). > > > From: "Bob Wooten" > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > > Tanx > > BW > > > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > Bruce > > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > BW > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 11:51:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:51:31 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:51:31 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: RE: Atomisation -> So....would a small single barrel TBI for each cyl. be better than -> PFI? Yep. I'm building a setup like that now, using 2.75" GM throttle bodies and a sheet steel manifold. It'll be ugly as sh*t when I'm finished welding all over it, but I get to cover it all with a box so I have something to hook the MAF to, so it won't be an issue. I have a Hilborn I converted to port injection, but the only reason the injectors are below the butterflies is there just wasn't *room* above them, not if I wanted to be able to close the hood over it all. It's sort of tight at the front end of the engine bay when you stuff an RX7 with a small block Ford... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:20:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:52:08 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:52:08 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? > So far the plan is to build a bulletproof 350ish engine. It'll be from > either a Dart or Bowtie block, 6.125" rods, 3.48 stroke ex-NASCAR crank > possibly (or Cola or Callies, some sub $1k crank), 4.000 bore, heads with > around 210cc intake runners (AFR, Canfield, Victor Jr's), 8.5:1 compression > and cam specs based partially on the current engines backpressure vs boost > characteristics (measured when I strap this tired mule to the dyno - will be > fairly mild with duration), and some custom JE/Venolia/KB pistons. Building a 380 with 400 block 3.50 inch eagle crank and 5.85 eagle rods JE d-dish (-32cc) pistons Already using AFR 195cc heads. And they are still the best flowing heads 2 years after I purchased them Same compression on mine. > My reasoning is to make a reliable, build it once road racing/street fun > engine. I still am considering a 377, but I like the detonation resistance a > smaller bore gives you. The question of the hour is whether I'll make more > power unshrouding the valves with the larger bore and less boost. I'm > planning on going to about .035 quench, Exactly what I'm doing. but some folks more experienced than > I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame front travel at > TDC. I don't think the quench area is supposted to support combustion. To knock down compression, I plan on mirroring the combustion chamber > shape in the piston, since this should give you the fastest burn time. Some > words of wisdom from the previously mentioned turbo folks suggest going with > a plain 'ole open bowl piston, Not me ever! but again I'm having a hard time convincing > myself that that's the way to go, when the collective theory based knowledge > usually says to go with a tight quench and small dish. I believe the more volume in the piston and the smaller the chamber the better off you are. Look at KB's site for more info on that. Using ATI D-1 supercharger 1000 hp 3core sheet metal intercooler With WATERINJECTION Thanks Bruce! Probably switching from ACCEL DFI to FAST bank to bank wide band O2 control. Hydrualic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in bungs > Any thoughts or comments before I'm committed to building it? Thanks! > > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > http://www.skulte.com > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:23:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:52:45 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:52:45 -0800 From: "Jess Gypin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests He uses an on board calibration that is independent of the cal resistor. Jess ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 10:34 AM Subject: Re: WB Requests > > > At a glance not too bad, if you like spending big bucks. > Closer examination show a serial cable leading to the sensor. > And the oem connector is missing. > So where is the calibration resistor?. In the photo the resolution isn't > great enough to see what might be a replaceable resistor. If it's > calibration data is encrpyted in the chip, then they have you locked in to > buying their sensor at what ever they want to charge. > > Another reason to just do a DIY-WB. > Bruce > > > From: "George Dickey" > Subject: Re: WB Requests > > Here is a unit I found on the Maita (MX5) forum. Never used it, no > > connection, etc > > http://www.geocities.com/francillion/ > > George > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 12:53:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:53:19 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:53:19 -0800 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Extrude Hone machine on eBay Saw this on eBay, check it out: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1676231897 Perfect for getting rid of the nasty bumps inside your uhh .... well, anything. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 12:53:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:53:52 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:53:52 -0800 From: "Tim Skwiot" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: another WB O2 sucess A big thanks to the WB O2 team and Steve for the very through parts kit. I got my unit up/running/installed last weekend -- and it works great!! I've been driving around with one eye on the O2 output ever since and have found/made several effective tweaks. Tim ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:33:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:54:23 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:54:23 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Hmmmmmm, interesting. I seem to recall someone using air to pressurize a bladder & using that as the propellant to get the water into the engine. sounds like a good long term solution provided that the air pump can keep up with the demand. I would think though that using air to sheer the water would be more problematic in tuning that anything & personally @ this point in life, I would steer clear of that. although, interesting concept. up side, no contact with moving parts, down side high part count & high realistate, & I would think high initial cost. up side to a super-whami-dyne pump, low part count, high maintenance, high priced pump. will hopefully get to that bridge later in life. I am willing to bet that location of jets is likely to be different for different systems, for optimum performance. I would think that somewhat close to head in intake runner to be a good spot, on a TPI (as I am). although possibly better place for a single plane carb manifold style a plate system would work better. any thoughts on this? seems logical that if I had a motor on a dyno, that I would want to increase water until the gain is gone. kind of like timing, start low & increase until gain is gone, anything more is likely to be a waste and/or cost HP. the whole thing about ONR makes sense to a degree, but still to large a concept for my little mind @ this point. I think that is WI 202, & I am still on WI 101, Heck I am still on DIY 101, once I graduate to 202, I am going to worry about HP, right now I am happy with my measly 12 second street car. Tanx for bending the mind BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bernd Felsche Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:22 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Bob Wooten tapped away at the keyboard with: > You are SOO good @ keeping us on the edge of our seats. Based on what's been written before, he's using compressed air to feed and shear the water for best atomisation. As long as the air flow rate is known/measured, there's not a real problem introducing the extra air. The use of air avoids direct contact with valves, pumps, etc. The only WI components exposed to air AND water are then the injector jets. The jets don't need moving parts. A check valve in the water feed line will prevent the turbo blowing back though that line. A sequence of compressed-air valves can be used to persuade that same valve to close on demand, cutting water flow in the forward direction. > High pressure = easy to maintain nice spray patterns in all conditions, > something about "overwhelming the manifold conditions" thing. > fogger nozzles for easy availability. I suppose this application > could really use someone to come up with a single injector nozzle > similar to a fogger nozzle that would be simple to change jets on, > or better yet, have a single nozzle/jet for all locations & have a > variable jet somewhere else (or pressure, but then we get into > critical flow or not). According to the people who make some money from it, (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. The closer you inject to the inlet valves, the greater the proportion of droplets and from a single injector, the greater the chance of imbalance. A port water-injector minimises vapourization but droplet sizes need to be very small. Distributing the right amount of water to each requires careful tuning and/or management. > what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased > economy & atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? The _least_ amount of water necessary will provide the maximum amount of power as water vapour displaces oxygen. It's better to have tiny droplets of water until the valve closes for compression. > exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a > major debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. Evaporating the droplets in-cylinder doesn't reduce the total oxygen present even when the droplets evaporate and absorb energy during compression (six to seven times the amount of heat as for the same mass of gasoline). The water vapour acts as a "buffer" to the flame front, not only obstructing it at a molecular level, but also to reduce hot spots by absorbing some of their heat. The Gasoline FAQ indicates the degree to which water content in the air (humidity) reduces an engine's Octane number requirements. Order of magnitude is 4 g water per kg of air reducing ONR by one point. (The relationship is not entirely linear.) With a high charge temperature and without becoming saturated, one could add 40 to 60 g of water per kg of inlet air, depending on initial ambient conditions. That's an AWR of between 25:1 and 16:1 for an ONR of between 10 and 15 points. Too much water and the flame front slows too much as the reagents take longer to "find" each other, resulting in less torque. Determining what is "too much" will take some tuning time. Accurate knock detection and some means of measuring torque under controlled loads are a distinct advantage. Well, that's one theory anyway. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:05:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:55:02 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:55:02 -0800 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #926 Clare Snyder wrote: > What about little "booster venturis" in the intake runners, right at the > injector to speed up local air velocity? I was thinking put the throttle bodies right next to the intake port, almost like a side draft carb, and put the injector right in front of the plate, so the fuel is sucked through high velocity air. Honda had a system like this in some of the late '80s TBI cars. There was a additional plate there just to create high velocity air for better atomization. JD ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:35:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:56:03 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:56:03 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Greg, Hope I did not step on your toes, implying that I was talking for you, that was not my intent. Just trying to sort all this stuff out. Onto topic, by negative work do you mean that when the piston comes up during compression it looses work (meaning that it is not free, it costs me something to compress the gas) & by injecting water & by it cooling the charge in the Cyl, it reduces the loss? But on the flip side that the water reduces the amount of power (positive work) that I would have got out of that charge if it were "dry"? But the gain of the reduction of work is larger than the gain in the positive work, meaning that the NET is more HP? If I am on track, this makes more sense (light bulbs coming on like a Christmas tree:) Ahhhhhhhh, this makes sense. So, IF I have a motor that is designed for WI I can design it around this net gain (& the others that you mentioned) & have a solid system that is going to be more efficient than one w/o it. (assuming a good state of tune initially) OR, if I had a motor that was not designed around it I could increase something (air & fuel for example) & compensate for the increased load on the engine with WI & keep the efficiency of this system hopefully the same. (assuming a good state of tune) OR if I had a system that was not of a good state of tune & I had to back out timing or air or add fuel to keep the motor from detonating or reduce the HP output, the WI could compensate for it & bring the motor back the other direction. This though sounds dangerous, like trying to fix a severed arm with a Barney Band aid. No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Greg Hermann Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 6:44 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts & increases HP, by >reducing charge temp (but I have a feeling that this one is open for major >debate here). > >BW > Not quite what I have been trying to say. The cooling during the compression stroke reduces the negative work taken from the crank to do the compression significantly. The cooler peak temp ALSO reduces the positive work available during the power stroke, but this reduction is marginally less than the reduction in negative work mentioned above. A slight net gain in output is the end result. BUT--the lower peak temp ALSO results in less heat rejection to the water jackets, which means some additional gain in power and efficiency will be there. The reduction in pressures that goes hand in hand with the lower temps means lower friction and bearing loads, so more gains in power and efficiency, as well as better mechanical durability. The reduction in temps also translates to better mechanical durability. If you build the engine knowing you are going to use WI, you can also build in a higher mechanical compression ratio (for the intended fuel), and reap more power and efficiency gains there. Try reading it this way, then argue away ! :-) Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:33:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:56:11 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:56:11 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Water Injection Bob, Right on, I found a bunch of stuff @ that site that is VERY informative. I would love to spend someone else's money blowing stuff up & learning about how things work & how they don't, this would definately be the ultimate job, now if only I can get that job & have them not pay me minimum wage. interesting commentary on HRM & such, the more I learn, the less in enjoy my monthly subscriptions, lots of great commercials going on there. Tanx for the info. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Robert Harris Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:23 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Water Injection When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports here that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal coolant - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - read the reports. Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power change ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the reports again. Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher pressures can be consumed in a cylinder. Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but by severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary research. If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same for most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in Heywood or read the research at NACA. Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:13:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:56:32 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:56:32 -0800 From: John & Meleaia McClure Subject: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) It looks like I got to the party late. I've been lurking on the list for a few days now trying to get a feel for things here...and at times it looks like a pretty rough crowd. So try and be easy on the "newbie". I'd like to try out the DIY_WB 02, but it looks like I've missed the group purchases. I signed up for a leftover PCB on http://208.37.117.207/wborder.html. There was a similar page I found for the Steve C. parts kits and I signed up there to. Will signing up on these pages get me in line for some of the "leftovers"? I must admit (sorry Bruce) that I looked at the Oz DIY_WB page and it does look inviting, but in keeping with the spirit of things here on the list (you guys did all the work) I'd like to solder one up myself. I might even try to put together the LED display instead of using a DVM. (Sharing my experiences with the list of course.) So guys, point me in the right direction and I'll try not and ask too many stupid questions. FYI...I'll be using this to help me tune my 87 Buick GN for the dragstrip. Thanks, John McClure ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:25:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:56:46 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:56:46 -0800 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Dave Williams wrote: > -> So do "conventional"[1] port injectors at any point in the rev/load > -> range produce better fuel delivery then carbs? > > "Better" in the sense of "more appropriate for the driving conditions > at hand?" Yes; port injection (more particularly, timed or "sequential" > port injection) can give better cold start and cold idle emissions and > driveability than a TBI or most carburetors. The old side > constant-vacuum SUs and the like with appropriate manifolding would come > danged close, though. I was thinking "better" in the sense of getting more power for the amount of fuel delivered. (But come to think of it's probably an ignorant question... ). > There are people who believe that port injectors shoot at the back of > the intake valve, which is hot and vaporizes the fuel, but in most > engines this is not true; the injector simply squirts a stream on the > port wall or floor, where it's picked up by passing air, > catch-as-catch-can. Take a look at any 5.0 Mustang or Tuned Port Chevy > and note the injectors are nowhere near the valves. A few new-design > engines *do* shoot more or less at the valves, but they're still a > minority on the road. No access to a 5.0 Mustang engine, sorry :) But a Toyota 4AGE engine initially had single pintle injectors that seemed to squirt at the ridge between the ports to each intake valve. Later 4AGEs had twin pintle injectors which directed the fuel more into the ports themselves, as did all variants of the supercharged version. Mos. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 13:31:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:57:11 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:57:11 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s http://www.sws.co.jp/stb_e/FRM/FILE/11FILE/sub11.htm Does this look familiar to anyone? I sent a request for contact to Sumitomo USA, I will be enquiring about this connector to see if they would be willing to sell a group buy lot. Obviously, I don't have any details just yet, but I will forward whatever they want to send me. This connector is not limited to the Honda VX. My Honda gurus tell me that this connector is very common, and that there are at least two on every OBDII Honda Civic engine loom, so it isn't necessary to chase down the VX model. Also, the '96-98 Civic HX uses a 5 wire sensor according to my sources, but from a quick perusal of web resources, it appears that Honda is even more proud of this piece than the one used in DIY. It uses the same 8 pin connector and cal resistor scheme. If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful right now. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 11:21 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe obviously). Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jmeager@bigpond.com Tue Dec 11 20:30:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 From: "Jeff Meager" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s The calibration resistor is IN the sensor - if you pull apart the plug you'll see it in there. Also, fuel injector plugs line up in size with the calibration resistor, so if you don't use the plug, you can hack up an injector plug to fit the calibration resistor into inside the box. Jeff -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Perry, Scott Sent: Wednesday, 12 December 2001 2:30 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s First of all, does anyone have any high quality pictures of their completed, functioning wideband with all the wiring attached and everything? I'm a complete novice with electronics, and it would be a great help to have a good visual reference to check my work with. Brian Renegar posted a decent picture of his mostly complete WB on another list (thanks Brian!), but I'd like to see one with all the wiring in place. Also, maybe the answer lies somewhere among the mountain of posts on this list, but I'm also a bit confused about this whole calibrating resistor business. Assuming I'm using the standard DIY PCB and electronics provided by the group purchases, and have the "standard" Civic NTK WB sensor purchased from The PartsBin, what calibrating resistor do I need to complete this board?? Why wasn't this provided in the parts kit? Also, just to make sure it's really as obvious as it appears, I just mount the resistor on the board where it says CalR, right? Sorry for my ignorance. :-) TIA! --Scott ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Tue Dec 11 19:51:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [ADMIN] Off topic posts There has been too much noise over the last few days. I do not want to see any more discussion of legal systems. I especially don't want to see abusive/insulting posts or posts containing bad language. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dcg1174@tntech.edu Tue Dec 11 20:39:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 From: "David Gregory" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: diy-wb bar graph display Actually, i was looking at $2.91 each from digikey. $11.64 for 4 to do one display, or nearly as much as one of Steve's kits for the contoller. I wasn't complaining and its still not expensive when compared to the price of a comerical unit. I was just really thinking aloud that a group buy would be very beneficial (~63 kits would save $6.57/kit on those 4 chips alone). So, i may organize a group buy in January, if there is interest. I'm in the middle of graduating, moving and starting a new job right now tho. David -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Orin Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 4:04 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you $2.08 each in Q1 at Allied is steep? It's LM3914N-1 now BTW. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Tue Dec 11 19:44:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > tooth dimensions. > > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. Audi tubo engines use an extra pin in the rear of the flywheel with a second sensor. The pin is at 62 deg BTDC on Cyl 1 (it's silly to put the timing reference at TDC on any cyl - put it at max advance plus calculation time BTDC - your choice of cyl). A single window hall sensor in the distributor takes care of compression/exhaust stroke issues - the window is 20 degrees wide as I recall - distributor position isn't critical. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Tue Dec 11 19:18:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Why do I keep thinking that a tooth could be lowered enough to skip the sensor and still work for the starter? Then use a retriggerable SS to detect the missing tooth. BobR. bcroe@juno.com wrote: > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > tooth dimensions. > > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. > > The Hall devices I picked for experiments > (MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things > including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, > and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could > do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice > missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of > us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make > do with what we have. > > Bruce Roe ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Tue Dec 11 19:15:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. Every Audi turbo since the early 80s thru mid 90s used the flywheel teeth for timing. Why? Because signals derived from the cam suffer from backlash in the cam drive and similarly for the distributor. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Tue Dec 11 19:53:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:50 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question > > While possible, it's not a common occurance on many cars. I can't recall > having ever seen a tooth break off. Driving a car with a fubar'd starter > can ruin some teeth, but again it's not a common occurance. > I've seen many times more reluctor coils in a distributor break then > flywheels fail. > Some times you just have to play the odds. Only time I've heard of flywheel teeth breaking was when someone's injectors leaked and hydro-locked a cylinder. Seems the starter was stronger than the teeth. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From A79coupe@aol.com Tue Dec 11 19:16:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:51 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:51 -0300 From: A79coupe@aol.com Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Is there a way to use the signal for the tach as a source for RPM? I'm not sure if the tach converts frequency to analog movement of the needle, or if the frequency is converted elsewhere and fed to the tach as a voltage. Maybe we could pirate an old tach and pick up the analog voltage as an input to the data acq. module. In a message dated Tue, 11 Dec 2001 5:10:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, Stephen Andersen writes: > Okay, I will reply to myself since after doing some research, > I am back to DIY mode. > > The LabJack USB data acq unit DOES have a counter, but none of the > canned software you get with it supports it at reasonable sample rates. > > Someone had mentioned taking a square wave rpm signal, and turning it > into an analog voltage using an LM2917 or somesuch and some wiring. > Can anyone provide me with some insight (or preferably DETAILED instructions > ;) on how to do this? > > I will still need to do some programming to get maximum sample rate > on about 6 signals, but with the built in counter, I am limited to > 2 samples/sec which is not nearly adequate. With the counter and custom > software I can probably get 16 samples/sec, but with the rpm as an analog > voltage I can get 25 samples/second with 6 channels... > > Any input? Offline is fine if no-one on the list is interested... > > Thanks, > Steve > > > Behalf Of Stephen Andersen > > Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal > > > > Thanks for the pointer. I am actually thinking about buying > > the USB logger board ($99) which has a built-in 32bit counter. > > I can snag the rpm signal to the DME in my car and multiply it > > by 20 to get rpm (So I'm told). I think with the 8 single > > ended inputs I can record enough (including the WB) for some > > decent tuning data... > > > > Not exactly DIY though!!! > > > > Thanks, > > Steve > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Fri Dec 7 06:19:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:52 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:52 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Audi DI Well, you can't complain about the 1.9TDI. 150BHP. For a car application that is very impressive in a diesel. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Dotson" Seems pretty weak for a 10. To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Tue Dec 11 19:27:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:53 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:53 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car is launching and driving down track. We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is critical to maximizing the performance. sf -----Original Message----- From: Brian Dessent [mailto:brian@dessent.net] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 5:14 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Anyone have a brainstorm of an inexpensive shock sensor. How about a rotary (optical, potentiometer, whatever) encoder at the hinge where a control arm attaches to the chassis? What is the application anyway? Sensing acceleration of the unsprung mass would be much more rugged and wideband, just epoxy a good accelerometer to a convenient place on the suspension. Brian ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Tue Dec 11 19:18:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:53 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:14:53 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Water Injection And heaven-forbid you mention that a TBI system results in an engine with a higher VE (hence power) then it would when port injected. And folks wonder how I can spend so much time on this stuff ! BobR. Robert Harris wrote: > When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, > misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might > just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject > when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. > > Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports here > that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to > destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. > > http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ > > Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal coolant > - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough > that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - read > the reports. > > Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power change > ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the > reports again. > > Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. > Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for > fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major > increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher pressures > can be consumed in a cylinder. > > Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but by > severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. > > The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use > computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to > destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary > research. > > If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of > their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same for > most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in Heywood > or read the research at NACA. > > Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Tue Dec 11 21:06:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:15:06 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:15:06 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display Orin wrote: > > > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think you > > $2.08 each in Q1 at Allied is steep? It's LM3914N-1 now BTW. http://www.digikey.com/scripts/US/DKSUS.dll?keywordsearch?vendor=150&mpart=PIC16F872-I/SP 16F872 -> 5 MIPs, 5 x A/D (10 bit), SPI, 22 I/O pins, 2 k words program = US$4.63 at DigiKey (no LED driver chips required for a DOT display) Peter. (I have no affiliation with MicroChip, and in fact I can't believe how antiquated their PIC instruction set is - but they ARE amazing value) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Tue Dec 11 20:30:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:18:47 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:18:47 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Good research, thanks. Bruce Roe On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 21:47:13 +0800 (WST) Bernd Felsche writes: > Anybody who wants to try this could save themselves re-inventing the > wheel by reading SAE Paper 1999-01-0203 "Enhanced Engine Position > Acquisition & Treatment" by Patrick Leiteinturier and Joseph Benning > of Siemens. It describes how to eliminate errors resulting from > tooth geometry and other factors. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Tue Dec 11 21:32:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:20:27 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:20:27 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts In regards to what Bruce? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:50 PM Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > From: "Bob Wooten" > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > Bruce > > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > BW > > Yes. > And, "right" may take a new turn in the not too distant future. > > Bruce > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Tue Dec 11 21:35:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:22:13 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:22:13 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts What would be the benefits of each way Bruce? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 12:01 AM Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. > In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So you > have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and > either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two > different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what > compromises your willing to make, with each application. > Bruce > Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the lil > guys are around (just trust me on that one). > > > From: "Bob Wooten" > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > > Tanx > > BW > > > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > Bruce > > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > BW > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Tue Dec 11 18:06:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:23:46 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:23:46 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: RE: Atomisation -> So....would a small single barrel TBI for each cyl. be better than -> PFI? Yep. I'm building a setup like that now, using 2.75" GM throttle bodies and a sheet steel manifold. It'll be ugly as sh*t when I'm finished welding all over it, but I get to cover it all with a box so I have something to hook the MAF to, so it won't be an issue. I have a Hilborn I converted to port injection, but the only reason the injectors are below the butterflies is there just wasn't *room* above them, not if I wanted to be able to close the hood over it all. It's sort of tight at the front end of the engine bay when you stuff an RX7 with a small block Ford... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 11 12:46:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:31:37 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:31:37 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > High pressure = easy to maintain nice spray patterns in all conditions, > something about "overwhelming the manifold conditions" thing. You can subscribe to two or more schools on how you want the water applied. Brute simple dumb, or go with the wizz bang stuff. If you go with the first, then the couple PSI difference ain't gonna really matter in relationship to the flow. ie, say your running 24 PSI of boost and turning it on at 18. 6 PSI variance, as compared to 200 PSI is no big deal. If you trying to run a system at 40 PSI that 6 is rather meaningful. > fogger nozzles for easy availability. I suppose this application could > really use someone to come up with a single injector nozzle similar to a > fogger nozzle that would be simple to change jets on, or better yet, have a > single nozzle/jet for all locations & have a variable jet somewhere else (or > pressure, but then we get into critical flow or not). A hole in a brass fitting is good enough when you have lots of PSI behind things. > what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased economy & > atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? WI for economy?. OK, but have a huge tank. Vaporization will cool the charge temperature, and atomization will make power. IMO, you'll use an intercooler for the temp., and then worry about atomization for power. > exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a major > debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. BUT, what > appears to be results of that is, increased resistance to detonation, keeps > the cyls clean (old mechanic dude teached me that one) & increases HP, by > reducing charge temp (but I have a feeling that this one is open for major > debate here). Try the archives, jun/jul of 00 (maybe 99). There is a very interesting post by Mr Harris that gives a great insight into what really happens with WI, in the chamber's reaction. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:34:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:34:36 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:34:36 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display > Actually, i was looking at $2.91 each from digikey. $11.64 for 4 to do one > display, or nearly as much as one of Steve's kits for the contoller. Digikey do tend to be a little spendy... Allied are usually better if you can meet their minimums. > I wasn't complaining and its still not expensive when compared to the price > of a comerical unit. Yes, those commercial units are all packaging and marketing. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:37:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:37:27 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:37:27 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? Just looking at the prices something is wrong. Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce From: "rob files" Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > different and > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; > Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 > Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 > Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > Rob ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:37:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:37:52 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:37:52 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Bruce have you seen this site? This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C182D2.FF044EE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://chargedair.com/tr/tr.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C182D2.FF044EE0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Charged Air Systems - Turbo Regal.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Charged Air Systems - Turbo Regal.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://chargedair.com/tr/tr.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://chargedair.com/tr/tr.htm Modified=80494ED2FC82C10129 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C182D2.FF044EE0-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:38:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:38:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:38:14 -0800 From: Kevin Wright Subject: Re: 76-79 Cad port injection EFI Yup, those would be the ones I'm looking for. One trick I ran across on the webpage of a DIY-EFI'er was to use the later aluminum manifold, and enlarge the throttle bores to match the early, larger throttle body bores. Mainly for weight savings and asthetics; I don't think that there's any significant flow differences in the manifolds. I'll go with what I can find! I gotta say, I'm really excited to be delving into the wild world of DIY EFI. A lot of this stuff goes straight over my head, but I'm working on it. krw ...and lo, thus spake bcroe@juno.com on 12/10/01: >Kevin, > >You want a 76-79 Seville or a 79 Eldo (and 80 in >CA) for that setup. 78 on are a usually corroded AU >intake with a smaller throttle body. > >Bruce Roe > >On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:20:37 -0600 Kevin Wright > writes: > > >> Of course, *I* was looking for one with the >> Caddy/Olds EFI to plop on my '70 Cutlass with the MegaSquirt. > >> Kevin Wright >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Kevin Wright krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:38:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:38:50 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:38:50 -0800 From: "Jason Haines" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: is an updated fuel injector list available anywhere Does an updated version of the fuel injector list that is on the FTP site exist anywhere? A lot of the areas are blank. BTW - who made that list? I have some information that is missing from that list that might help fill in a few of the blanks. Jason ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:39:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:39:12 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:39:12 -0800 From: "Jason Haines" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Bosch peak and hold injectors Does anyone know of any part numbers for Bosch peak-and-hold injectors? I am looking for injectors in the 65 to 85 lb/hr range (at 43 to 58 psi fuel pressure). Thanks, Jason ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:39:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:39:31 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:39:31 -0800 From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success Good info Mark. The output reading does change rapidly on my WB O2 unit.........even though I was testing it on a carbureted engine. I found that I had to use the min/max/avg capability of my DVM to make sense of the output. Neil > posted the info back when I finished the DIY-WB back Aug or Sept. As near as I could tell from about 11:1 up to 18:1 they matched within .1 air fuel ratio. I've used the DIY-WB on my Dynojet and tuned with it comparing it to the wide band on the Dynojet also. Within a tenth or so. It changes so fast. < ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:39:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:39:50 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:39:50 -0800 From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success Hi Don, Thanks for the input. Yeah, 1.82 is about 11 AFR which is quite rich. The bike is not a smooth idling engine even at the best of times. It is a big twin cylinder Moto Guzzi so it doesn't have 4 or 6 cylinders to smooth things out. I always adjust the carbs' idle jets for the smoothest possible idle so it appears that very rich is what it requires. I was actually glad that the engine just ran that day, let alone idled smoothly. I hadn't run the engine since mid-Oct, when the cold weather settled in. The choke was off when I took that reading. I did flip the choke on momentarily to try it....Had to blip the throttle to keep it running and I saw an equivalent AFR of about 8 or 9:1. I will wait until next spring before I really worry about tuning anything with the WB O2 unit. Neil > Congratulations, sounds great. Just a tuning question for you. How does your bike idle? The 1.82v readout suggests it's quite rich. Perhaps it's because of the cold ambient temp or was the choke still out at this point? Cheers Don < ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:40:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:40:10 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:40:10 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Tuning for F1 When tuned properly, and EFI'd car will always have a sound of it's own http://iqx.ionichost.com/other/instest.html Or: What the lil guys sound like. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:40:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:40:40 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:40:40 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question As small as the starter's gear is, it doesn't engage many teeth, making a signifigant change to one would be *iffy* in my opinion. Bruce From: "rr" Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > Why do I keep thinking that a tooth could be lowered enough > to skip the sensor and still work for the starter? Then use a > retriggerable SS to detect the missing tooth. > BobR. > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > > tooth dimensions. > > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. > > The Hall devices I picked for experiments > > (MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things > > including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, > > and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could > > do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice > > missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of > > us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make > > do with what we have. > > > > Bruce Roe ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:40:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:40:54 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:40:54 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts How to actually do Water Injection, corrrectly. I'm reserving further comment till I get it plumbed and tested. Bruce From: "elcamino73" Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > In regards to what Bruce? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > > Bruce > > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > > BW > > Yes. > > And, "right" may take a new turn in the not too distant future. > > > > Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:41:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:41:02 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:41:02 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Vaporization is primarily used for charge cooling. Atomisation is generally used for raising the threhold of detonation. Bruce From: "elcamino73" Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > What would be the benefits of each way Bruce? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. > > In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So > you have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and > > either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two > > different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what > > compromises your willing to make, with each application. > > Bruce > > Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the > lil guys are around (just trust me on that one). > > From: "Bob Wooten" > > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > > > Tanx > > > BW > > > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > > > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > > Bruce > > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > > BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:41:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:41:49 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:41:49 -0800 From: James Montebello MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) Every Audi turbo, and every other car equipped with Bosch Motronic, which covers nearly every German car sold since the mid to late 80s, and a good number of other European cars, as well. It's a very common system, used on literally millions of cars to date. While we're on the subject, I've heard that argument (cam signals are no good for timing because of the cam drive) several times. It seems to me that having ignition timing be more accurate than cam timing is a relatively useless feature. Therefore, using a cam sensor is perfectly adequate. Indeed, one could make the case that synchronizing ignition with valve events is "more accurate" than synchronizing it with crank (i.e., piston) position. If you're going to do full sequential, you'll need some indication of cam position, anyway. The advantage I see of using many teeth for the crank position isn't relative positioning, but rather high-resolution and redundancy when measuring speed. You can miss the signals from many teeth and still not lose track of the current engine speed. Watching many teeth also gives you the ability to watch the rate of change of the crank speed more closely, and potentially divine things like misfires (which should show up as two anomolously large changes in crank speed during one or two revolutions) for very sophisticated control strategies. Finally, as discussed not long ago on this list was the big advantage of timing everything with continuous external, engine-driven interrupts, rather than relying on long-running calculations seeded by one or two samples early in the process. james montebello On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Orin wrote: > > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > > > > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. > > Every Audi turbo since the early 80s thru mid 90s > used the flywheel teeth for timing. Why? Because signals > derived from the cam suffer from backlash in the cam drive > and similarly for the distributor. > > Orin. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:42:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:42:25 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:42:25 -0800 From: "Wing Gee" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DIY-WB meter.. from DSE? http://www.dse.com.au/cgi-bin/DSE.storefront/1029126617/Product/View/K4213 how this meter compared to ours? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:42:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:42:47 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:42:47 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s The one I have here is slightly different, Most noteably the lower edge has one rather then 2 *keying* grooves. Thanks Bruce From: "efi_student" Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s > http://www.sws.co.jp/stb_e/FRM/FILE/11FILE/sub11.htm > Does this look familiar to anyone? I sent a request for contact to > Sumitomo USA, I will be enquiring about this connector to see if they > would be willing to sell a group buy lot. Obviously, I don't have any > details just yet, but I will forward whatever they want to send me. > This connector is not limited to the Honda VX. My Honda gurus tell me > that this connector is very common, and that there are at least two on > every OBDII Honda Civic engine loom, so it isn't necessary to chase down > the VX model. Also, the '96-98 Civic HX uses a 5 wire sensor according > to my sources, but from a quick perusal of web resources, it appears > that Honda is even more proud of this piece than the one used in DIY. > It uses the same 8 pin connector and cal resistor scheme. > If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful > right now. > Lance > Behalf Of Bruce > Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s > From: "Perry, Scott" > > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I > don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring > harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other > suggestions... > Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . > Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe > obviously). Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 17:43:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:43:04 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:43:04 -0800 From: "Todd Danielson" <96Hawk@RMarshall.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s ----- Original Message ----- From: "efi_student" To > If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful > right now. > I have some connections, although not directly with Sumitomo. I'm checking on it. Todd ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 18:57:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:44:06 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:44:06 -0800 From: "David Randall" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: diy-wb bar graph display www.future-active.com shows a qty 20 pricing of $1.875 for the LM3914. Price goes to $1.438 with 100+. That's only 50 boards worth for 100+ qty. I've been laying out a PCB for Bruce's 36 LED display. I don't have it finished, and getting it to squeeze onto a 3.8" wide board is tight. But, with any luck, it'll work. At this point in my design, the LED's are on the board, and not remotely connected. I presume a 25 wire connector (and ribbon cable?) would be sufficient to run the LED's remotely. I've searched around for some gauge housings, but have come up empty handed. I'd prefer to make a finished gauge that would be sufficient quality that you'd be happy to have in your car, and wouldn't want to hide it because it looks just a project. Does anyone know of sources for empty 2 1/16" gauge housings? It would be great if we could pull together a quality 36 LED 2 1/16" gauge for less than the price of standard A/F gauge. Dave Randall -----Original Message----- From: Orin [mailto:orin@diy-efi.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 2:04 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think > you $2.08 each in Q1 at Allied is steep? It's LM3914N-1 now BTW. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 18:54:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:44:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:44:26 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) The magic words were "GN"... Bruce has quite the "GN" apparently, hope to see it someday. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "John & Meleaia McClure" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:59 PM Subject: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) > It looks like I got to the party late. I've been lurking on the list for a > few days now trying to get a feel for things here...and at times it looks > like a pretty rough crowd. So try and be easy on the "newbie". > > I'd like to try out the DIY_WB 02, but it looks like I've missed the group > purchases. I signed up for a leftover PCB on > http://208.37.117.207/wborder.html. There was a similar page I found for > the Steve C. parts kits and I signed up there to. Will signing up on these > pages get me in line for some of the "leftovers"? > > I must admit (sorry Bruce) that I looked at the Oz DIY_WB page and it does > look inviting, but in keeping with the spirit of things here on the list > (you guys did all the work) I'd like to solder one up myself. I might even > try to put together the LED display instead of using a DVM. (Sharing my > experiences with the list of course.) > > So guys, point me in the right direction and I'll try not and ask too many > stupid questions. > > FYI...I'll be using this to help me tune my 87 Buick GN for the dragstrip. > > Thanks, > John McClure > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 18:41:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:44:43 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:44:43 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) > >I must admit (sorry Bruce) that I looked at the Oz DIY_WB page and it does >look inviting, but in keeping with the spirit of things here on the list >(you guys did all the work) I'd like to solder one up myself. I might even >try to put together the LED display instead of using a DVM. (Sharing my >experiences with the list of course.) > >So guys, point me in the right direction and I'll try not and ask too many >stupid questions. > >FYI...I'll be using this to help me tune my 87 Buick GN for the dragstrip. > >Thanks, >John McClure John-- You'll probably be wanting to talk to Bruce and the little guys at more length. Last we heard Sleepy said he had a black car running pretty well ! Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 19:00:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:45:07 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:45:07 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts At 8:17 PM 12/11/01, Bob Wooten wrote: >Greg, > >Hope I did not step on your toes, implying that I was talking for you, that >was not my intent. Just trying to sort all this stuff out. Huh?? Never thought you did. > >Onto topic, by negative work do you mean that when the piston comes up >during compression it looses work (meaning that it is not free, it costs me >something to compress the gas) & by injecting water & by it cooling the >charge in the Cyl, it reduces the loss? Precisely. > >But on the flip side that the water reduces the amount of power (positive >work) that I would have got out of that charge if it were "dry"? Yes. > >But the gain of the reduction of work is larger than the gain in the >positive work, meaning that the NET is more HP? If I am on track, this >makes more sense (light bulbs coming on like a Christmas tree:) BINGO!! > >Ahhhhhhhh, this makes sense. Also makes sense as to why the bearing loads get lighter. With WI you are not passing as much power around from one cylinder to another via the crankshaft. Now that I state it that way--I would bet that there is some reduction in torsional vibration in the crank, too !! > >So, IF I have a motor that is designed for WI I can design it around this >net gain (& the others that you mentioned) & have a solid system that is >going to be more efficient than one w/o it. (assuming a good state of tune >initially) That's my thought. Not backed up by experimentation and hardware that _I_ have done, YET. Been busy for some time planning out a 605 cid (based on an IHC "LV" type engine) that I think is going to end up with about 7 to 8 psi boost (over sea level) and 10.5 to 1 or so mechanical compression. (Goal is 925 ft. lbs., 1500--4000 rpm) Want to use full time WI to see if I can get it to run on ULR fuel. It's going in a motor home, so water tankage is no problem. The rev limit comes from Allison's converter. Planning to use VATN type turbos. (Again, the lower EGT's should let the VATN's be reliable.) Current problem is finding forged blanks for the pistons. (4-5/8" bore, 1-5/16" wrist pins, 2.4" pin CL to top). Have found blanks big enough in 6018 alloy, but _REALLY_ want to use 4032 !!! Why?? Seen, for instance, some 4032 forged pistons for an FE Ford that spec only .0015" clearance !!! IMO, this will give WAY better ring life for a street engine. And--I won't have no steeeenkin' cast peeeestons, hyper or not, mon!!! When IH christened these motors "LV" they did mean LARGE--5-3/8" bore centers and 12-5/8" deck height ! Gonna use a block from a DV (diesel) 551, all of them, gas and diesel, had 18 head bolts per bank, but the diesels had 9/16" head bolts and oil cooling nozzles for the pistons. All five mains are cross bolted. :-) Will upgrade to 5/8" main studs and 7/16" cross bolts. > >OR, if I had a motor that was not designed around it I could increase >something (air & fuel for example) & compensate for the increased load on >the engine with WI & keep the efficiency of this system hopefully the same. >(assuming a good state of tune) Yep. The "designed around it" part is really just a higher mechanical compression ratio and or boost level to take advantage of the fact that you _CAN_ do that with the WI. When you really get into it, I would bet there would be some cam timing things to be optimized. Likewise, I thoroughly expect that there would be some turbine wheel and exhaust housing adjustments to make on turbo(s) to get things just so, too. First thought here is maybe one size smaller exhaust housing for a starting place. Compressor(s) would remain the same. But--a bit more mass flow in the exhaust (from the water) together with the significantly lower EGT's is telling me a slightly smaller nozzle would be in order. Of course--the lower EGT's mean the turbines and the turbos would live a lot longer, too ! > >OR if I had a system that was not of a good state of tune & I had to back >out timing or air or add fuel to keep the motor from detonating or reduce >the HP output, the WI could compensate for it & bring the motor back the >other direction. This though sounds dangerous, like trying to fix a severed >arm with a Barney Band aid. With the WI, I think you could just set the fuel mixture at 13 or even 13.5 to 1, even at full boost, and use the water to stay away from the devil detonation. The water is likely going to make it want some more timing compared to no water, too. Seems to me that this sort of stuff would be fairly easy and safe to sneak up on from a tune meant for no WI. Greg > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) >BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 18:33:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:46:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:46:14 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Just picking up teeth on that sloppy gear is a challenge; I wouldn't want to tell the tall ones from the short ones. What if another one got a bit lower? Bruce Roe On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:18:31 -0500 rr writes: > Why do I keep thinking that a tooth could be lowered enough > to skip the sensor and still work for the starter? Then use a > retriggerable SS to detect the missing tooth. > > BobR. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 18:43:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:46:32 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 17:46:32 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > is launching and driving down track. > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > critical to maximizing the performance. Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the displacement over time, from field to field. What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jfdavis@epix.net Wed Dec 12 01:10:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:26:21 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:26:21 -0300 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #926 Clare Snyder wrote: > What about little "booster venturis" in the intake runners, right at the > injector to speed up local air velocity? I was thinking put the throttle bodies right next to the intake port, almost like a side draft carb, and put the injector right in front of the plate, so the fuel is sucked through high velocity air. Honda had a system like this in some of the late '80s TBI cars. There was a additional plate there just to create high velocity air for better atomization. JD ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clshore@yahoo.com Wed Dec 12 00:20:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:26:51 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:26:51 -0300 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Extrude Hone machine on eBay Saw this on eBay, check it out: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1676231897 Perfect for getting rid of the nasty bumps inside your uhh .... well, anything. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From tskwiot@hotmail.com Wed Dec 12 00:53:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:28:00 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:28:00 -0300 From: "Tim Skwiot" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: another WB O2 sucess A big thanks to the WB O2 team and Steve for the very through parts kit. I got my unit up/running/installed last weekend -- and it works great!! I've been driving around with one eye on the O2 output ever since and have found/made several effective tweaks. Tim ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Tue Dec 11 22:04:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:28:44 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:28:44 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb calibration with NB Both WB and NB sensors are already in agreement on stoich. The calibration problem for WB is as you move away from stoich. So you can't use a NB to calibrate a WB, although it could give a sanity check that things are at least working. Bruce Roe > From: "Kevin _" > Subject: Re: diy-wb works! > I think it would be very easy to do without a lab > bench and to just calibrate a stoich point using a > regular switching O2 sensor in the same stream > as the UEGO. > Kevin ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jmcclure@sstelco.com Wed Dec 12 01:59:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:34:58 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:34:58 -0300 From: John & Meleaia McClure Subject: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) It looks like I got to the party late. I've been lurking on the list for a few days now trying to get a feel for things here...and at times it looks like a pretty rough crowd. So try and be easy on the "newbie". I'd like to try out the DIY_WB 02, but it looks like I've missed the group purchases. I signed up for a leftover PCB on http://208.37.117.207/wborder.html. There was a similar page I found for the Steve C. parts kits and I signed up there to. Will signing up on these pages get me in line for some of the "leftovers"? I must admit (sorry Bruce) that I looked at the Oz DIY_WB page and it does look inviting, but in keeping with the spirit of things here on the list (you guys did all the work) I'd like to solder one up myself. I might even try to put together the LED display instead of using a DVM. (Sharing my experiences with the list of course.) So guys, point me in the right direction and I'll try not and ask too many stupid questions. FYI...I'll be using this to help me tune my 87 Buick GN for the dragstrip. Thanks, John McClure ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Tue Dec 11 23:20:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:35:05 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:35:05 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? > So far the plan is to build a bulletproof 350ish engine. It'll be from > either a Dart or Bowtie block, 6.125" rods, 3.48 stroke ex-NASCAR crank > possibly (or Cola or Callies, some sub $1k crank), 4.000 bore, heads with > around 210cc intake runners (AFR, Canfield, Victor Jr's), 8.5:1 compression > and cam specs based partially on the current engines backpressure vs boost > characteristics (measured when I strap this tired mule to the dyno - will be > fairly mild with duration), and some custom JE/Venolia/KB pistons. Building a 380 with 400 block 3.50 inch eagle crank and 5.85 eagle rods JE d-dish (-32cc) pistons Already using AFR 195cc heads. And they are still the best flowing heads 2 years after I purchased them Same compression on mine. > My reasoning is to make a reliable, build it once road racing/street fun > engine. I still am considering a 377, but I like the detonation resistance a > smaller bore gives you. The question of the hour is whether I'll make more > power unshrouding the valves with the larger bore and less boost. I'm > planning on going to about .035 quench, Exactly what I'm doing. but some folks more experienced than > I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame front travel at > TDC. I don't think the quench area is supposted to support combustion. To knock down compression, I plan on mirroring the combustion chamber > shape in the piston, since this should give you the fastest burn time. Some > words of wisdom from the previously mentioned turbo folks suggest going with > a plain 'ole open bowl piston, Not me ever! but again I'm having a hard time convincing > myself that that's the way to go, when the collective theory based knowledge > usually says to go with a tight quench and small dish. I believe the more volume in the piston and the smaller the chamber the better off you are. Look at KB's site for more info on that. Using ATI D-1 supercharger 1000 hp 3core sheet metal intercooler With WATERINJECTION Thanks Bruce! Probably switching from ACCEL DFI to FAST bank to bank wide band O2 control. Hydrualic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in bungs > Any thoughts or comments before I'm committed to building it? Thanks! > > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > http://www.skulte.com > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jessmx5@earthlink.net Tue Dec 11 23:43:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:40:29 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:40:29 -0300 From: "Jess Gypin" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB Requests He uses an on board calibration that is independent of the cal resistor. Jess ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 10:34 AM Subject: Re: WB Requests > > > At a glance not too bad, if you like spending big bucks. > Closer examination show a serial cable leading to the sensor. > And the oem connector is missing. > So where is the calibration resistor?. In the photo the resolution isn't > great enough to see what might be a replaceable resistor. If it's > calibration data is encrpyted in the chip, then they have you locked in to > buying their sensor at what ever they want to charge. > > Another reason to just do a DIY-WB. > Bruce > > > From: "George Dickey" > Subject: Re: WB Requests > > Here is a unit I found on the Maita (MX5) forum. Never used it, no > > connection, etc > > http://www.geocities.com/francillion/ > > George > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos@sydney.net Wed Dec 12 02:40:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:44:57 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:44:57 -0300 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Atomisation Re: Intake manifold construction, intercoolers On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Dave Williams wrote: > -> So do "conventional"[1] port injectors at any point in the rev/load > -> range produce better fuel delivery then carbs? > > "Better" in the sense of "more appropriate for the driving conditions > at hand?" Yes; port injection (more particularly, timed or "sequential" > port injection) can give better cold start and cold idle emissions and > driveability than a TBI or most carburetors. The old side > constant-vacuum SUs and the like with appropriate manifolding would come > danged close, though. I was thinking "better" in the sense of getting more power for the amount of fuel delivered. (But come to think of it's probably an ignorant question... ). > There are people who believe that port injectors shoot at the back of > the intake valve, which is hot and vaporizes the fuel, but in most > engines this is not true; the injector simply squirts a stream on the > port wall or floor, where it's picked up by passing air, > catch-as-catch-can. Take a look at any 5.0 Mustang or Tuned Port Chevy > and note the injectors are nowhere near the valves. A few new-design > engines *do* shoot more or less at the valves, but they're still a > minority on the road. No access to a 5.0 Mustang engine, sorry :) But a Toyota 4AGE engine initially had single pintle injectors that seemed to squirt at the ridge between the ports to each intake valve. Later 4AGEs had twin pintle injectors which directed the fuel more into the ports themselves, as did all variants of the supercharged version. Mos. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Wed Dec 12 01:17:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:27 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:27 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Greg, Hope I did not step on your toes, implying that I was talking for you, that was not my intent. Just trying to sort all this stuff out. Onto topic, by negative work do you mean that when the piston comes up during compression it looses work (meaning that it is not free, it costs me something to compress the gas) & by injecting water & by it cooling the charge in the Cyl, it reduces the loss? But on the flip side that the water reduces the amount of power (positive work) that I would have got out of that charge if it were "dry"? But the gain of the reduction of work is larger than the gain in the positive work, meaning that the NET is more HP? If I am on track, this makes more sense (light bulbs coming on like a Christmas tree:) Ahhhhhhhh, this makes sense. So, IF I have a motor that is designed for WI I can design it around this net gain (& the others that you mentioned) & have a solid system that is going to be more efficient than one w/o it. (assuming a good state of tune initially) OR, if I had a motor that was not designed around it I could increase something (air & fuel for example) & compensate for the increased load on the engine with WI & keep the efficiency of this system hopefully the same. (assuming a good state of tune) OR if I had a system that was not of a good state of tune & I had to back out timing or air or add fuel to keep the motor from detonating or reduce the HP output, the WI could compensate for it & bring the motor back the other direction. This though sounds dangerous, like trying to fix a severed arm with a Barney Band aid. No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Greg Hermann Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 6:44 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts & increases HP, by >reducing charge temp (but I have a feeling that this one is open for major >debate here). > >BW > Not quite what I have been trying to say. The cooling during the compression stroke reduces the negative work taken from the crank to do the compression significantly. The cooler peak temp ALSO reduces the positive work available during the power stroke, but this reduction is marginally less than the reduction in negative work mentioned above. A slight net gain in output is the end result. BUT--the lower peak temp ALSO results in less heat rejection to the water jackets, which means some additional gain in power and efficiency will be there. The reduction in pressures that goes hand in hand with the lower temps means lower friction and bearing loads, so more gains in power and efficiency, as well as better mechanical durability. The reduction in temps also translates to better mechanical durability. If you build the engine knowing you are going to use WI, you can also build in a higher mechanical compression ratio (for the intended fuel), and reap more power and efficiency gains there. Try reading it this way, then argue away ! :-) Greg ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 12 05:03:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:44 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:44 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s http://www.sws.co.jp/stb_e/FRM/FILE/11FILE/sub11.htm Does this look familiar to anyone? I sent a request for contact to Sumitomo USA, I will be enquiring about this connector to see if they would be willing to sell a group buy lot. Obviously, I don't have any details just yet, but I will forward whatever they want to send me. This connector is not limited to the Honda VX. My Honda gurus tell me that this connector is very common, and that there are at least two on every OBDII Honda Civic engine loom, so it isn't necessary to chase down the VX model. Also, the '96-98 Civic HX uses a 5 wire sensor according to my sources, but from a quick perusal of web resources, it appears that Honda is even more proud of this piece than the one used in DIY. It uses the same 8 pin connector and cal resistor scheme. If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful right now. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 11:21 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe obviously). Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Wed Dec 12 01:25:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:54 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:54 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Water Injection Bob, Right on, I found a bunch of stuff @ that site that is VERY informative. I would love to spend someone else's money blowing stuff up & learning about how things work & how they don't, this would definately be the ultimate job, now if only I can get that job & have them not pay me minimum wage. interesting commentary on HRM & such, the more I learn, the less in enjoy my monthly subscriptions, lots of great commercials going on there. Tanx for the info. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Robert Harris Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:23 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Water Injection When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports here that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal coolant - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - read the reports. Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power change ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the reports again. Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher pressures can be consumed in a cylinder. Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but by severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary research. If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same for most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in Heywood or read the research at NACA. Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Wed Dec 12 01:05:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:59 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:51:59 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Hmmmmmm, interesting. I seem to recall someone using air to pressurize a bladder & using that as the propellant to get the water into the engine. sounds like a good long term solution provided that the air pump can keep up with the demand. I would think though that using air to sheer the water would be more problematic in tuning that anything & personally @ this point in life, I would steer clear of that. although, interesting concept. up side, no contact with moving parts, down side high part count & high realistate, & I would think high initial cost. up side to a super-whami-dyne pump, low part count, high maintenance, high priced pump. will hopefully get to that bridge later in life. I am willing to bet that location of jets is likely to be different for different systems, for optimum performance. I would think that somewhat close to head in intake runner to be a good spot, on a TPI (as I am). although possibly better place for a single plane carb manifold style a plate system would work better. any thoughts on this? seems logical that if I had a motor on a dyno, that I would want to increase water until the gain is gone. kind of like timing, start low & increase until gain is gone, anything more is likely to be a waste and/or cost HP. the whole thing about ONR makes sense to a degree, but still to large a concept for my little mind @ this point. I think that is WI 202, & I am still on WI 101, Heck I am still on DIY 101, once I graduate to 202, I am going to worry about HP, right now I am happy with my measly 12 second street car. Tanx for bending the mind BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bernd Felsche Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 11:22 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Bob Wooten tapped away at the keyboard with: > You are SOO good @ keeping us on the edge of our seats. Based on what's been written before, he's using compressed air to feed and shear the water for best atomisation. As long as the air flow rate is known/measured, there's not a real problem introducing the extra air. The use of air avoids direct contact with valves, pumps, etc. The only WI components exposed to air AND water are then the injector jets. The jets don't need moving parts. A check valve in the water feed line will prevent the turbo blowing back though that line. A sequence of compressed-air valves can be used to persuade that same valve to close on demand, cutting water flow in the forward direction. > High pressure = easy to maintain nice spray patterns in all conditions, > something about "overwhelming the manifold conditions" thing. > fogger nozzles for easy availability. I suppose this application > could really use someone to come up with a single injector nozzle > similar to a fogger nozzle that would be simple to change jets on, > or better yet, have a single nozzle/jet for all locations & have a > variable jet somewhere else (or pressure, but then we get into > critical flow or not). According to the people who make some money from it, (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. The closer you inject to the inlet valves, the greater the proportion of droplets and from a single injector, the greater the chance of imbalance. A port water-injector minimises vapourization but droplet sizes need to be very small. Distributing the right amount of water to each requires careful tuning and/or management. > what do I want? I think that I want vaporization for increased > economy & atomization for power. Warm, tepid or cold? The _least_ amount of water necessary will provide the maximum amount of power as water vapour displaces oxygen. It's better to have tiny droplets of water until the valve closes for compression. > exactly what it "does" is still a mystery to me & the topic of a > major debate that I don't think that we have got to the bottom of. Evaporating the droplets in-cylinder doesn't reduce the total oxygen present even when the droplets evaporate and absorb energy during compression (six to seven times the amount of heat as for the same mass of gasoline). The water vapour acts as a "buffer" to the flame front, not only obstructing it at a molecular level, but also to reduce hot spots by absorbing some of their heat. The Gasoline FAQ indicates the degree to which water content in the air (humidity) reduces an engine's Octane number requirements. Order of magnitude is 4 g water per kg of air reducing ONR by one point. (The relationship is not entirely linear.) With a high charge temperature and without becoming saturated, one could add 40 to 60 g of water per kg of inlet air, depending on initial ambient conditions. That's an AWR of between 25:1 and 16:1 for an ONR of between 10 and 15 points. Too much water and the flame front slows too much as the reagents take longer to "find" each other, resulting in less torque. Determining what is "too much" will take some tuning time. Accurate knock detection and some means of measuring torque under controlled loads are a distinct advantage. Well, that's one theory anyway. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 22:53:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:53:52 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:53:52 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [Admin] Delays in posts showing up I'm having to let posts through in relatively small batches so the server doesn't get constipated and stop accepting incoming posts at all. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 22:55:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:55:12 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:55:12 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Massive and bruttal snippage. > I am willing to bet that location of jets is likely to be different for > different systems, for optimum performance Like in real estate, it's location, location, location. Now were back to the actual system. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 22:55:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:55:41 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:55:41 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Napa's part (Echlin) is a Borg Warner unit, they are one in the same. I believe they are all sourced from NTK. I have access to these at about $90.00 a unit. If Borg can ship them I would gladly help out any one who wants one. If they have them to ship to me!!! How can I get a list of those who are interested with out getting 400 e-mails? ----- Original Message ----- From: "efi_student" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 5:18 AM Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 for > the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known good > units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on the > parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. The > Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 > Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered one. If it ends > up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one well known to be > correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor of any kind for > only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still patiently waiting > for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what lengths > have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it would be > best to get something on a decent sized roll to save expenses. Would a > sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with Beldfoil (or equivalent) > be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? Is this an experiment and > report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't want > to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > > > Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a > complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I > doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce > > > > From: "rob files" > Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > > different > and > > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; > > Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 > > Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 > > Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > > Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > > Rob > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 22:56:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:56:10 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:56:10 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Bosch peak and hold injectors Check out the list's site. I believe they are all listed there. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Haines" To: "DIY_EFI" Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:11 AM Subject: Bosch peak and hold injectors > Does anyone know of any part numbers for Bosch peak-and-hold injectors? I am > looking for injectors in the 65 to 85 lb/hr range (at 43 to 58 psi fuel > pressure). > > Thanks, > > > Jason > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 22:56:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:56:50 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:56:50 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: is an updated fuel injector list available anywhere It'd definitely be nice if it was updated...seems like hard to find info. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Haines" To: "DIY_EFI" Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 6:09 AM Subject: is an updated fuel injector list available anywhere > Does an updated version of the fuel injector list that is on the FTP site > exist anywhere? A lot of the areas are blank. > > BTW - who made that list? I have some information that is missing from that > list that might help fill in a few of the blanks. > > > > Jason > > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 22:57:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:57:47 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:57:47 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Kinda surprised nobody's mentioned all the available tooth counts....148, 160, 162, etc...wouldn't this be an added nightmare ? Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 2:00 PM Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > As small as the starter's gear is, it doesn't engage many teeth, making a > signifigant change to one would be *iffy* in my opinion. > Bruce > > > > From: "rr" > Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > Why do I keep thinking that a tooth could be lowered enough > > to skip the sensor and still work for the starter? Then use a > > retriggerable SS to detect the missing tooth. > > BobR. > > > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > > > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > > > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > > > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > > > tooth dimensions. > > > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > > > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > > > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > > > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. > > > The Hall devices I picked for experiments > > > (MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things > > > including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, > > > and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could > > > do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice > > > missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of > > > us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make > > > do with what we have. > > > > > > Bruce Roe > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 22:58:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:58:29 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:58:29 -0800 From: "Raymond Brantley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts My guess is that you don't use an engine hoist rented from a local auto supply to drop that puppy in :>) I used to work for a Mack dealership and remember marveling at the size and strength of some of that stuff, although I didn't marvel when trying to lift some of it. Their V-8 was pretty cool...... Thanks, Raymond -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hermann Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 5:34 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts At 8:17 PM 12/11/01, Bob Wooten wrote: >Greg, > >Hope I did not step on your toes, implying that I was talking for you, >that was not my intent. Just trying to sort all this stuff out. Huh?? Never thought you did. > >Onto topic, by negative work do you mean that when the piston comes up >during compression it looses work (meaning that it is not free, it >costs me something to compress the gas) & by injecting water & by it >cooling the charge in the Cyl, it reduces the loss? Precisely. > >But on the flip side that the water reduces the amount of power >(positive >work) that I would have got out of that charge if it were "dry"? Yes. > >But the gain of the reduction of work is larger than the gain in the >positive work, meaning that the NET is more HP? If I am on track, this >makes more sense (light bulbs coming on like a Christmas tree:) BINGO!! > >Ahhhhhhhh, this makes sense. Also makes sense as to why the bearing loads get lighter. With WI you are not passing as much power around from one cylinder to another via the crankshaft. Now that I state it that way--I would bet that there is some reduction in torsional vibration in the crank, too !! > >So, IF I have a motor that is designed for WI I can design it around >this net gain (& the others that you mentioned) & have a solid system >that is going to be more efficient than one w/o it. (assuming a good >state of tune >initially) That's my thought. Not backed up by experimentation and hardware that _I_ have done, YET. Been busy for some time planning out a 605 cid (based on an IHC "LV" type engine) that I think is going to end up with about 7 to 8 psi boost (over sea level) and 10.5 to 1 or so mechanical compression. (Goal is 925 ft. lbs., 1500--4000 rpm) Want to use full time WI to see if I can get it to run on ULR fuel. It's going in a motor home, so water tankage is no problem. The rev limit comes from Allison's converter. Planning to use VATN type turbos. (Again, the lower EGT's should let the VATN's be reliable.) Current problem is finding forged blanks for the pistons. (4-5/8" bore, 1-5/16" wrist pins, 2.4" pin CL to top). Have found blanks big enough in 6018 alloy, but _REALLY_ want to use 4032 !!! Why?? Seen, for instance, some 4032 forged pistons for an FE Ford that spec only .0015" clearance !!! IMO, this will give WAY better ring life for a street engine. And--I won't have no steeeenkin' cast peeeestons, hyper or not, mon!!! When IH christened these motors "LV" they did mean LARGE--5-3/8" bore centers and 12-5/8" deck height ! Gonna use a block from a DV (diesel) 551, all of them, gas and diesel, had 18 head bolts per bank, but the diesels had 9/16" head bolts and oil cooling nozzles for the pistons. All five mains are cross bolted. :-) Will upgrade to 5/8" main studs and 7/16" cross bolts. > >OR, if I had a motor that was not designed around it I could increase >something (air & fuel for example) & compensate for the increased load >on the engine with WI & keep the efficiency of this system hopefully >the same. (assuming a good state of tune) Yep. The "designed around it" part is really just a higher mechanical compression ratio and or boost level to take advantage of the fact that you _CAN_ do that with the WI. When you really get into it, I would bet there would be some cam timing things to be optimized. Likewise, I thoroughly expect that there would be some turbine wheel and exhaust housing adjustments to make on turbo(s) to get things just so, too. First thought here is maybe one size smaller exhaust housing for a starting place. Compressor(s) would remain the same. But--a bit more mass flow in the exhaust (from the water) together with the significantly lower EGT's is telling me a slightly smaller nozzle would be in order. Of course--the lower EGT's mean the turbines and the turbos would live a lot longer, too ! > >OR if I had a system that was not of a good state of tune & I had to >back out timing or air or add fuel to keep the motor from detonating or >reduce the HP output, the WI could compensate for it & bring the motor >back the other direction. This though sounds dangerous, like trying to >fix a severed arm with a Barney Band aid. With the WI, I think you could just set the fuel mixture at 13 or even 13.5 to 1, even at full boost, and use the water to stay away from the devil detonation. The water is likely going to make it want some more timing compared to no water, too. Seems to me that this sort of stuff would be fairly easy and safe to sneak up on from a tune meant for no WI. Greg > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) >BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 22:59:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:59:16 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 22:59:16 -0800 From: PorscheRcr@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 In a message dated 12/12/2001 2:16:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@diy-efi.org writes: << It's sort of tight at the front end of the engine bay when you stuff an RX7 with a small block Ford... >> Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have lots of room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is stuffed back into the firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I have small feet :) Bill J 68 Triumph GT6 V8 (getting Megasquirt) 67 International Travelall (also getting MegaSquirt) 84 Audi 90 Quattro (staying CIS-E for now) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From krwright@wankel.net Wed Dec 12 08:20:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:07 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:07 -0300 From: Kevin Wright Subject: Re: 76-79 Cad port injection EFI Yup, those would be the ones I'm looking for. One trick I ran across on the webpage of a DIY-EFI'er was to use the later aluminum manifold, and enlarge the throttle bores to match the early, larger throttle body bores. Mainly for weight savings and asthetics; I don't think that there's any significant flow differences in the manifolds. I'll go with what I can find! I gotta say, I'm really excited to be delving into the wild world of DIY EFI. A lot of this stuff goes straight over my head, but I'm working on it. krw ...and lo, thus spake bcroe@juno.com on 12/10/01: >Kevin, > >You want a 76-79 Seville or a 79 Eldo (and 80 in >CA) for that setup. 78 on are a usually corroded AU >intake with a smaller throttle body. > >Bruce Roe > >On Mon, 10 Dec 2001 07:20:37 -0600 Kevin Wright > writes: > > >> Of course, *I* was looking for one with the >> Caddy/Olds EFI to plop on my '70 Cutlass with the MegaSquirt. > >> Kevin Wright >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org -- Kevin Wright krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca Wed Dec 12 10:59:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:12 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:12 -0300 From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success Good info Mark. The output reading does change rapidly on my WB O2 unit.........even though I was testing it on a carbureted engine. I found that I had to use the min/max/avg capability of my DVM to make sense of the output. Neil > posted the info back when I finished the DIY-WB back Aug or Sept. As near as I could tell from about 11:1 up to 18:1 they matched within .1 air fuel ratio. I've used the DIY-WB on my Dynojet and tuned with it comparing it to the wide band on the Dynojet also. Within a tenth or so. It changes so fast. < ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 12 07:18:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:17 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:17 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? Just looking at the prices something is wrong. Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce From: "rob files" Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > different and > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; > Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 > Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 > Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > Rob ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jhaines@lingenfelter.com Wed Dec 12 10:11:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:19 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:19 -0300 From: "Jason Haines" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Bosch peak and hold injectors Does anyone know of any part numbers for Bosch peak-and-hold injectors? I am looking for injectors in the 65 to 85 lb/hr range (at 43 to 58 psi fuel pressure). Thanks, Jason ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Wed Dec 12 08:05:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:19 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:19 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Bruce have you seen this site? This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C182D2.FF044EE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit http://chargedair.com/tr/tr.htm ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C182D2.FF044EE0 Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="Charged Air Systems - Turbo Regal.url" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="Charged Air Systems - Turbo Regal.url" [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://chargedair.com/tr/tr.htm [InternetShortcut] URL=http://chargedair.com/tr/tr.htm Modified=80494ED2FC82C10129 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C182D2.FF044EE0-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 12 23:00:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:21 -0800 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:21 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs I've used a 12' long cable of 18ga wire (just GM harness stuff wire wrapped together) with no problems when using a DVM. Bruce From: "efi_student" Would a > sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with Beldfoil (or equivalent) > be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? Is this an experiment and > report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't want > to reinvent the wheel here)? > Lance ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Wed Dec 12 22:34:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:22 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:22 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display > Actually, i was looking at $2.91 each from digikey. $11.64 for 4 to do one > display, or nearly as much as one of Steve's kits for the contoller. Digikey do tend to be a little spendy... Allied are usually better if you can meet their minimums. > I wasn't complaining and its still not expensive when compared to the price > of a comerical unit. Yes, those commercial units are all packaging and marketing. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 12 18:00:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:26 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:26 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question As small as the starter's gear is, it doesn't engage many teeth, making a signifigant change to one would be *iffy* in my opinion. Bruce From: "rr" Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > Why do I keep thinking that a tooth could be lowered enough > to skip the sensor and still work for the starter? Then use a > retriggerable SS to detect the missing tooth. > BobR. > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > > tooth dimensions. > > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. > > The Hall devices I picked for experiments > > (MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things > > including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, > > and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could > > do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice > > missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of > > us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make > > do with what we have. > > > > Bruce Roe ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 12 14:15:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:43 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:00:43 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Tuning for F1 When tuned properly, and EFI'd car will always have a sound of it's own http://iqx.ionichost.com/other/instest.html Or: What the lil guys sound like. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jhaines@lingenfelter.com Wed Dec 12 10:09:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:01:52 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:01:52 -0300 From: "Jason Haines" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: is an updated fuel injector list available anywhere Does an updated version of the fuel injector list that is on the FTP site exist anywhere? A lot of the areas are blank. BTW - who made that list? I have some information that is missing from that list that might help fill in a few of the blanks. Jason ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 12 18:06:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:01:53 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:01:53 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts How to actually do Water Injection, corrrectly. I'm reserving further comment till I get it plumbed and tested. Bruce From: "elcamino73" Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > In regards to what Bruce? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > > Bruce > > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > > BW > > Yes. > > And, "right" may take a new turn in the not too distant future. > > > > Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca Wed Dec 12 11:15:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:01:55 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:01:55 -0300 From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Success Hi Don, Thanks for the input. Yeah, 1.82 is about 11 AFR which is quite rich. The bike is not a smooth idling engine even at the best of times. It is a big twin cylinder Moto Guzzi so it doesn't have 4 or 6 cylinders to smooth things out. I always adjust the carbs' idle jets for the smoothest possible idle so it appears that very rich is what it requires. I was actually glad that the engine just ran that day, let alone idled smoothly. I hadn't run the engine since mid-Oct, when the cold weather settled in. The choke was off when I took that reading. I did flip the choke on momentarily to try it....Had to blip the throttle to keep it running and I saw an equivalent AFR of about 8 or 9:1. I will wait until next spring before I really worry about tuning anything with the WB O2 unit. Neil > Congratulations, sounds great. Just a tuning question for you. How does your bike idle? The 1.82v readout suggests it's quite rich. Perhaps it's because of the cold ambient temp or was the choke still out at this point? Cheers Don < ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 12 18:12:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:04:13 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:04:13 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Vaporization is primarily used for charge cooling. Atomisation is generally used for raising the threhold of detonation. Bruce From: "elcamino73" Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > What would be the benefits of each way Bruce? > From: "Bruce" nacelp@bright.net > Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > Lots of pressure, small *jets*, so as to make a truely fine mist. > > In the case of dry manifolding, with WI it will become wet with WI. So > you have to rethink things. Water has alot of inertia, compared to air, and > > either your looking for vaporization, or atomization, both serve two > > different goals. You have to figure out what goals you want and what > > compromises your willing to make, with each application. > > Bruce > > Air hoses, and WI are to be used ONLY with adult supervision, when the > lil guys are around (just trust me on that one). > > From: "Bob Wooten" > > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > > as a follow up, IYO, what constitutes "done right"? > > > Tanx > > > BW > > > Behalf Of Bob Wooten > > > Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > > > Also, I consider WI done right as a must. > > > Bruce > > > Whats WI? (water injection?) > > > BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jamesm@lapuwali.com Wed Dec 12 18:53:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:06:52 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:06:52 -0300 From: James Montebello MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) Every Audi turbo, and every other car equipped with Bosch Motronic, which covers nearly every German car sold since the mid to late 80s, and a good number of other European cars, as well. It's a very common system, used on literally millions of cars to date. While we're on the subject, I've heard that argument (cam signals are no good for timing because of the cam drive) several times. It seems to me that having ignition timing be more accurate than cam timing is a relatively useless feature. Therefore, using a cam sensor is perfectly adequate. Indeed, one could make the case that synchronizing ignition with valve events is "more accurate" than synchronizing it with crank (i.e., piston) position. If you're going to do full sequential, you'll need some indication of cam position, anyway. The advantage I see of using many teeth for the crank position isn't relative positioning, but rather high-resolution and redundancy when measuring speed. You can miss the signals from many teeth and still not lose track of the current engine speed. Watching many teeth also gives you the ability to watch the rate of change of the crank speed more closely, and potentially divine things like misfires (which should show up as two anomolously large changes in crank speed during one or two revolutions) for very sophisticated control strategies. Finally, as discussed not long ago on this list was the big advantage of timing everything with continuous external, engine-driven interrupts, rather than relying on long-running calculations seeded by one or two samples early in the process. james montebello On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Orin wrote: > > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > > > > > Even the manufacturers don't stoop that low. > > Every Audi turbo since the early 80s thru mid 90s > used the flywheel teeth for timing. Why? Because signals > derived from the cam suffer from backlash in the cam drive > and similarly for the distributor. > > Orin. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From winggee@hotmail.com Wed Dec 12 18:58:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:07:18 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:07:18 -0300 From: "Wing Gee" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DIY-WB meter.. from DSE? http://www.dse.com.au/cgi-bin/DSE.storefront/1029126617/Product/View/K4213 how this meter compared to ours? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 12 19:14:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:08:19 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:08:19 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s The one I have here is slightly different, Most noteably the lower edge has one rather then 2 *keying* grooves. Thanks Bruce From: "efi_student" Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s > http://www.sws.co.jp/stb_e/FRM/FILE/11FILE/sub11.htm > Does this look familiar to anyone? I sent a request for contact to > Sumitomo USA, I will be enquiring about this connector to see if they > would be willing to sell a group buy lot. Obviously, I don't have any > details just yet, but I will forward whatever they want to send me. > This connector is not limited to the Honda VX. My Honda gurus tell me > that this connector is very common, and that there are at least two on > every OBDII Honda Civic engine loom, so it isn't necessary to chase down > the VX model. Also, the '96-98 Civic HX uses a 5 wire sensor according > to my sources, but from a quick perusal of web resources, it appears > that Honda is even more proud of this piece than the one used in DIY. > It uses the same 8 pin connector and cal resistor scheme. > If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful > right now. > Lance > Behalf Of Bruce > Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s > From: "Perry, Scott" > > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I > don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring > harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other > suggestions... > Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . > Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe > obviously). Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From 96Hawk@RMarshall.com Wed Dec 12 18:58:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:09:40 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:09:40 -0300 From: "Todd Danielson" <96Hawk@RMarshall.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s ----- Original Message ----- From: "efi_student" To > If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful > right now. > I have some connections, although not directly with Sumitomo. I'm checking on it. Todd ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Wed Dec 12 21:59:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:51:56 -0300 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:51:56 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Just picking up teeth on that sloppy gear is a challenge; I wouldn't want to tell the tall ones from the short ones. What if another one got a bit lower? Bruce Roe On Tue, 11 Dec 2001 17:18:31 -0500 rr writes: > Why do I keep thinking that a tooth could be lowered enough > to skip the sensor and still work for the starter? Then use a > retriggerable SS to detect the missing tooth. > > BobR. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Wed Dec 12 20:01:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:00:28 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:00:28 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) > >I must admit (sorry Bruce) that I looked at the Oz DIY_WB page and it does >look inviting, but in keeping with the spirit of things here on the list >(you guys did all the work) I'd like to solder one up myself. I might even >try to put together the LED display instead of using a DVM. (Sharing my >experiences with the list of course.) > >So guys, point me in the right direction and I'll try not and ask too many >stupid questions. > >FYI...I'll be using this to help me tune my 87 Buick GN for the dragstrip. > >Thanks, >John McClure John-- You'll probably be wanting to talk to Bruce and the little guys at more length. Last we heard Sleepy said he had a black car running pretty well ! Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Dec 12 22:33:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:02:47 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:02:47 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > is launching and driving down track. > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > critical to maximizing the performance. Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the displacement over time, from field to field. What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Wed Dec 12 20:37:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:09:44 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:09:44 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) The magic words were "GN"... Bruce has quite the "GN" apparently, hope to see it someday. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "John & Meleaia McClure" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:59 PM Subject: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) > It looks like I got to the party late. I've been lurking on the list for a > few days now trying to get a feel for things here...and at times it looks > like a pretty rough crowd. So try and be easy on the "newbie". > > I'd like to try out the DIY_WB 02, but it looks like I've missed the group > purchases. I signed up for a leftover PCB on > http://208.37.117.207/wborder.html. There was a similar page I found for > the Steve C. parts kits and I signed up there to. Will signing up on these > pages get me in line for some of the "leftovers"? > > I must admit (sorry Bruce) that I looked at the Oz DIY_WB page and it does > look inviting, but in keeping with the spirit of things here on the list > (you guys did all the work) I'd like to solder one up myself. I might even > try to put together the LED display instead of using a DVM. (Sharing my > experiences with the list of course.) > > So guys, point me in the right direction and I'll try not and ask too many > stupid questions. > > FYI...I'll be using this to help me tune my 87 Buick GN for the dragstrip. > > Thanks, > John McClure > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From davidra@windows.microsoft.com Wed Dec 12 19:25:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:13:00 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:13:00 -0300 From: "David Randall" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: diy-wb bar graph display www.future-active.com shows a qty 20 pricing of $1.875 for the LM3914. Price goes to $1.438 with 100+. That's only 50 boards worth for 100+ qty. I've been laying out a PCB for Bruce's 36 LED display. I don't have it finished, and getting it to squeeze onto a 3.8" wide board is tight. But, with any luck, it'll work. At this point in my design, the LED's are on the board, and not remotely connected. I presume a 25 wire connector (and ribbon cable?) would be sufficient to run the LED's remotely. I've searched around for some gauge housings, but have come up empty handed. I'd prefer to make a finished gauge that would be sufficient quality that you'd be happy to have in your car, and wouldn't want to hide it because it looks just a project. Does anyone know of sources for empty 2 1/16" gauge housings? It would be great if we could pull together a quality 36 LED 2 1/16" gauge for less than the price of standard A/F gauge. Dave Randall -----Original Message----- From: Orin [mailto:orin@diy-efi.org] Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 2:04 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: diy-wb bar graph display > Also, looking at the prices for LM3914.. man they're steep. I think > you $2.08 each in Q1 at Allied is steep? It's LM3914N-1 now BTW. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Wed Dec 12 20:34:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:13:58 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 00:13:58 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts At 8:17 PM 12/11/01, Bob Wooten wrote: >Greg, > >Hope I did not step on your toes, implying that I was talking for you, that >was not my intent. Just trying to sort all this stuff out. Huh?? Never thought you did. > >Onto topic, by negative work do you mean that when the piston comes up >during compression it looses work (meaning that it is not free, it costs me >something to compress the gas) & by injecting water & by it cooling the >charge in the Cyl, it reduces the loss? Precisely. > >But on the flip side that the water reduces the amount of power (positive >work) that I would have got out of that charge if it were "dry"? Yes. > >But the gain of the reduction of work is larger than the gain in the >positive work, meaning that the NET is more HP? If I am on track, this >makes more sense (light bulbs coming on like a Christmas tree:) BINGO!! > >Ahhhhhhhh, this makes sense. Also makes sense as to why the bearing loads get lighter. With WI you are not passing as much power around from one cylinder to another via the crankshaft. Now that I state it that way--I would bet that there is some reduction in torsional vibration in the crank, too !! > >So, IF I have a motor that is designed for WI I can design it around this >net gain (& the others that you mentioned) & have a solid system that is >going to be more efficient than one w/o it. (assuming a good state of tune >initially) That's my thought. Not backed up by experimentation and hardware that _I_ have done, YET. Been busy for some time planning out a 605 cid (based on an IHC "LV" type engine) that I think is going to end up with about 7 to 8 psi boost (over sea level) and 10.5 to 1 or so mechanical compression. (Goal is 925 ft. lbs., 1500--4000 rpm) Want to use full time WI to see if I can get it to run on ULR fuel. It's going in a motor home, so water tankage is no problem. The rev limit comes from Allison's converter. Planning to use VATN type turbos. (Again, the lower EGT's should let the VATN's be reliable.) Current problem is finding forged blanks for the pistons. (4-5/8" bore, 1-5/16" wrist pins, 2.4" pin CL to top). Have found blanks big enough in 6018 alloy, but _REALLY_ want to use 4032 !!! Why?? Seen, for instance, some 4032 forged pistons for an FE Ford that spec only .0015" clearance !!! IMO, this will give WAY better ring life for a street engine. And--I won't have no steeeenkin' cast peeeestons, hyper or not, mon!!! When IH christened these motors "LV" they did mean LARGE--5-3/8" bore centers and 12-5/8" deck height ! Gonna use a block from a DV (diesel) 551, all of them, gas and diesel, had 18 head bolts per bank, but the diesels had 9/16" head bolts and oil cooling nozzles for the pistons. All five mains are cross bolted. :-) Will upgrade to 5/8" main studs and 7/16" cross bolts. > >OR, if I had a motor that was not designed around it I could increase >something (air & fuel for example) & compensate for the increased load on >the engine with WI & keep the efficiency of this system hopefully the same. >(assuming a good state of tune) Yep. The "designed around it" part is really just a higher mechanical compression ratio and or boost level to take advantage of the fact that you _CAN_ do that with the WI. When you really get into it, I would bet there would be some cam timing things to be optimized. Likewise, I thoroughly expect that there would be some turbine wheel and exhaust housing adjustments to make on turbo(s) to get things just so, too. First thought here is maybe one size smaller exhaust housing for a starting place. Compressor(s) would remain the same. But--a bit more mass flow in the exhaust (from the water) together with the significantly lower EGT's is telling me a slightly smaller nozzle would be in order. Of course--the lower EGT's mean the turbines and the turbos would live a lot longer, too ! > >OR if I had a system that was not of a good state of tune & I had to back >out timing or air or add fuel to keep the motor from detonating or reduce >the HP output, the WI could compensate for it & bring the motor back the >other direction. This though sounds dangerous, like trying to fix a severed >arm with a Barney Band aid. With the WI, I think you could just set the fuel mixture at 13 or even 13.5 to 1, even at full boost, and use the water to stay away from the devil detonation. The water is likely going to make it want some more timing compared to no water, too. Seems to me that this sort of stuff would be fairly easy and safe to sneak up on from a tune meant for no WI. Greg > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) >BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 00:59:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:18:25 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:18:25 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs I've used a 12' long cable of 18ga wire (just GM harness stuff wire wrapped together) with no problems when using a DVM. Bruce From: "efi_student" Would a > sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with Beldfoil (or equivalent) > be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? Is this an experiment and > report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't want > to reinvent the wheel here)? > Lance ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Thu Dec 13 03:53:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:18:45 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:18:45 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [Admin] Delays in posts showing up I'm having to let posts through in relatively small batches so the server doesn't get constipated and stop accepting incoming posts at all. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Wed Dec 12 23:06:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:20:08 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:20:08 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Bosch peak and hold injectors Check out the list's site. I believe they are all listed there. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Haines" To: "DIY_EFI" Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:11 AM Subject: Bosch peak and hold injectors > Does anyone know of any part numbers for Bosch peak-and-hold injectors? I am > looking for injectors in the 65 to 85 lb/hr range (at 43 to 58 psi fuel > pressure). > > Thanks, > > > Jason > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From PorscheRcr@aol.com Thu Dec 13 00:52:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:20:52 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:20:52 -0300 From: PorscheRcr@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 In a message dated 12/12/2001 2:16:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@diy-efi.org writes: << It's sort of tight at the front end of the engine bay when you stuff an RX7 with a small block Ford... >> Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have lots of room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is stuffed back into the firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I have small feet :) Bill J 68 Triumph GT6 V8 (getting Megasquirt) 67 International Travelall (also getting MegaSquirt) 84 Audi 90 Quattro (staying CIS-E for now) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Wed Dec 12 23:04:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:21:12 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:21:12 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Napa's part (Echlin) is a Borg Warner unit, they are one in the same. I believe they are all sourced from NTK. I have access to these at about $90.00 a unit. If Borg can ship them I would gladly help out any one who wants one. If they have them to ship to me!!! How can I get a list of those who are interested with out getting 400 e-mails? ----- Original Message ----- From: "efi_student" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 5:18 AM Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 for > the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known good > units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on the > parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. The > Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 > Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered one. If it ends > up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one well known to be > correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor of any kind for > only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still patiently waiting > for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what lengths > have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it would be > best to get something on a decent sized roll to save expenses. Would a > sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with Beldfoil (or equivalent) > be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? Is this an experiment and > report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't want > to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > > > Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a > complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I > doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce > > > > From: "rob files" > Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > > different > and > > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; > > Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 > > Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 > > Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > > Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > > Rob > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From raymond@iwantperformance.net Thu Dec 13 00:30:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:21:20 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:21:20 -0300 From: "Raymond Brantley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts My guess is that you don't use an engine hoist rented from a local auto supply to drop that puppy in :>) I used to work for a Mack dealership and remember marveling at the size and strength of some of that stuff, although I didn't marvel when trying to lift some of it. Their V-8 was pretty cool...... Thanks, Raymond -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Greg Hermann Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 5:34 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts At 8:17 PM 12/11/01, Bob Wooten wrote: >Greg, > >Hope I did not step on your toes, implying that I was talking for you, >that was not my intent. Just trying to sort all this stuff out. Huh?? Never thought you did. > >Onto topic, by negative work do you mean that when the piston comes up >during compression it looses work (meaning that it is not free, it >costs me something to compress the gas) & by injecting water & by it >cooling the charge in the Cyl, it reduces the loss? Precisely. > >But on the flip side that the water reduces the amount of power >(positive >work) that I would have got out of that charge if it were "dry"? Yes. > >But the gain of the reduction of work is larger than the gain in the >positive work, meaning that the NET is more HP? If I am on track, this >makes more sense (light bulbs coming on like a Christmas tree:) BINGO!! > >Ahhhhhhhh, this makes sense. Also makes sense as to why the bearing loads get lighter. With WI you are not passing as much power around from one cylinder to another via the crankshaft. Now that I state it that way--I would bet that there is some reduction in torsional vibration in the crank, too !! > >So, IF I have a motor that is designed for WI I can design it around >this net gain (& the others that you mentioned) & have a solid system >that is going to be more efficient than one w/o it. (assuming a good >state of tune >initially) That's my thought. Not backed up by experimentation and hardware that _I_ have done, YET. Been busy for some time planning out a 605 cid (based on an IHC "LV" type engine) that I think is going to end up with about 7 to 8 psi boost (over sea level) and 10.5 to 1 or so mechanical compression. (Goal is 925 ft. lbs., 1500--4000 rpm) Want to use full time WI to see if I can get it to run on ULR fuel. It's going in a motor home, so water tankage is no problem. The rev limit comes from Allison's converter. Planning to use VATN type turbos. (Again, the lower EGT's should let the VATN's be reliable.) Current problem is finding forged blanks for the pistons. (4-5/8" bore, 1-5/16" wrist pins, 2.4" pin CL to top). Have found blanks big enough in 6018 alloy, but _REALLY_ want to use 4032 !!! Why?? Seen, for instance, some 4032 forged pistons for an FE Ford that spec only .0015" clearance !!! IMO, this will give WAY better ring life for a street engine. And--I won't have no steeeenkin' cast peeeestons, hyper or not, mon!!! When IH christened these motors "LV" they did mean LARGE--5-3/8" bore centers and 12-5/8" deck height ! Gonna use a block from a DV (diesel) 551, all of them, gas and diesel, had 18 head bolts per bank, but the diesels had 9/16" head bolts and oil cooling nozzles for the pistons. All five mains are cross bolted. :-) Will upgrade to 5/8" main studs and 7/16" cross bolts. > >OR, if I had a motor that was not designed around it I could increase >something (air & fuel for example) & compensate for the increased load >on the engine with WI & keep the efficiency of this system hopefully >the same. (assuming a good state of tune) Yep. The "designed around it" part is really just a higher mechanical compression ratio and or boost level to take advantage of the fact that you _CAN_ do that with the WI. When you really get into it, I would bet there would be some cam timing things to be optimized. Likewise, I thoroughly expect that there would be some turbine wheel and exhaust housing adjustments to make on turbo(s) to get things just so, too. First thought here is maybe one size smaller exhaust housing for a starting place. Compressor(s) would remain the same. But--a bit more mass flow in the exhaust (from the water) together with the significantly lower EGT's is telling me a slightly smaller nozzle would be in order. Of course--the lower EGT's mean the turbines and the turbos would live a lot longer, too ! > >OR if I had a system that was not of a good state of tune & I had to >back out timing or air or add fuel to keep the motor from detonating or >reduce the HP output, the WI could compensate for it & bring the motor >back the other direction. This though sounds dangerous, like trying to >fix a severed arm with a Barney Band aid. With the WI, I think you could just set the fuel mixture at 13 or even 13.5 to 1, even at full boost, and use the water to stay away from the devil detonation. The water is likely going to make it want some more timing compared to no water, too. Seems to me that this sort of stuff would be fairly easy and safe to sneak up on from a tune meant for no WI. Greg > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) >BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Thu Dec 13 01:08:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:21:51 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:21:51 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: is an updated fuel injector list available anywhere It'd definitely be nice if it was updated...seems like hard to find info. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jason Haines" To: "DIY_EFI" Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 6:09 AM Subject: is an updated fuel injector list available anywhere > Does an updated version of the fuel injector list that is on the FTP site > exist anywhere? A lot of the areas are blank. > > BTW - who made that list? I have some information that is missing from that > list that might help fill in a few of the blanks. > > > > Jason > > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 12 22:42:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:22:06 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:22:06 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Massive and bruttal snippage. > I am willing to bet that location of jets is likely to be different for > different systems, for optimum performance Like in real estate, it's location, location, location. Now were back to the actual system. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Thu Dec 13 01:10:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:23:37 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 04:23:37 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Kinda surprised nobody's mentioned all the available tooth counts....148, 160, 162, etc...wouldn't this be an added nightmare ? Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 2:00 PM Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > As small as the starter's gear is, it doesn't engage many teeth, making a > signifigant change to one would be *iffy* in my opinion. > Bruce > > > > From: "rr" > Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > Why do I keep thinking that a tooth could be lowered enough > > to skip the sensor and still work for the starter? Then use a > > retriggerable SS to detect the missing tooth. > > BobR. > > > bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > > Yes, even if a tooth is a bit battered, it only represents > > > a couple of degrees. Battered or not, it will not be > > > moving into the position of an adjacent tooth. And the > > > the shaft runout should be pretty small compared to > > > tooth dimensions. > > > A PIC ought to do it, if it can match the top RPM rate. > > > But I won't be knocking a tooth off it, so something > > > else will be needed for sync on the flywheel, and a > > > second crude sync from the cam/distributor. > > > The Hall devices I picked for experiments > > > (MLX90217) claim to be self adjusting to things > > > including gear wear, rise time of .4 microsecond, > > > and 15KHZ bandwidth. That sounds like they could > > > do the job. I understand the OEMs putting a nice > > > missing tooth wheel in their engine, but those of > > > us trying to upgrade 70s engines just have to make > > > do with what we have. > > > > > > Bruce Roe > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:55:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:55:00 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:55:00 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Generally, I'm just trying to point out the less then obvious, and sometimes, it's hard to get someone's attention. It's odd how often people leap to use the word arguement when it's just discussion. Bruce > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) > >BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:55:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:55:20 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:55:20 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) From: "John & Meleaia McClure" Subject: DIY_WB inquiry > I'd like to try out the DIY_WB 02, but it looks like I've missed the group > purchases. I signed up for a leftover PCB on > http://208.37.117.207/wborder.html. There was a similar page I found for > the Steve C. parts kits and I signed up there to. Will signing up on these > pages get me in line for some of the "leftovers"? Yes, and I'd be expecting an announcement about that in a few days. > I must admit (sorry Bruce) that I looked at the Oz DIY_WB page and it does > look inviting, but in keeping with the spirit of things here on the list > (you guys did all the work) I'd like to solder one up myself. I might even > try to put together the LED display instead of using a DVM. (Sharing my > experiences with the list of course.) Thanks, and appreciated > So guys, point me in the right direction and I'll try not and ask too many > stupid questions. > FYI...I'll be using this to help me tune my 87 Buick GN for the dragstrip. > Thanks, > John McClure I like Black Cars Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:55:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:55:37 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:55:37 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? efi_student wrote: > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 for > the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known good > units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on the > parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. The > Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 > Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered one. If it ends > up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one well known to be > correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor of any kind for > only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still patiently waiting > for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what lengths > have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it would be > best to get something on a decent sized roll to save expenses. Would a > sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with Beldfoil (or equivalent) > be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? Is this an experiment and > report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't want > to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a > complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I > doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce > > From: "rob files" > Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > > different > and > > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; > > Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 > > Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 > > Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > > Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > > Rob > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:56:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:56:01 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:56:01 -0800 From: "Andris Skulte" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Building a 380 with 400 block 3.50 inch eagle crank and 5.85 eagle rods JE > d-dish (-32cc) pistons > Already using AFR 195cc heads. And they are still the best flowing heads 2 > years after I purchased them > Same compression on mine. Any reason not to go with the longer 6.125" rods if I can find them for a reasonable price? > but some folks more experienced than > > I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame > front travel at > > TDC. > > I don't think the quench area is supposted to support combustion. Not really, but if the gasses are shot out of the quench area at a super high velocity, it might break apart the flame front in the chamber area. The grooves mentioned earlier sound like a good idea, if you can design it correctly. > Using ATI D-1 supercharger 1000 hp 3core sheet metal intercooler With > WATERINJECTION > Thanks Bruce! Nice! Now what exactly constitues a 3 core intercooler compared to a single core or double core? I assume it's just 3 small ones welded side to side? I'm running the Spearco 2-182 core with 3" mandrel bent/TIG'd plumbing in/out of the IC, and 2.5" to the merge prior to the IC. > Probably switching from ACCEL DFI to FAST bank to bank wide band > O2 control. I'm going to try and make the DFI work for this iteration, but I'll need to source a VIC cheaply somehow. I just don't have the time to build the MegaFueler y'all designed here :( > Hydrualic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in bungs Do you know anyone running this manifold on boost? (yeah, it sounds like drugs.. Uh huh. I'm on boost, but I'm staying off the wagon!) He he he. ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo http://www.skulte.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:56:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:56:19 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:56:19 -0800 From: CJYoungDET@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup --part1_9d.1fe767e4.29498f3c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone, I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html. I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). Sorry to bother you all with this sophomoric question. Thanks, Chris. --part1_9d.1fe767e4.29498f3c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone,

     I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html.   I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?).

Sorry to bother you all with this sophomoric question.

Thanks,
Chris. --part1_9d.1fe767e4.29498f3c_boundary-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:56:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:56:46 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:56:46 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Water Injection Some folks. Some have a few clues to the way. Bruce I can name 7, in this room From: "rr" Subject: Re: Water Injection > And heaven-forbid you mention that a TBI system results in an engine > with a higher VE (hence power) then it would when port injected. > And folks wonder how I can spend so much time on this stuff ! > BobR. > Robert Harris wrote: > > When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, > > misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might > > just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject > > when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. > > Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports here > > that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to > > destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. > > http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ > > Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal coolant > > - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough > > that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - read > > the reports. > > Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power change > > ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the > > reports again. > > Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. > > Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for > > fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major > > increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher pressures > > can be consumed in a cylinder. > > > > Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but by > > severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. > > > > The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use > > computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to > > destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary > > research. > > > > If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of > > their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same for > > most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in Heywood > > or read the research at NACA. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:57:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:57:00 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:57:00 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Might investigate Eagle Rods a bit further. they're done by the same crowd as the Scat Cranks. Oh and read about Scat cranks for related info.. Bruce From: "elcamino73" > Building a 380 with 400 block 3.50 inch eagle crank and 5.85 eagle rods JE > d-dish (-32cc) pistons ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:57:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:57:13 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:57:13 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > I seem to recall someone using air to pressurize a > bladder & using that as the propellant to get the water into the engine. > sounds like a good long term solution provided that the air pump can keep up > with the demand. That's one way. > I would think though that using air to sheer the water > would be more problematic in tuning that anything & personally @ this point > in life, I would steer clear of that. although, interesting concept. There are simple answers. > up side, no contact with moving parts, down side high part count & high > realistate, & I would think high initial cost. up side to a > super-whami-dyne pump, low part count, high maintenance, high priced pump. > will hopefully get to that bridge later in life. Arrgh, think cheap, and what items can do what you want them to. > I am willing to bet that location of jets is likely to be different for > different systems, for optimum performance. I would think that somewhat > close to head in intake runner to be a good spot, on a TPI (as I am). > although possibly better place for a single plane carb manifold style a > plate system would work better. any thoughts on this? Pics to follow. > seems logical that if I had a motor on a dyno, that I would want to increase > water until the gain is gone. kind of like timing, start low & increase > until gain is gone, anything more is likely to be a waste and/or cost HP. Back to testing experimenting, and actually tuning.. yep > the whole thing about ONR makes sense to a degree, but still to large a > concept for my little mind @ this point. I think that is WI 202, & I am > still on WI 101, Heck I am still on DIY 101, once I graduate to 202, I am > going to worry about HP, right now I am happy with my measly 12 second > street car. there is 12 secs and then there is 12 secs. hehehe Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:57:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:57:36 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:57:36 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > Kinda surprised nobody's mentioned all the available > tooth counts....148, 160, 162, etc...wouldn't this be > an added nightmare ? Only if it's not a multiple of the number of cylinders/2. IE. you have an integer number of teeth between each firing. Running some numbers on the Audi 5 cyl engines: 135 teeth - so 270 per cycle, 72 between each cyl firing. Resolution is 360/135 degrees - or it would be if they didn't use BOTH edges of the tooth signal - giving a resolution of 360/270 or 1.33 degrees. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:58:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:58:03 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:58:03 -0800 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Water Injection Which report numbers did you find useful? There are so many turbine engine reports. FR Wilk ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 8:25 PM Subject: RE: Water Injection > Bob, > > Right on, I found a bunch of stuff @ that site that is VERY informative. I > would love to spend someone else's money blowing stuff up & learning about > how things work & how they don't, this would definately be the ultimate job, > now if only I can get that job & have them not pay me minimum wage. > > interesting commentary on HRM & such, the more I learn, the less in enjoy my > monthly subscriptions, lots of great commercials going on there. > > Tanx for the info. > BW > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Robert Harris > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:23 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Water Injection > > > When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, > misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might > just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject > when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. > > Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports > here > that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to > destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. > > http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ > > Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal > coolant > - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough > that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - > read > the reports. > > Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power > change > ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the > reports again. > > Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. > Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for > fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major > increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher > pressures > can be consumed in a cylinder. > > Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but > by > severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. > > The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use > computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to > destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary > research. > > If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of > their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same > for > most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in > Heywood > or read the research at NACA. > > Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:58:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:58:17 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:58:17 -0800 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation I've had my good nights sleep now and feel much more sensible. Main realisation is that I have to log my driving habits a little more to see where I want to optimise performance (no free lunches). That should decide me which layout to play with. -----Original Message----- >From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] >But: >Does complexity always equal better?. BIG SNIP >> So my engine, in first iteration will end up with 9 injector mounts. >> I think a good nights sleep is required, followed by looking up the >> prices for 1000cc/min P&H injectors. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 12:58:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:58:44 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 12:58:44 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Bosch peak and hold injectors Hi Jason, have a look at Bosch 0 280 150 363 (replacement for older 0 280 150 351). They flow 655cc/min@3bar. They are very low impedance (0.7 Ohm) and require 6A/1.4A current. Best regards, Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Jason Haines [mailto:jhaines@lingenfelter.com] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2001 14:11 An: DIY_EFI Betreff: Bosch peak and hold injectors Does anyone know of any part numbers for Bosch peak-and-hold injectors? I am looking for injectors in the 65 to 85 lb/hr range (at 43 to 58 psi fuel pressure). Thanks, Jason ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:51:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:51:07 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:51:07 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) When you get to worring about Better, it's easy to loose track of what's actually needed, and practical. Heck even if you use a crank posistion sensor reading directly off of a counter weight, the is some crank flex so there will be a timing error, from one cylinder to another. Heck even the block distorts some. Bruce Firmly rooted in actually making mechanical noise to test something From: "James Montebello" > While we're on the subject, I've heard that argument (cam signals are no > good for timing because of the cam drive) several times. It seems to me > that having ignition timing be more accurate than cam timing is a > relatively useless feature. Therefore, using a cam sensor is perfectly > adequate. Indeed, one could make the case that synchronizing ignition > with valve events is "more accurate" than synchronizing it with crank > (i.e., piston) position. If you're going to do full sequential, you'll > need some indication of cam position, anyway. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:51:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:51:45 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:51:45 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 -> Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have -> lots of room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is -> stuffed back into the firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I -> have small feet :) I put a 400 Chevy small block and a Powerglide into a '72 Spitfire, does that count? I notched the firewall boxes too. The automatic transmission required from frame surgery, but it was free. A friend's girlfriend could weld, and she cut the rails out one at a time where they wrapped around the stock trans, flipped them the other way, and welded them back in. Then we laid papier-mache over the transmission and several layers of Wal-Mart fiberglass cloth and resin to make a new transmission tunnel. Form-fit when we removed the paper. It never saw the road, unfortunately. The buddy who owned it went off to college and lost interest, and instead of selling it to me, he gave it to the school's engineering department, who removed the V8 and put in some junkyard bits to convert it to an "electric car." Which proved to me there was plenty of political correctness but no intelligence at Oklahoma State... The RX7 is a breeze, though. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:52:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:52:02 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:52:02 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts At 9:30 PM 12/12/01, Raymond Brantley wrote: >My guess is that you don't use an engine hoist rented from a local auto >supply to drop that puppy in :>) > >I used to work for a Mack dealership and remember marveling at the size >and strength of some of that stuff, although I didn't marvel when trying >to lift some of it. Their V-8 was pretty cool...... > > >Thanks, >Raymond Gonna be an interesting install. Coach up in the air about 4 feet on wood cribbing, build a double A-frame inside over the doghouse...probably use two chain falls to get it up and in. BARE block weighs about 400 lbs. Fully dressed engine more like 1250. Plus 450 or so for the tranny (6 speed Allison.) Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:52:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:52:28 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:52:28 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s That does not look like an 8 pin connector, Anyway, Why not just buy the sensor and once you have it in hand, try to get the connector. -----Original Message----- From: efi_student [mailto:efi.student@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 3:04 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s http://www.sws.co.jp/stb_e/FRM/FILE/11FILE/sub11.htm Does this look familiar to anyone? I sent a request for contact to Sumitomo USA, I will be enquiring about this connector to see if they would be willing to sell a group buy lot. Obviously, I don't have any details just yet, but I will forward whatever they want to send me. This connector is not limited to the Honda VX. My Honda gurus tell me that this connector is very common, and that there are at least two on every OBDII Honda Civic engine loom, so it isn't necessary to chase down the VX model. Also, the '96-98 Civic HX uses a 5 wire sensor according to my sources, but from a quick perusal of web resources, it appears that Honda is even more proud of this piece than the one used in DIY. It uses the same 8 pin connector and cal resistor scheme. If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful right now. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 11:21 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe obviously). Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:52:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:52:55 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:52:55 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data recorder. I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking for a cheap way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch and also down track. The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position sensors, I am just looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont allow for that expense when the money is needed else where on the car. Thanks though. BW??? The recorder can sample from 1 Hz to 1000 Hz max. sf -----Original Message----- From: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:34 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > is launching and driving down track. > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > critical to maximizing the performance. Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the displacement over time, from field to field. What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:53:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:53:14 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:53:14 -0800 From: Kevin Wright Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 ...and lo, thus spake PorscheRcr@aol.com on 12/12/01: >In a message dated 12/12/2001 2:16:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, >DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@diy-efi.org writes: > ><< It's sort of tight at the front end of the engine bay when you stuff an RX7 > with a small block Ford... >> > >Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have lots of >room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is stuffed back into the >firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I have small feet :) Geez, I'd have gone with a Rover/Buick/Olds aluminum V8 myself, but then, that's been done... Thinking of a Rover V8 in one of my first-gen RX-7s, simply because of weight issues and no been-there done-that syndrome, not to mention slightly easier fitment than the SBC/SBF. Maybe a Lexus or Olds Aurora/NorthStar V8? MegaSquirted, of course! I've also seen one with a Buick GN motor... >Bill J >68 Triumph GT6 V8 (getting Megasquirt) >67 International Travelall (also getting MegaSquirt) >84 Audi 90 Quattro (staying CIS-E for now) -- Kevin Wright Euless, TX krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright http://www.wankel.net/~krwright/cars/rx7/rx7.html 1979 Red RX-7 GS - FrankenRex - the only one that runs! 1984 Tender Blue RX-7 GSL-SE Project car - The Blue Bomb - it lives, no more bubbles in the coolant! 1984 Tornado Silver RX-7 GSL-SE Project Car Mark II - The Grey Mouse - no motor :( 1970 Black Olds Cutlass S Sports Coupe - Snoopy - not-quite musclecar 1980 Yellow Suzuki GS450L - as yet unnamed - recovering... 2000 Teal Chevy Astro Van - The Green Brick, my wife's - towing and haulage Not to mention the parts cars... Geez! Where did all these cars come from? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:53:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:53:30 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:53:30 -0800 From: adam.bahret@vsea.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: new to the list Hi I'm new to the mailing list. My name is Adam Bahret and I am a mechanical engineer with a BS in Mechanical Eng and a MS in Mech Eng Computer Systems and analylitical tools. But foremost I am a basment bomber gear head like the rest of you and unfortunatley don't have a basement, so I basiccally trash the apartment regularly. Current Projects: Building a fuel injection system for a 73 2.4 L currently carbed Porsche engine. Since it is a carbuerated engine I have had to fabricate the fuel ijection system. Machined intake runners. Made an airbox out of fiberglass using a reverse lost core method. The computer is based on Z world JackRabbit Controller. It's not a EPROM but it has a 5 year battery in the board. It's a nice set up for experimentation. I look forward to building the wide band O2 sensor. I am hoping to get my hands on one of the printed circuit boards if any are left. Please let me know if you know of one available. Or a parts kit. I am also interested in finding out if anybody has built the digital distributorless electronic ignition project that was posted by Tim Drury. Adam ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 15:03:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:54:56 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:54:56 -0800 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C18414.DED507C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit no, just tap off the lambda wire to your meter, leaving the lambda wire connected to the ECU. The other connection from your meter connects to chassis ground. ie. the meter is connected across the lambda sensor in parallel with the ECU. Cheers Rich -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of CJYoungDET@aol.com Sent: 13 December 2001 04:58 To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup Hello everyone, I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html. I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). Sorry to bother you all with this sophomoric question. Thanks, Chris. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C18414.DED507C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
no,=20 just tap off the lambda wire to your meter, leaving the lambda wire = connected to the ECU. The other connection from your meter connects to = chassis=20 ground. ie. the meter is connected across the lambda sensor in parallel = with the=20 ECU.
Cheers
Rich
 
-----Original Message-----
From: = owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org=20 [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of=20 CJYoungDET@aol.com
Sent: 13 December 2001 = 04:58
To:=20 diy_efi@diy-efi.org
Subject: O2 Sensor Meter=20 Hookup

Hello=20 everyone,

     I was planning on = building one=20 of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on=20 http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html.   I was = wondering=20 how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a = series with=20 the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). =

Sorry to=20 bother you all with this sophomoric question.

Thanks,=20
Chris. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C18414.DED507C0-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:55:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:55:12 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:55:12 -0800 From: "Jonathan D Stauffer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB O2 Board and Kit availability I am new to the group, so please bear with me. I am extremely interested in the WB O2setup. Are there any remaining boards and/or parts kits available? Any info you can give me would be great! Thanks, Jonathan Stauffer ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:55:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:55:53 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:55:53 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 I expect a dozen 8x10s, with a typed description on the back posted at incoming. Bruce From: > Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have lots of > room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is stuffed back into the > firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I have small feet :) > Bill J ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 14:56:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:56:05 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 14:56:05 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup Amps are read in sries, volts in parrarel. Other then richer, or leaner then 14.7:1, it's of no benefit Bruce From: CJYoungDET@aol.com Subject: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html. I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). Chris. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From f_wilk@hotmail.com Thu Dec 13 04:41:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:13:11 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:13:11 -0300 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Water Injection Which report numbers did you find useful? There are so many turbine engine reports. FR Wilk ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 8:25 PM Subject: RE: Water Injection > Bob, > > Right on, I found a bunch of stuff @ that site that is VERY informative. I > would love to spend someone else's money blowing stuff up & learning about > how things work & how they don't, this would definately be the ultimate job, > now if only I can get that job & have them not pay me minimum wage. > > interesting commentary on HRM & such, the more I learn, the less in enjoy my > monthly subscriptions, lots of great commercials going on there. > > Tanx for the info. > BW > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Robert Harris > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:23 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Water Injection > > > When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, > misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might > just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject > when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. > > Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports > here > that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to > destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. > > http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ > > Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal > coolant > - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough > that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - > read > the reports. > > Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power > change > ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the > reports again. > > Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. > Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for > fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major > increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher > pressures > can be consumed in a cylinder. > > Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but > by > severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. > > The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use > computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to > destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary > research. > > If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of > their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same > for > most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in > Heywood > or read the research at NACA. > > Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Thu Dec 13 04:13:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:13:11 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:13:11 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > Kinda surprised nobody's mentioned all the available > tooth counts....148, 160, 162, etc...wouldn't this be > an added nightmare ? Only if it's not a multiple of the number of cylinders/2. IE. you have an integer number of teeth between each firing. Running some numbers on the Audi 5 cyl engines: 135 teeth - so 270 per cycle, 72 between each cyl firing. Resolution is 360/135 degrees - or it would be if they didn't use BOTH edges of the tooth signal - giving a resolution of 360/270 or 1.33 degrees. Orin. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 02:06:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:13:13 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:13:13 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Water Injection Some folks. Some have a few clues to the way. Bruce I can name 7, in this room From: "rr" Subject: Re: Water Injection > And heaven-forbid you mention that a TBI system results in an engine > with a higher VE (hence power) then it would when port injected. > And folks wonder how I can spend so much time on this stuff ! > BobR. > Robert Harris wrote: > > When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, > > misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might > > just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject > > when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. > > Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports here > > that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to > > destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. > > http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ > > Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal coolant > > - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough > > that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - read > > the reports. > > Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power change > > ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the > > reports again. > > Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. > > Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for > > fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major > > increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher pressures > > can be consumed in a cylinder. > > > > Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but by > > severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. > > > > The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use > > computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to > > destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary > > research. > > > > If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of > > their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same for > > most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in Heywood > > or read the research at NACA. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Thu Dec 13 01:52:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:13:42 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:13:42 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? efi_student wrote: > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 for > the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known good > units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on the > parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. The > Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 > Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered one. If it ends > up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one well known to be > correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor of any kind for > only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still patiently waiting > for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what lengths > have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it would be > best to get something on a decent sized roll to save expenses. Would a > sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with Beldfoil (or equivalent) > be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? Is this an experiment and > report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't want > to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a > complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So I > doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce > > From: "rob files" > Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > > different > and > > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; > > Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 > > Oxygen Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 > > Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 Bosch $57.60 > > Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > > Rob > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From CJYoungDET@aol.com Thu Dec 13 01:57:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:14:19 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:14:19 -0300 From: CJYoungDET@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup --part1_9d.1fe767e4.29498f3c_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone, I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html. I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). Sorry to bother you all with this sophomoric question. Thanks, Chris. --part1_9d.1fe767e4.29498f3c_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello everyone,

     I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html.   I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?).

Sorry to bother you all with this sophomoric question.

Thanks,
Chris. --part1_9d.1fe767e4.29498f3c_boundary-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 02:28:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:15:54 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:15:54 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob Wooten" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > I seem to recall someone using air to pressurize a > bladder & using that as the propellant to get the water into the engine. > sounds like a good long term solution provided that the air pump can keep up > with the demand. That's one way. > I would think though that using air to sheer the water > would be more problematic in tuning that anything & personally @ this point > in life, I would steer clear of that. although, interesting concept. There are simple answers. > up side, no contact with moving parts, down side high part count & high > realistate, & I would think high initial cost. up side to a > super-whami-dyne pump, low part count, high maintenance, high priced pump. > will hopefully get to that bridge later in life. Arrgh, think cheap, and what items can do what you want them to. > I am willing to bet that location of jets is likely to be different for > different systems, for optimum performance. I would think that somewhat > close to head in intake runner to be a good spot, on a TPI (as I am). > although possibly better place for a single plane carb manifold style a > plate system would work better. any thoughts on this? Pics to follow. > seems logical that if I had a motor on a dyno, that I would want to increase > water until the gain is gone. kind of like timing, start low & increase > until gain is gone, anything more is likely to be a waste and/or cost HP. Back to testing experimenting, and actually tuning.. yep > the whole thing about ONR makes sense to a degree, but still to large a > concept for my little mind @ this point. I think that is WI 202, & I am > still on WI 101, Heck I am still on DIY 101, once I graduate to 202, I am > going to worry about HP, right now I am happy with my measly 12 second > street car. there is 12 secs and then there is 12 secs. hehehe Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 01:05:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:16:27 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:16:27 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Generally, I'm just trying to point out the less then obvious, and sometimes, it's hard to get someone's attention. It's odd how often people leap to use the word arguement when it's just discussion. Bruce > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) > >BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 01:38:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:16:40 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:16:40 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_WB inquiry (be gentle) From: "John & Meleaia McClure" Subject: DIY_WB inquiry > I'd like to try out the DIY_WB 02, but it looks like I've missed the group > purchases. I signed up for a leftover PCB on > http://208.37.117.207/wborder.html. There was a similar page I found for > the Steve C. parts kits and I signed up there to. Will signing up on these > pages get me in line for some of the "leftovers"? Yes, and I'd be expecting an announcement about that in a few days. > I must admit (sorry Bruce) that I looked at the Oz DIY_WB page and it does > look inviting, but in keeping with the spirit of things here on the list > (you guys did all the work) I'd like to solder one up myself. I might even > try to put together the LED display instead of using a DVM. (Sharing my > experiences with the list of course.) Thanks, and appreciated > So guys, point me in the right direction and I'll try not and ask too many > stupid questions. > FYI...I'll be using this to help me tune my 87 Buick GN for the dragstrip. > Thanks, > John McClure I like Black Cars Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bill.shurvinton@nokia.com Thu Dec 13 05:40:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:19:51 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:19:51 -0300 From: bill.shurvinton@nokia.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Atomisation I've had my good nights sleep now and feel much more sensible. Main realisation is that I have to log my driving habits a little more to see where I want to optimise performance (no free lunches). That should decide me which layout to play with. -----Original Message----- From: ext Bruce [mailto:nacelp@bright.net] >But: >Does complexity always equal better?. BIG SNIP >> So my engine, in first iteration will end up with 9 injector mounts. >> I think a good nights sleep is required, followed by looking up the >> prices for 1000cc/min P&H injectors. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 02:23:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:19:57 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:19:57 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Might investigate Eagle Rods a bit further. they're done by the same crowd as the Scat Cranks. Oh and read about Scat cranks for related info.. Bruce From: "elcamino73" > Building a 380 with 400 block 3.50 inch eagle crank and 5.85 eagle rods JE > d-dish (-32cc) pistons ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Thu Dec 13 06:14:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:20:38 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:20:38 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Bosch peak and hold injectors Hi Jason, have a look at Bosch 0 280 150 363 (replacement for older 0 280 150 351). They flow 655cc/min@3bar. They are very low impedance (0.7 Ohm) and require 6A/1.4A current. Best regards, Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Jason Haines [mailto:jhaines@lingenfelter.com] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 12. Dezember 2001 14:11 An: DIY_EFI Betreff: Bosch peak and hold injectors Does anyone know of any part numbers for Bosch peak-and-hold injectors? I am looking for injectors in the 65 to 85 lb/hr range (at 43 to 58 psi fuel pressure). Thanks, Jason ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From skulte@skulte.com Thu Dec 13 01:55:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:26:42 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:26:42 -0300 From: "Andris Skulte" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Building a 380 with 400 block 3.50 inch eagle crank and 5.85 eagle rods JE > d-dish (-32cc) pistons > Already using AFR 195cc heads. And they are still the best flowing heads 2 > years after I purchased them > Same compression on mine. Any reason not to go with the longer 6.125" rods if I can find them for a reasonable price? > but some folks more experienced than > > I claim that a quench that tight really disturbs the flame > front travel at > > TDC. > > I don't think the quench area is supposted to support combustion. Not really, but if the gasses are shot out of the quench area at a super high velocity, it might break apart the flame front in the chamber area. The grooves mentioned earlier sound like a good idea, if you can design it correctly. > Using ATI D-1 supercharger 1000 hp 3core sheet metal intercooler With > WATERINJECTION > Thanks Bruce! Nice! Now what exactly constitues a 3 core intercooler compared to a single core or double core? I assume it's just 3 small ones welded side to side? I'm running the Spearco 2-182 core with 3" mandrel bent/TIG'd plumbing in/out of the IC, and 2.5" to the merge prior to the IC. > Probably switching from ACCEL DFI to FAST bank to bank wide band > O2 control. I'm going to try and make the DFI work for this iteration, but I'll need to source a VIC cheaply somehow. I just don't have the time to build the MegaFueler y'all designed here :( > Hydrualic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in bungs Do you know anyone running this manifold on boost? (yeah, it sounds like drugs.. Uh huh. I'm on boost, but I'm staying off the wagon!) He he he. ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo http://www.skulte.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 18:44:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:44:05 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:44:05 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Greg Hermann" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > At 9:30 PM 12/12/01, Raymond Brantley wrote: > >My guess is that you don't use an engine hoist rented from a local auto > >supply to drop that puppy in :>) > >I used to work for a Mack dealership and remember marveling at the size > >and strength of some of that stuff, although I didn't marvel when trying > >to lift some of it. Their V-8 was pretty cool...... > >Thanks, > >Raymond > Gonna be an interesting install. Coach up in the air about 4 feet on wood > cribbing, build a double A-frame inside over the doghouse...probably use > two chain falls to get it up and in. > BARE block weighs about 400 lbs. Fully dressed engine more like 1250. Plus > 450 or so for the tranny (6 speed Allison.) > Greg IH 436 head, 200 lbs. tractor rear end casing 800 lbs, empty. Bruce Mass can be a good thing! ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 18:44:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:44:32 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:44:32 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Sensor. For some reason, they call it a connector, but that is consistent with other Bosch sensors that they list. Odd nomenclature, but what ever works. They have a decent return policy, so if it is wrong, the cost is small, shipping and restocking. I believe I have paid more than that for a number of parts/pieces that got lost/destroyed in experiments or performance trials. If it is five wire, woohoo! Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Gary Schaumberg Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? efi_student wrote: > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 > for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known > good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on > the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. > The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector > C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered > one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one > well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor > of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still > patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what > lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it > would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save > expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with > Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? > Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, > I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 18:44:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:44:56 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:44:56 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup Can you guys turn off the HTML?. Makes the archives a real mess TIA Bruce From: Rich M Subject: RE: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup no, just tap off the lambda wire to your meter, leaving the lambda wire connected to the ECU. The other connection from your meter connects to chassis ground. ie. the meter is connected across the lambda sensor in parallel with the ECU. Cheers Rich From: Behalf Of CJYoungDET@aol.com Subject: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html. I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). Sorry to bother you all with this sophomoric question. Chris. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 18:45:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:45:30 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:45:30 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? It's a Supra owner's group. Lots of kids, a few with some pretty good ideas, not nearly the expertise here. That's what brought me here, no one on that list was willing to reveal anything about the ECM. Either they don't know (mostly), or they have put too much effort into it, and plan to make money from it. I had hoped that at some point, someone would crack the OEM ECM on the Supra, but it just isn't happening except one guy in Canada, but he's not a programmer, he's just learned how to manipulate the maps, I'd like to know more than just remapping. I've figured I need to learn more to understand the algorithms, and as Bruce said, it's better to learn from something that is already hacked (a known) than to try to invent from a blank sheet. So that's why I'm here. I am also a full disclosure type unless I have been asked to keep something secret, I work in Information Security and specialize in networking. I follow a number of security related subjects too, and I have a bit of the hacker mentality. It helps me do what I do for a living, and I find the hacker mentality to be much the same as the guy who wants to get more out of his machine. Let's see what happens when I do this... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 8:58 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? What is the other list, would be curious what they discuss? -----Original Message----- From: efi_student [mailto:efi.student@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 7:27 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? This is correct. I just did a search through a Honda parts site, and the 49 state model is completely different and MUCH more expensive. Not just the sensor, but the whole exhaust set up. The NB sensor is cheap, that is what you are seeing for under $100. I also have some parts scouts looking for a better price than www.partsbin.com and so far, even with an enticement of a purchase of 10 or more units, no one seems to be able to best that price. BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the bounds of the agreement? Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Kevin _ Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 10:16 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? I believe you need a sensor from a non-CA car. As we know, emission laws are stricter in CA because of smog problems. Therefore, I'm drawing the assumption that the CA version had to run stoich to maintain maximum catalyst efficiency and lowest emissions. You can easily detect stoich with a cheaper, switching narrow-band O2 sensor. In the other states, laws are a little less strict so I'm guessing it was a lean-burn civic VX in 49 states. Just to toss out a question, does anybody know what A:F they ran on the lean-burn side of that VX? I know it couldn't be that lean because its not stratified charge, but I am curious... Kevin >Hey all, > >I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different >and I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it >can't be beat!). > >So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor >1994- for CA only there are three listings; > >Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen >Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 >Bosch $57.60 > >Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > >Thanks, >Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 18:46:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:46:14 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:46:14 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Fo Orin: Starter Tooth Sensor Question OK Orin-- You seem to be somewhat familiar with the Audi turbo set-up. So--let's see if we can pick their brains a bit. No point in reinventing wheels when a reputable mfgr. has done development work, after all !! 1. Does Audi use a mag pick-up or a Hall-effect sensor? 2. Does it face the ring gear radially or from one face? 3. If their sensor faces the ring gear from one face, is it on the same or the opposite side from the side on which the starter pinion engages? 4. Is it any sort of a "smart" sensor ?? (Any on board digital or analog signal processing in the sensor?) 5. Do they do any signal processing for this sensor in their ECU?? 6. I take it they use a second sensor for a timing pick-up Does this one pick up from "lugs" added to the flywheel, or from something else?? Is this one Hall or mag?? 7. I also assume they use a third sensor off the cam or a dizzy shaft to get cam position?? Again, Hall or mag?? I happen to have one of the Bentley service books for the Quattros, so I will do some digging too. Also thinking that a useful ECU function might be to "wife and or bozo proof" the starter and ring gear-- use a discreet input for a "start" command and an on/off output to control the starter solenoid via a relay. Do things like not enable the solenoid if the flywheel sensor is picking up any engine motion at all, cut juice to the solenoid once the flywheel sensor frequency goes above a certain level for a particular length of time, refuse to re-energize the solenoid for "X" seconds after it has been de-energized (so as to give the starter time to spin down to a full stop). I'm thinking all of these functions would tend to keep the tooth fairies away from the ring gear. Greg (ready for a trip to Santa Fe Audi Parts, just south of Denver, to do some scrounging) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 18:46:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:46:38 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:46:38 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) >Not really, but if the gasses are shot out of the quench area at a super >high velocity, it might break apart the flame front in the chamber area. The >grooves mentioned earlier sound like a good idea, if you can design it >correctly. It's been done on some diesels, so nothing new. I think I've also heard of Honda doing some "texturing" in the chambers. Careful design is _always_ a good idea. :-) > Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 18:47:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:47:06 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:47:06 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s It's the same style. Not the exact connector. If you look at the data sheet it comes in many pin configurations. The key is the inserts, the rounded locking housing and the rubber internal seal. I looked at every connector Sumitomo listed on their site to determine which one looked to be most like the one that I have seen both on the wiring harness and on the sensors themselves. This appears to be it from the description. I am 100% certain that the connector is Sumitomo, it's now just a question of exactly which one it is. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 7:19 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s That does not look like an 8 pin connector, Anyway, Why not just buy the sensor and once you have it in hand, try to get the connector. -----Original Message----- From: efi_student [mailto:efi.student@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 3:04 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s http://www.sws.co.jp/stb_e/FRM/FILE/11FILE/sub11.htm Does this look familiar to anyone? I sent a request for contact to Sumitomo USA, I will be enquiring about this connector to see if they would be willing to sell a group buy lot. Obviously, I don't have any details just yet, but I will forward whatever they want to send me. This connector is not limited to the Honda VX. My Honda gurus tell me that this connector is very common, and that there are at least two on every OBDII Honda Civic engine loom, so it isn't necessary to chase down the VX model. Also, the '96-98 Civic HX uses a 5 wire sensor according to my sources, but from a quick perusal of web resources, it appears that Honda is even more proud of this piece than the one used in DIY. It uses the same 8 pin connector and cal resistor scheme. If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful right now. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 11:21 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe obviously). Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 18:47:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:47:27 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:47:27 -0800 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data recorder. He meant just put a video camera on a tripod and record the run and then analyze it to death with a computer. Although I don't know how you would deal with the changing angle (assuming a fixed camera to the side.) > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking for a > cheap > way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch and also down track. > > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position sensors, I > am just > looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont allow for that expense when the > money > is needed else where on the car. What about using a non-contact displacement sensor under the fender that measures distance to the ground? You could either use one in the front and one in the rear, or just a single unit at one fender and an inclinometer to measure the body's angle. The ultrasonic rangefinder is cheap and easily available, but I don't know about its distance resolution. They use them all the time in robots to sense when they are coming close to walls, objects, etc, and in this application they are sensing in the tens of feet range. You might be able to adapt one (with a modified controller) to sense the distance from under the fender to the ground. Since the distance does not change much you don't need much dynamic range and so this might enble you to use a high frequency counter to get the resolution you need. Infrared rangefinding might also be in the realm of DIY, I don't know the details but I think most automatic cameras use this to set focus. (The ultimate cheap source of ultrasonic rangefinders for hobbyists used to be Polaroid cameras which used them for focus.) Since money is an issue I don't think you'll be using laser displacement measuring but it would definitely work just fine. What is your resolution requirement? How much does the suspension move and how precisely do you want to measure it? Do you need to measure at all four corners or would just front/back work? What about just sensing the angle of the chassis instead of displacement of the shocks? Other ideas: - Linear potentiometers that have several inches of travel can be had for a few bucks and would work fine for a quick and dirty setup, assuming you could figure out how to mount them. It's a "poor man's LVDT." (LVDT = an inductor whose core moves in and out, changing the inductance. THe ones I've worked with can measure displacement down to about a micron [0.00004 inch] and they have very little to zero friction.) - You could mount a strain gague either directly to part of a coil spring or put a load cell between the coil spring and its housing. If you have a torsion spring this is an even more attractive idea. This might not be linear and it probably wouldn't relate directly to distance but it would relate directly to the force acting on the wheel, which might be equally useful for suspenstion tuning. Bare (unmounted) strain gagues are pretty cheap and you're not really interested in absolute calibration, just repeatable relative measurements. Omeaga sells packages of 10 for $49. Brian (just brainstorming) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 18:47:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:47:51 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 18:47:51 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: new to the list At 11:42 AM 12/13/01, adam.bahret@vsea.com wrote: >Hi I'm new to the mailing list. >My name is Adam Bahret and I am a mechanical engineer with a BS in >Mechanical Eng and a MS in Mech Eng Computer Systems and analylitical >tools. But foremost I am a basment bomber gear head like the rest of you >and unfortunatley don't have a basement, so I basiccally trash the >apartment regularly. Hey--If you have a Ford FE or Cleveland block for a coffee table base, there are a few here you'd fit right in with-- Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 13 19:08:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 19:08:40 -0800 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 19:08:40 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fo Orin: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > You seem to be somewhat familiar with the Audi turbo set-up. > > So--let's see if we can pick their brains a bit. No point in reinventing > wheels when a reputable mfgr. has done development work, after all !! > > 1. Does Audi use a mag pick-up or a Hall-effect sensor? Magnetic variable reluctance. > 2. Does it face the ring gear radially or from one face? Radially. > 4. Is it any sort of a "smart" sensor ?? (Any on board digital or analog > signal processing in the sensor?) No, same sensors since 80s as far as I can tell. Difference in part numbers seems to be concerned with the connectors and/or cable length. > 5. Do they do any signal processing for this sensor in their ECU?? Simple comparator based circuit on both flywheel teeth and second 'cyl 1' sensor. Just a Schmitt trigger on the flywheel sensor. The second cyl 1 sensor uses a percentage of the previous peak level to compare against with a bleed resistor on the capacitor used to store the previous peak. I have the circuits hand drawn and scanned somewhere. > 6. I take it they use a second sensor for a timing pick-up Does this one > pick up from "lugs" added to the flywheel, or from something else?? Is this > one Hall or mag?? It's a pin inserted in the engine side of the flywheel. > 7. I also assume they use a third sensor off the cam or a dizzy shaft to > get cam position?? Again, Hall or mag?? Hall sensor in the distributor - in fact, the same as the NA engines use to fire the ignition, only with one window rather than 5. > I happen to have one of the Bentley service books for the Quattros, so I > will do some digging too. It should be in there as long as it's for some turbo model between 84 and 95. > Also thinking that a useful ECU function might be to "wife and or bozo > proof" the starter and ring gear-- use a discreet input for a "start" > command and an on/off output to control the starter solenoid via a relay. > Do things like not enable the solenoid if the flywheel sensor is picking up > any engine motion at all, cut juice to the solenoid once the flywheel > sensor frequency goes above a certain level for a particular length of > time, refuse to re-energize the solenoid for "X" seconds after it has been > de-energized (so as to give the starter time to spin down to a full stop). Hint... most of the Audi ECUs don't energize the fuel pump relay until they detect a signal from the flywheel sensor. They also de-energize it a couple of seconds after the signal stops. Unfortunately, they also de-energize it as an overboost or overrev cutoff. > I'm thinking all of these functions would tend to keep the tooth fairies > away from the ring gear. The Audi teeth seem remarkably bozo proof. Seems to take a hydrolocked cylinder or broken starter to break them. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From adam.bahret@vsea.com Thu Dec 13 13:42:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:04:29 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:04:29 -0300 From: adam.bahret@vsea.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: new to the list Hi I'm new to the mailing list. My name is Adam Bahret and I am a mechanical engineer with a BS in Mechanical Eng and a MS in Mech Eng Computer Systems and analylitical tools. But foremost I am a basment bomber gear head like the rest of you and unfortunatley don't have a basement, so I basiccally trash the apartment regularly. Current Projects: Building a fuel injection system for a 73 2.4 L currently carbed Porsche engine. Since it is a carbuerated engine I have had to fabricate the fuel ijection system. Machined intake runners. Made an airbox out of fiberglass using a reverse lost core method. The computer is based on Z world JackRabbit Controller. It's not a EPROM but it has a 5 year battery in the board. It's a nice set up for experimentation. I look forward to building the wide band O2 sensor. I am hoping to get my hands on one of the printed circuit boards if any are left. Please let me know if you know of one available. Or a parts kit. I am also interested in finding out if anybody has built the digital distributorless electronic ignition project that was posted by Tim Drury. Adam ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Thu Dec 13 09:02:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:04:29 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:04:29 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 -> Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have -> lots of room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is -> stuffed back into the firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I -> have small feet :) I put a 400 Chevy small block and a Powerglide into a '72 Spitfire, does that count? I notched the firewall boxes too. The automatic transmission required from frame surgery, but it was free. A friend's girlfriend could weld, and she cut the rails out one at a time where they wrapped around the stock trans, flipped them the other way, and welded them back in. Then we laid papier-mache over the transmission and several layers of Wal-Mart fiberglass cloth and resin to make a new transmission tunnel. Form-fit when we removed the paper. It never saw the road, unfortunately. The buddy who owned it went off to college and lost interest, and instead of selling it to me, he gave it to the school's engineering department, who removed the V8 and put in some junkyard bits to convert it to an "electric car." Which proved to me there was plenty of political correctness but no intelligence at Oklahoma State... The RX7 is a breeze, though. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 10:36:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:05:07 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:05:07 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) When you get to worring about Better, it's easy to loose track of what's actually needed, and practical. Heck even if you use a crank posistion sensor reading directly off of a counter weight, the is some crank flex so there will be a timing error, from one cylinder to another. Heck even the block distorts some. Bruce Firmly rooted in actually making mechanical noise to test something From: "James Montebello" > While we're on the subject, I've heard that argument (cam signals are no > good for timing because of the cam drive) several times. It seems to me > that having ignition timing be more accurate than cam timing is a > relatively useless feature. Therefore, using a cam sensor is perfectly > adequate. Indeed, one could make the case that synchronizing ignition > with valve events is "more accurate" than synchronizing it with crank > (i.e., piston) position. If you're going to do full sequential, you'll > need some indication of cam position, anyway. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Thu Dec 13 11:46:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:05:19 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:05:19 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts At 9:30 PM 12/12/01, Raymond Brantley wrote: >My guess is that you don't use an engine hoist rented from a local auto >supply to drop that puppy in :>) > >I used to work for a Mack dealership and remember marveling at the size >and strength of some of that stuff, although I didn't marvel when trying >to lift some of it. Their V-8 was pretty cool...... > > >Thanks, >Raymond Gonna be an interesting install. Coach up in the air about 4 feet on wood cribbing, build a double A-frame inside over the doghouse...probably use two chain falls to get it up and in. BARE block weighs about 400 lbs. Fully dressed engine more like 1250. Plus 450 or so for the tranny (6 speed Allison.) Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Thu Dec 13 12:19:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:05:28 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:05:28 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s That does not look like an 8 pin connector, Anyway, Why not just buy the sensor and once you have it in hand, try to get the connector. -----Original Message----- From: efi_student [mailto:efi.student@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 3:04 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s http://www.sws.co.jp/stb_e/FRM/FILE/11FILE/sub11.htm Does this look familiar to anyone? I sent a request for contact to Sumitomo USA, I will be enquiring about this connector to see if they would be willing to sell a group buy lot. Obviously, I don't have any details just yet, but I will forward whatever they want to send me. This connector is not limited to the Honda VX. My Honda gurus tell me that this connector is very common, and that there are at least two on every OBDII Honda Civic engine loom, so it isn't necessary to chase down the VX model. Also, the '96-98 Civic HX uses a 5 wire sensor according to my sources, but from a quick perusal of web resources, it appears that Honda is even more proud of this piece than the one used in DIY. It uses the same 8 pin connector and cal resistor scheme. If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful right now. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 11:21 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe obviously). Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Thu Dec 13 12:25:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:07:08 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:07:08 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data recorder. I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking for a cheap way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch and also down track. The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position sensors, I am just looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont allow for that expense when the money is needed else where on the car. Thanks though. BW??? The recorder can sample from 1 Hz to 1000 Hz max. sf -----Original Message----- From: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:34 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > is launching and driving down track. > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > critical to maximizing the performance. Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the displacement over time, from field to field. What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From krwright@wankel.net Thu Dec 13 13:00:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:07:11 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:07:11 -0300 From: Kevin Wright Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 ...and lo, thus spake PorscheRcr@aol.com on 12/12/01: >In a message dated 12/12/2001 2:16:38 PM Pacific Standard Time, >DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@diy-efi.org writes: > ><< It's sort of tight at the front end of the engine bay when you stuff an RX7 > with a small block Ford... >> > >Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have lots of >room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is stuffed back into the >firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I have small feet :) Geez, I'd have gone with a Rover/Buick/Olds aluminum V8 myself, but then, that's been done... Thinking of a Rover V8 in one of my first-gen RX-7s, simply because of weight issues and no been-there done-that syndrome, not to mention slightly easier fitment than the SBC/SBF. Maybe a Lexus or Olds Aurora/NorthStar V8? MegaSquirted, of course! I've also seen one with a Buick GN motor... >Bill J >68 Triumph GT6 V8 (getting Megasquirt) >67 International Travelall (also getting MegaSquirt) >84 Audi 90 Quattro (staying CIS-E for now) -- Kevin Wright Euless, TX krwright@wankel.net krwright@ev1.net http://www.wankel.net/~krwright http://www.wankel.net/~krwright/cars/rx7/rx7.html 1979 Red RX-7 GS - FrankenRex - the only one that runs! 1984 Tender Blue RX-7 GSL-SE Project car - The Blue Bomb - it lives, no more bubbles in the coolant! 1984 Tornado Silver RX-7 GSL-SE Project Car Mark II - The Grey Mouse - no motor :( 1970 Black Olds Cutlass S Sports Coupe - Snoopy - not-quite musclecar 1980 Yellow Suzuki GS450L - as yet unnamed - recovering... 2000 Teal Chevy Astro Van - The Green Brick, my wife's - towing and haulage Not to mention the parts cars... Geez! Where did all these cars come from? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jstauffe@wlgore.com Thu Dec 13 19:03:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:10:55 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:10:55 -0300 From: "Jonathan D Stauffer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB O2 Board and Kit availability I am new to the group, so please bear with me. I am extremely interested in the WB O2setup. Are there any remaining boards and/or parts kits available? Any info you can give me would be great! Thanks, Jonathan Stauffer ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 19:10:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:12:47 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:12:47 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 I expect a dozen 8x10s, with a typed description on the back posted at incoming. Bruce From: > Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have lots of > room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is stuffed back into the > firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I have small feet :) > Bill J ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 19:19:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:13:00 -0300 Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 20:13:00 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup Amps are read in sries, volts in parrarel. Other then richer, or leaner then 14.7:1, it's of no benefit Bruce From: CJYoungDET@aol.com Subject: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html. I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). Chris. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:16:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:16:45 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:16:45 -0800 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #940 Here is a few to get you started in understanding what you need to know to start heavy thinking about water injection. Remember - that there are 8300+ more reports on this server and it will take some searching and correlation and cross indexing to get there - but this is a start. Enjoy http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1922/naca-tn-93/naca-tn-93.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1944/naca-tn-977/naca-tn-977.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1939/naca-tm-899/naca-tm-899.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1943/naca-report-756/naca-report-756.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1945/naca-report-812/naca-report-812.pdf http://nachttp://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1936/naca-report-531/nac http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1936/naca-report-531/naca-report-531.pdfa-report-531.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1933/naca-tn-476/naca-tn-476.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1936/naca-report-512/naca-report-512.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1950/naca-tn-2025/naca-tn-2025.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1939/naca-report-657/naca-report-657.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1946/naca-report-855/naca-report-855.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1940/naca-report-699/naca-report-699.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1948/naca-report-897/naca-report-897.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1940/naca-tn-787/naca-tn-787.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1949/naca-tn-1446/naca-tn-1446.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1949/naca-report-931/naca-report-931.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1945/naca-wr-e-198/naca-wr-e-198.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1947/naca-rm-e6l05a/naca-rm-e6l05a.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1946/naca-tn-1026/naca-tn-1026.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1945/naca-wr-e-280/naca-wr-e-280.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1940/naca-tn-774/naca-tn-774.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1949/naca-tn-1883/naca-tn-1883.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1946/naca-report-853/naca-report-853.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1954/naca-report-1182/naca-report-1182.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1942/naca-tn-861/naca-tn-861.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1948/naca-report-895/naca-report-895.pdf On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 15:13:45 -0800, you wrote: >Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:41:59 -0800 >From: "944Technologist" >Subject: Re: Water Injection > >Which report numbers did you find useful? There are so many turbine engine >reports. > >FR Wilk ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:17:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:17:29 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:17:29 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Just givin you a little Christmas cheer ;-). If everyone were just like me, this would be a VERY boring place, but then again, I would always be right wouldn't I? BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:05 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Generally, I'm just trying to point out the less then obvious, and sometimes, it's hard to get someone's attention. It's odd how often people leap to use the word arguement when it's just discussion. Bruce > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) > >BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:17:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:17:52 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:17:52 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Water Injection I don't know the numbers. I forwarded the address to work (T1 line @ work dialup @ home) & surfed for about an hour. I found 2 on ION, one on O2 sensors, & a number on piston combustion engines. they all were very interesting & informative. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of 944Technologist Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 11:42 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Water Injection Which report numbers did you find useful? There are so many turbine engine reports. FR Wilk ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 8:25 PM Subject: RE: Water Injection > Bob, > > Right on, I found a bunch of stuff @ that site that is VERY informative. I > would love to spend someone else's money blowing stuff up & learning about > how things work & how they don't, this would definately be the ultimate job, > now if only I can get that job & have them not pay me minimum wage. > > interesting commentary on HRM & such, the more I learn, the less in enjoy my > monthly subscriptions, lots of great commercials going on there. > > Tanx for the info. > BW > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Robert Harris > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:23 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Water Injection > > > When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, > misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might > just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject > when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. > > Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports > here > that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to > destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. > > http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ > > Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal > coolant > - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough > that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - > read > the reports. > > Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power > change > ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the > reports again. > > Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. > Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for > fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major > increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher > pressures > can be consumed in a cylinder. > > Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but > by > severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. > > The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use > computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to > destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary > research. > > If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of > their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same > for > most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in > Heywood > or read the research at NACA. > > Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:18:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:18:09 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:18:09 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb bar graph display Something I was considering adding was a 30 LED display covering about 11:1 to 19:1. 20 rich and 10 lean. This leaves out the boosted and lean burn guys, but might have some application. It would be the same circuit as the 36 LED, minus one LM3914 driver and LED group, and about 6 resistors would change value. Bruce Roe ps, I think that is 25 boards for 100+ qty On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 14:25:20 -0800 "David Randall" writes: > www.future-active.com shows a qty 20 pricing of $1.875 for the LM3914. > Price goes to $1.438 with 100+. That's only 50 boards worth for 100+ > qty. > Dave Randall ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:18:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:18:31 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:18:31 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Teeth Sensor I also have thought for a long time, that differentiating the velocity of teeth moving by would be a good way to see the relative power output of each cylinder, with the right dispay. Another project for retirement. Bruce Roe On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:53:21 -0800 (PST) James Montebello writes: > Watching many teeth also gives you the ability to watch > the rate of change of the crank speed more closely, and > potentially divine things like misfires (which should show > up as two anomolously large changes in crank speed > during one or two revolutions) for very sophisticated > control strategies. > james montebello > > On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Orin wrote: > > > > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > > > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:18:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:18:58 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:18:58 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB O2 Wiring Qs I've used unshielded cables to 8'; 15' shielded with no apparent problem. Make sure the heater wire gauge is not so small so at to have a lot of voltage drop. You can check this with it running; I doubled up these wires for the long run. Bruce Roe On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 02:18:34 -0800 "efi_student" writes: > The wiring from the box to the sensor isn't specified, > so I am curious what lengths have been tested and > since I am building a few, I figure it would be best to > get something on a decent sized roll to save expenses. > Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long > with Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone > having noise issues? Is this an experiment and > report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't > want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:19:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:19:12 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:19:12 -0800 From: Lance Subject: Holley ECU to GM ECU? Hi all! I quick question from someone who does definitely NOT know it all! I have [had, actually] a Holley Projection 4Di 900cfm throttle body unit on my 84 Corvette. The computer on this unit has gone to EFI heaven [or hell!], and I'm now suspicious of the longevity of Holley ECUs. So though the Commander 950 is available, I'm not convinced it is for me. I was thinking that with availability of the widely hacked GM ECU 1227747, I might be able to replace the Holley ECU with the GM unit [with a suitably matched custom PROM]. But can I use the 1227747 to drive the 4 low-impedance injectors of the Hollet TB? I assume that if I wire them in parallel, and they have roughly the same impedance as GM units, I will double the current for the ECU to handle. On the other hand, it seems that the 747 has four injector drivers, wired together in pairs. But I could certainly be wrong... So will this work? I haven't actually measured the impedance of the Holley injectors versus the GM units, but will do that very soon. If I can do this ECU conversion, I believe I could use most of the original CFI wiring and just adapt the injectors and the ECU. Any comments? Thanks. Lance Gardiner. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:19:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:19:54 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:19:54 -0800 From: clayb Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 08:36:33 -0500 > From: "Bruce" > Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > > When you get to worring about Better, it's easy to loose track of what's > actually needed, and practical. Heck even if you use a crank posistion > sensor reading directly off of a counter weight, the is some crank flex so > there will be a timing error, from one cylinder to another. Heck even the > block distorts some. > Bruce > Firmly rooted in actually making mechanical noise to test something I agree on the mechanical noises required to test. That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the distributorless ignition stays rock steady. There can be no doubt this has an impact on my ability to tune near the edge of detonation. - Clay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:20:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:20:23 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:20:23 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs The sensor showed up today at 6 pm PST. I'm impressed with the service, they are in NJ! Sad news, it is a 4 wire. Genuine Bosch, but only 4 wires. I guess the cheapest price is really $117.78... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Gary Schaumberg Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? efi_student wrote: > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 > for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known > good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on > the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. > The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector > C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered > one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one > well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor > of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still > patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what > lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it > would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save > expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with > Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? > Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, > I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a > complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So > I doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce > > From: "rob files" > Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > > different > and > > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; Oxygen > > Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen Sensor > > C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 > > Bosch $57.60 Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's > > only $60???? Rob > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:20:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:20:57 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:20:57 -0800 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: First wb_lcd pic The first picture of the wb_lcd is up at http://w.shawsr.home.att.net/WB_LCD.JPG (caps count)! bs ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:21:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:21:28 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:21:28 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Here's a couple... GM OE# 1004771 has 153 teeth. No weight (Some 305 Pontiacs) GM OE# 25501868 has 131 teeth. (Some 3.8L Buicks) Another has 135 teeth on a 4 cyl 1.8L Buick (who cares, right ?) 153 teeth on some 92 305 truck chassis, too--so one would have to be sure. Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Orin" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:13 AM Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > Kinda surprised nobody's mentioned all the available > > tooth counts....148, 160, 162, etc...wouldn't this be > > an added nightmare ? > > Only if it's not a multiple of the number of cylinders/2. > IE. you have an integer number of teeth between each firing. > > Running some numbers on the Audi 5 cyl engines: > > 135 teeth - so 270 per cycle, 72 between each cyl firing. > Resolution is 360/135 degrees - or it would be if they > didn't use BOTH edges of the tooth signal - giving a resolution > of 360/270 or 1.33 degrees. > > Orin. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:21:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:21:37 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:21:37 -0800 From: Richie Austin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: New to group Just wanted to introduce myself to the group. I'm a new member obviously, main interests are learning as much as possible about FI, and learn about building the DIY WB o2 setup. Currently the only "kit" form i've found is the one that techedge.com.au is offering. Just wanting your guys input on it, since you guys are the ones that made it all possible. I really appreciate any feedback, the o2 will be used on a home dyno setup, and another one on a 1990 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX for drag racing. Thanks, Richie end > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:21:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:21:51 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:21:51 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Operating temp Question I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the time. 260 ------ --- --- --- --- --- ----- --- --- --- --- --- 210 ----- --- --- --- --- --- --> ----- --- --- --- --- --- 160 ----- If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or what? Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. Bob Wooten r71chevy@earthlink.net www.r71camaro.homestead.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:22:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:22:56 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:22:56 -0800 From: PorscheRcr@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: V8s in places they didn't come in In a message dated 12/13/2001 4:04:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@diy-efi.org writes: << I expect a dozen 8x10s, with a typed description on the back posted at incoming >> I have plenty of photos Bruce, I could send a couple jpgs if you'd like. Bill J ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:23:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:23:05 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:23:05 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) -> It's been done on some diesels, so nothing new. I think I've also -> heard of Honda doing some "texturing" in the chambers. Some of the new Toyotas have a "fire slot" in the quench area of the piston to direct a jet of gas as the piston passes TDC. I've thought about that one a long while. Best as I can figure it's a hack to get around a problem with end gasses trapper around the spark plug. Then again, it might be something entirely different... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:24:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:24:11 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:24:11 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data > recorder. Computer is digital. I wasn't aware of your limitation of an analogue data recorder. If the camera is digital, use IEEE1394 connection for lossless, digital transfer. You measure the displacement on-screen on a field-by-field basis. > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking > for a cheap way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch > and also down track. > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position > sensors, I am just looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont > allow for that expense when the money is needed else where on the > car. Rotary encoders are somewhat cheaper, depending on enclosures and resolution. Cost really depends on if you already have a camcorder. > Thanks though. > > BW??? The recorder can sample from 1 Hz to 1000 Hz max. What's the frequency of the thing you're trying to measure? Normal (road) suspension dampers cannot respond to frequencies much beyond 100Hz. The suspension relies instead on tyre flexure. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > > is launching and driving down track. > > > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > > critical to maximizing the performance. > > Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 > or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal > into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the > displacement over time, from field to field. > > What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be > measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 00:24:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:24:33 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 00:24:33 -0800 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: HTML in posts Apologies, I didn't realise I had HTML active - my mail setup does reply in the same format as original message though unless I remember to turn it off manually... I'll try and pay more attention. Cheers Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: 13 December 2001 23:08 > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup > > Can you guys turn off the HTML?. > Makes the archives a real mess > TIA > Bruce > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Fri Dec 14 00:08:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:27 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:27 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fo Orin: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > You seem to be somewhat familiar with the Audi turbo set-up. > > So--let's see if we can pick their brains a bit. No point in reinventing > wheels when a reputable mfgr. has done development work, after all !! > > 1. Does Audi use a mag pick-up or a Hall-effect sensor? Magnetic variable reluctance. > 2. Does it face the ring gear radially or from one face? Radially. > 4. Is it any sort of a "smart" sensor ?? (Any on board digital or analog > signal processing in the sensor?) No, same sensors since 80s as far as I can tell. Difference in part numbers seems to be concerned with the connectors and/or cable length. > 5. Do they do any signal processing for this sensor in their ECU?? Simple comparator based circuit on both flywheel teeth and second 'cyl 1' sensor. Just a Schmitt trigger on the flywheel sensor. The second cyl 1 sensor uses a percentage of the previous peak level to compare against with a bleed resistor on the capacitor used to store the previous peak. I have the circuits hand drawn and scanned somewhere. > 6. I take it they use a second sensor for a timing pick-up Does this one > pick up from "lugs" added to the flywheel, or from something else?? Is this > one Hall or mag?? It's a pin inserted in the engine side of the flywheel. > 7. I also assume they use a third sensor off the cam or a dizzy shaft to > get cam position?? Again, Hall or mag?? Hall sensor in the distributor - in fact, the same as the NA engines use to fire the ignition, only with one window rather than 5. > I happen to have one of the Bentley service books for the Quattros, so I > will do some digging too. It should be in there as long as it's for some turbo model between 84 and 95. > Also thinking that a useful ECU function might be to "wife and or bozo > proof" the starter and ring gear-- use a discreet input for a "start" > command and an on/off output to control the starter solenoid via a relay. > Do things like not enable the solenoid if the flywheel sensor is picking up > any engine motion at all, cut juice to the solenoid once the flywheel > sensor frequency goes above a certain level for a particular length of > time, refuse to re-energize the solenoid for "X" seconds after it has been > de-energized (so as to give the starter time to spin down to a full stop). Hint... most of the Audi ECUs don't energize the fuel pump relay until they detect a signal from the flywheel sensor. They also de-energize it a couple of seconds after the signal stops. Unfortunately, they also de-energize it as an overboost or overrev cutoff. > I'm thinking all of these functions would tend to keep the tooth fairies > away from the ring gear. The Audi teeth seem remarkably bozo proof. Seems to take a hydrolocked cylinder or broken starter to break them. Orin. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Thu Dec 13 21:01:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:31 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:31 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: new to the list At 11:42 AM 12/13/01, adam.bahret@vsea.com wrote: >Hi I'm new to the mailing list. >My name is Adam Bahret and I am a mechanical engineer with a BS in >Mechanical Eng and a MS in Mech Eng Computer Systems and analylitical >tools. But foremost I am a basment bomber gear head like the rest of you >and unfortunatley don't have a basement, so I basiccally trash the >apartment regularly. Hey--If you have a Ford FE or Cleveland block for a coffee table base, there are a few here you'd fit right in with-- Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 13 20:04:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:34 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:34 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Sensor. For some reason, they call it a connector, but that is consistent with other Bosch sensors that they list. Odd nomenclature, but what ever works. They have a decent return policy, so if it is wrong, the cost is small, shipping and restocking. I believe I have paid more than that for a number of parts/pieces that got lost/destroyed in experiments or performance trials. If it is five wire, woohoo! Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Gary Schaumberg Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? efi_student wrote: > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 > for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known > good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on > the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. > The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector > C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered > one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one > well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor > of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still > patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what > lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it > would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save > expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with > Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? > Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, > I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Thu Dec 13 20:35:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:38 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:38 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) >Not really, but if the gasses are shot out of the quench area at a super >high velocity, it might break apart the flame front in the chamber area. The >grooves mentioned earlier sound like a good idea, if you can design it >correctly. It's been done on some diesels, so nothing new. I think I've also heard of Honda doing some "texturing" in the chambers. Careful design is _always_ a good idea. :-) > Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Thu Dec 13 20:27:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:41 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:41 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Fo Orin: Starter Tooth Sensor Question OK Orin-- You seem to be somewhat familiar with the Audi turbo set-up. So--let's see if we can pick their brains a bit. No point in reinventing wheels when a reputable mfgr. has done development work, after all !! 1. Does Audi use a mag pick-up or a Hall-effect sensor? 2. Does it face the ring gear radially or from one face? 3. If their sensor faces the ring gear from one face, is it on the same or the opposite side from the side on which the starter pinion engages? 4. Is it any sort of a "smart" sensor ?? (Any on board digital or analog signal processing in the sensor?) 5. Do they do any signal processing for this sensor in their ECU?? 6. I take it they use a second sensor for a timing pick-up Does this one pick up from "lugs" added to the flywheel, or from something else?? Is this one Hall or mag?? 7. I also assume they use a third sensor off the cam or a dizzy shaft to get cam position?? Again, Hall or mag?? I happen to have one of the Bentley service books for the Quattros, so I will do some digging too. Also thinking that a useful ECU function might be to "wife and or bozo proof" the starter and ring gear-- use a discreet input for a "start" command and an on/off output to control the starter solenoid via a relay. Do things like not enable the solenoid if the flywheel sensor is picking up any engine motion at all, cut juice to the solenoid once the flywheel sensor frequency goes above a certain level for a particular length of time, refuse to re-energize the solenoid for "X" seconds after it has been de-energized (so as to give the starter time to spin down to a full stop). I'm thinking all of these functions would tend to keep the tooth fairies away from the ring gear. Greg (ready for a trip to Santa Fe Audi Parts, just south of Denver, to do some scrounging) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 20:07:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:44 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:44 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup Can you guys turn off the HTML?. Makes the archives a real mess TIA Bruce From: Rich M Subject: RE: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup no, just tap off the lambda wire to your meter, leaving the lambda wire connected to the ECU. The other connection from your meter connects to chassis ground. ie. the meter is connected across the lambda sensor in parallel with the ECU. Cheers Rich From: Behalf Of CJYoungDET@aol.com Subject: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html. I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). Sorry to bother you all with this sophomoric question. Chris. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 13 20:00:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:57 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:09:57 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Greg Hermann" Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts > At 9:30 PM 12/12/01, Raymond Brantley wrote: > >My guess is that you don't use an engine hoist rented from a local auto > >supply to drop that puppy in :>) > >I used to work for a Mack dealership and remember marveling at the size > >and strength of some of that stuff, although I didn't marvel when trying > >to lift some of it. Their V-8 was pretty cool...... > >Thanks, > >Raymond > Gonna be an interesting install. Coach up in the air about 4 feet on wood > cribbing, build a double A-frame inside over the doghouse...probably use > two chain falls to get it up and in. > BARE block weighs about 400 lbs. Fully dressed engine more like 1250. Plus > 450 or so for the tranny (6 speed Allison.) > Greg IH 436 head, 200 lbs. tractor rear end casing 800 lbs, empty. Bruce Mass can be a good thing! ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From brian@dessent.net Thu Dec 13 20:52:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:10:06 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:10:06 -0300 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data recorder. He meant just put a video camera on a tripod and record the run and then analyze it to death with a computer. Although I don't know how you would deal with the changing angle (assuming a fixed camera to the side.) > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking for a > cheap > way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch and also down track. > > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position sensors, I > am just > looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont allow for that expense when the > money > is needed else where on the car. What about using a non-contact displacement sensor under the fender that measures distance to the ground? You could either use one in the front and one in the rear, or just a single unit at one fender and an inclinometer to measure the body's angle. The ultrasonic rangefinder is cheap and easily available, but I don't know about its distance resolution. They use them all the time in robots to sense when they are coming close to walls, objects, etc, and in this application they are sensing in the tens of feet range. You might be able to adapt one (with a modified controller) to sense the distance from under the fender to the ground. Since the distance does not change much you don't need much dynamic range and so this might enble you to use a high frequency counter to get the resolution you need. Infrared rangefinding might also be in the realm of DIY, I don't know the details but I think most automatic cameras use this to set focus. (The ultimate cheap source of ultrasonic rangefinders for hobbyists used to be Polaroid cameras which used them for focus.) Since money is an issue I don't think you'll be using laser displacement measuring but it would definitely work just fine. What is your resolution requirement? How much does the suspension move and how precisely do you want to measure it? Do you need to measure at all four corners or would just front/back work? What about just sensing the angle of the chassis instead of displacement of the shocks? Other ideas: - Linear potentiometers that have several inches of travel can be had for a few bucks and would work fine for a quick and dirty setup, assuming you could figure out how to mount them. It's a "poor man's LVDT." (LVDT = an inductor whose core moves in and out, changing the inductance. THe ones I've worked with can measure displacement down to about a micron [0.00004 inch] and they have very little to zero friction.) - You could mount a strain gague either directly to part of a coil spring or put a load cell between the coil spring and its housing. If you have a torsion spring this is an even more attractive idea. This might not be linear and it probably wouldn't relate directly to distance but it would relate directly to the force acting on the wheel, which might be equally useful for suspenstion tuning. Bare (unmounted) strain gagues are pretty cheap and you're not really interested in absolute calibration, just repeatable relative measurements. Omeaga sells packages of 10 for $49. Brian (just brainstorming) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 13 20:22:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:10:10 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:10:10 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? It's a Supra owner's group. Lots of kids, a few with some pretty good ideas, not nearly the expertise here. That's what brought me here, no one on that list was willing to reveal anything about the ECM. Either they don't know (mostly), or they have put too much effort into it, and plan to make money from it. I had hoped that at some point, someone would crack the OEM ECM on the Supra, but it just isn't happening except one guy in Canada, but he's not a programmer, he's just learned how to manipulate the maps, I'd like to know more than just remapping. I've figured I need to learn more to understand the algorithms, and as Bruce said, it's better to learn from something that is already hacked (a known) than to try to invent from a blank sheet. So that's why I'm here. I am also a full disclosure type unless I have been asked to keep something secret, I work in Information Security and specialize in networking. I follow a number of security related subjects too, and I have a bit of the hacker mentality. It helps me do what I do for a living, and I find the hacker mentality to be much the same as the guy who wants to get more out of his machine. Let's see what happens when I do this... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 8:58 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? What is the other list, would be curious what they discuss? -----Original Message----- From: efi_student [mailto:efi.student@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 7:27 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? This is correct. I just did a search through a Honda parts site, and the 49 state model is completely different and MUCH more expensive. Not just the sensor, but the whole exhaust set up. The NB sensor is cheap, that is what you are seeing for under $100. I also have some parts scouts looking for a better price than www.partsbin.com and so far, even with an enticement of a purchase of 10 or more units, no one seems to be able to best that price. BTW, (pulls on hip boots), I have been getting a lot of requests from list members on another list for a DIY-WB unit. I don't have the financial resources to help them all out, but I have offered certain people (whom I believe would both honor the user's agreement AND not complain if they have small issues using the unit because it isn't a commercial item and doesn't have a spiffy display yet, yada, yada) an assembled, tested unit sans sensor (I will test with my own sensor(s) before shipping) for cost of components. The agreement I have made with them is that they MUST abide by the user's agreement, AND report their results back to me for sharing with this list. After all the noise, I think I understand both the letter and intent of the user's agreement. Do the designers agree that this type of distribution is within the bounds of the agreement? Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Kevin _ Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 10:16 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? I believe you need a sensor from a non-CA car. As we know, emission laws are stricter in CA because of smog problems. Therefore, I'm drawing the assumption that the CA version had to run stoich to maintain maximum catalyst efficiency and lowest emissions. You can easily detect stoich with a cheaper, switching narrow-band O2 sensor. In the other states, laws are a little less strict so I'm guessing it was a lean-burn civic VX in 49 states. Just to toss out a question, does anybody know what A:F they ran on the lean-burn side of that VX? I know it couldn't be that lean because its not stratified charge, but I am curious... Kevin >Hey all, > >I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are different >and I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it >can't be beat!). > >So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 VX oxygen sensor >1994- for CA only there are three listings; > >Oxygen Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen >Sensor C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 >Bosch $57.60 > >Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's only $60???? > >Thanks, >Rob _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rsrich@cwcom.net Thu Dec 13 17:29:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:10:16 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:10:16 -0300 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C18414.DED507C0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit no, just tap off the lambda wire to your meter, leaving the lambda wire connected to the ECU. The other connection from your meter connects to chassis ground. ie. the meter is connected across the lambda sensor in parallel with the ECU. Cheers Rich -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of CJYoungDET@aol.com Sent: 13 December 2001 04:58 To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup Hello everyone, I was planning on building one of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html. I was wondering how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a series with the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). Sorry to bother you all with this sophomoric question. Thanks, Chris. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C18414.DED507C0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
no,=20 just tap off the lambda wire to your meter, leaving the lambda wire = connected to the ECU. The other connection from your meter connects to = chassis=20 ground. ie. the meter is connected across the lambda sensor in parallel = with the=20 ECU.
Cheers
Rich
 
-----Original Message-----
From: = owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org=20 [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of=20 CJYoungDET@aol.com
Sent: 13 December 2001 = 04:58
To:=20 diy_efi@diy-efi.org
Subject: O2 Sensor Meter=20 Hookup

Hello=20 everyone,

     I was planning on = building one=20 of the simpler O2 sensor meters like the one on=20 http://www.students.tut.fi/~eppu/dev/EGO-bar.html.   I was = wondering=20 how it was hooked up, it (I have a 1 wire lambada) hooked up in a = series with=20 the meter? (from the sensor to the meter then to the ECU?). =

Sorry to=20 bother you all with this sophomoric question.

Thanks,=20
Chris. ------=_NextPart_000_0035_01C18414.DED507C0-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 13 20:41:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:16:16 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 04:16:16 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s It's the same style. Not the exact connector. If you look at the data sheet it comes in many pin configurations. The key is the inserts, the rounded locking housing and the rubber internal seal. I looked at every connector Sumitomo listed on their site to determine which one looked to be most like the one that I have seen both on the wiring harness and on the sensors themselves. This appears to be it from the description. I am 100% certain that the connector is Sumitomo, it's now just a question of exactly which one it is. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 7:19 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s That does not look like an 8 pin connector, Anyway, Why not just buy the sensor and once you have it in hand, try to get the connector. -----Original Message----- From: efi_student [mailto:efi.student@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 3:04 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s http://www.sws.co.jp/stb_e/FRM/FILE/11FILE/sub11.htm Does this look familiar to anyone? I sent a request for contact to Sumitomo USA, I will be enquiring about this connector to see if they would be willing to sell a group buy lot. Obviously, I don't have any details just yet, but I will forward whatever they want to send me. This connector is not limited to the Honda VX. My Honda gurus tell me that this connector is very common, and that there are at least two on every OBDII Honda Civic engine loom, so it isn't necessary to chase down the VX model. Also, the '96-98 Civic HX uses a 5 wire sensor according to my sources, but from a quick perusal of web resources, it appears that Honda is even more proud of this piece than the one used in DIY. It uses the same 8 pin connector and cal resistor scheme. If anyone has an inside line with Sumitomo, it could be very useful right now. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 11:21 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: DIY Wideband Completed Pictures and Calibrating Resistor ?s From: "Perry, Scott" > But doesn't this require having the mating connector? Unfortunately I don't have time to go to junk yards looking for a Civic VX wiring harness to mate to the O2 sensor connector. Maybe you have other suggestions... Maybe someone with an extra would volunteer one. . Lacking that, there are blade ends, wire ties and RTV (sensor safe obviously). Bruce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Thu Dec 13 22:18:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:54:05 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:54:05 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data > recorder. Computer is digital. I wasn't aware of your limitation of an analogue data recorder. If the camera is digital, use IEEE1394 connection for lossless, digital transfer. You measure the displacement on-screen on a field-by-field basis. > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking > for a cheap way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch > and also down track. > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position > sensors, I am just looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont > allow for that expense when the money is needed else where on the > car. Rotary encoders are somewhat cheaper, depending on enclosures and resolution. Cost really depends on if you already have a camcorder. > Thanks though. > > BW??? The recorder can sample from 1 Hz to 1000 Hz max. What's the frequency of the thing you're trying to measure? Normal (road) suspension dampers cannot respond to frequencies much beyond 100Hz. The suspension relies instead on tyre flexure. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > > is launching and driving down track. > > > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > > critical to maximizing the performance. > > Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 > or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal > into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the > displacement over time, from field to field. > > What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be > measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From w.shawsr@att.net Thu Dec 13 23:11:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:54:05 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:54:05 -0300 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: First wb_lcd pic The first picture of the wb_lcd is up at http://w.shawsr.home.att.net/WB_LCD.JPG (caps count)! bs ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rca90gsx@yahoo.com Fri Dec 14 00:40:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:54:44 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:54:44 -0300 From: Richie Austin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: New to group Just wanted to introduce myself to the group. I'm a new member obviously, main interests are learning as much as possible about FI, and learn about building the DIY WB o2 setup. Currently the only "kit" form i've found is the one that techedge.com.au is offering. Just wanting your guys input on it, since you guys are the ones that made it all possible. I really appreciate any feedback, the o2 will be used on a home dyno setup, and another one on a 1990 Mitsubishi Eclipse GSX for drag racing. Thanks, Richie end > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Thu Dec 13 21:22:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:54:59 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:54:59 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WB O2 Wiring Qs I've used unshielded cables to 8'; 15' shielded with no apparent problem. Make sure the heater wire gauge is not so small so at to have a lot of voltage drop. You can check this with it running; I doubled up these wires for the long run. Bruce Roe On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 02:18:34 -0800 "efi_student" writes: > The wiring from the box to the sensor isn't specified, > so I am curious what lengths have been tested and > since I am building a few, I figure it would be best to > get something on a decent sized roll to save expenses. > Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long > with Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone > having noise issues? Is this an experiment and > report back to the list item (that's fine, I'll do it, just don't > want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Thu Dec 13 21:09:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:55:03 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:55:03 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Teeth Sensor I also have thought for a long time, that differentiating the velocity of teeth moving by would be a good way to see the relative power output of each cylinder, with the right dispay. Another project for retirement. Bruce Roe On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:53:21 -0800 (PST) James Montebello writes: > Watching many teeth also gives you the ability to watch > the rate of change of the crank speed more closely, and > potentially divine things like misfires (which should show > up as two anomolously large changes in crank speed > during one or two revolutions) for very sophisticated > control strategies. > james montebello > > On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Orin wrote: > > > > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > > > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bob@bobthecomputerguy.com Thu Dec 13 22:16:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:55:14 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:55:14 -0300 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #940 Here is a few to get you started in understanding what you need to know to start heavy thinking about water injection. Remember - that there are 8300+ more reports on this server and it will take some searching and correlation and cross indexing to get there - but this is a start. Enjoy http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1922/naca-tn-93/naca-tn-93.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1944/naca-tn-977/naca-tn-977.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1939/naca-tm-899/naca-tm-899.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1943/naca-report-756/naca-report-756.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1945/naca-report-812/naca-report-812.pdf http://nachttp://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1936/naca-report-531/nac http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1936/naca-report-531/naca-report-531.pdfa-report-531.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1933/naca-tn-476/naca-tn-476.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1936/naca-report-512/naca-report-512.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1950/naca-tn-2025/naca-tn-2025.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1939/naca-report-657/naca-report-657.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1946/naca-report-855/naca-report-855.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1940/naca-report-699/naca-report-699.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1948/naca-report-897/naca-report-897.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1940/naca-tn-787/naca-tn-787.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1949/naca-tn-1446/naca-tn-1446.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1949/naca-report-931/naca-report-931.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1945/naca-wr-e-198/naca-wr-e-198.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1947/naca-rm-e6l05a/naca-rm-e6l05a.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1946/naca-tn-1026/naca-tn-1026.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1945/naca-wr-e-280/naca-wr-e-280.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1940/naca-tn-774/naca-tn-774.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1949/naca-tn-1883/naca-tn-1883.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1946/naca-report-853/naca-report-853.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1954/naca-report-1182/naca-report-1182.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1942/naca-tn-861/naca-tn-861.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1948/naca-report-895/naca-report-895.pdf On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 15:13:45 -0800, you wrote: >Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:41:59 -0800 From: "944Technologist" >Subject: Re: Water Injection > >Which report numbers did you find useful? There are so many turbine engine >reports. > >FR Wilk ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 13 23:57:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:55:37 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:55:37 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs The sensor showed up today at 6 pm PST. I'm impressed with the service, they are in NJ! Sad news, it is a 4 wire. Genuine Bosch, but only 4 wires. I guess the cheapest price is really $117.78... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Gary Schaumberg Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? efi_student wrote: > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 > for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known > good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on > the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. > The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector > C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered > one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one > well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor > of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still > patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what > lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it > would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save > expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with > Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? > Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, > I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a > complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So > I doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce > > From: "rob files" > Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > > different > and > > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; Oxygen > > Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen Sensor > > C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 > > Bosch $57.60 Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's > > only $60???? Rob > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From lance.gardiner@shaw.ca Thu Dec 13 22:57:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:56:56 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:56:56 -0300 From: Lance Subject: Holley ECU to GM ECU? Hi all! I quick question from someone who does definitely NOT know it all! I have [had, actually] a Holley Projection 4Di 900cfm throttle body unit on my 84 Corvette. The computer on this unit has gone to EFI heaven [or hell!], and I'm now suspicious of the longevity of Holley ECUs. So though the Commander 950 is available, I'm not convinced it is for me. I was thinking that with availability of the widely hacked GM ECU 1227747, I might be able to replace the Holley ECU with the GM unit [with a suitably matched custom PROM]. But can I use the 1227747 to drive the 4 low-impedance injectors of the Hollet TB? I assume that if I wire them in parallel, and they have roughly the same impedance as GM units, I will double the current for the ECU to handle. On the other hand, it seems that the 747 has four injector drivers, wired together in pairs. But I could certainly be wrong... So will this work? I haven't actually measured the impedance of the Holley injectors versus the GM units, but will do that very soon. If I can do this ECU conversion, I believe I could use most of the original CFI wiring and just adapt the injectors and the ECU. Any comments? Thanks. Lance Gardiner. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Thu Dec 13 23:16:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:57:49 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:57:49 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: diy-wb bar graph display Something I was considering adding was a 30 LED display covering about 11:1 to 19:1. 20 rich and 10 lean. This leaves out the boosted and lean burn guys, but might have some application. It would be the same circuit as the 36 LED, minus one LM3914 driver and LED group, and about 6 resistors would change value. Bruce Roe ps, I think that is 25 boards for 100+ qty On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 14:25:20 -0800 "David Randall" writes: > www.future-active.com shows a qty 20 pricing of $1.875 for the LM3914. > Price goes to $1.438 with 100+. That's only 50 boards worth for 100+ > qty. > Dave Randall ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Fri Dec 14 00:53:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:58:10 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:58:10 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Operating temp Question I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the time. 260 ------ --- --- --- --- --- ----- --- --- --- --- --- 210 ----- --- --- --- --- --- --> ----- --- --- --- --- --- 160 ----- If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or what? Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. Bob Wooten r71chevy@earthlink.net www.r71camaro.homestead.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clayb@sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 13 23:30:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:58:27 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:58:27 -0300 From: clayb Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 08:36:33 -0500 > From: "Bruce" > Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > > When you get to worring about Better, it's easy to loose track of what's > actually needed, and practical. Heck even if you use a crank posistion > sensor reading directly off of a counter weight, the is some crank flex so > there will be a timing error, from one cylinder to another. Heck even the > block distorts some. > Bruce > Firmly rooted in actually making mechanical noise to test something I agree on the mechanical noises required to test. That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the distributorless ignition stays rock steady. There can be no doubt this has an impact on my ability to tune near the edge of detonation. - Clay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Fri Dec 14 00:00:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:11 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:11 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) -> It's been done on some diesels, so nothing new. I think I've also -> heard of Honda doing some "texturing" in the chambers. Some of the new Toyotas have a "fire slot" in the quench area of the piston to direct a jet of gas as the piston passes TDC. I've thought about that one a long while. Best as I can figure it's a hack to get around a problem with end gasses trapper around the spark plug. Then again, it might be something entirely different... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Thu Dec 13 22:31:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:15 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:15 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Turbo Chubby parts Just givin you a little Christmas cheer ;-). If everyone were just like me, this would be a VERY boring place, but then again, I would always be right wouldn't I? BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:05 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts Generally, I'm just trying to point out the less then obvious, and sometimes, it's hard to get someone's attention. It's odd how often people leap to use the word arguement when it's just discussion. Bruce > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) > >BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From PorscheRcr@aol.com Fri Dec 14 01:55:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:16 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:16 -0300 From: PorscheRcr@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: V8s in places they didn't come in In a message dated 12/13/2001 4:04:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@diy-efi.org writes: << I expect a dozen 8x10s, with a typed description on the back posted at incoming >> I have plenty of photos Bruce, I could send a couple jpgs if you'd like. Bill J ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rsrich@cwcom.net Fri Dec 14 04:25:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:18 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:18 -0300 From: "Rich M" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: HTML in posts Apologies, I didn't realise I had HTML active - my mail setup does reply in the same format as original message though unless I remember to turn it off manually... I'll try and pay more attention. Cheers Rich > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: 13 December 2001 23:08 > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: O2 Sensor Meter Hookup > > Can you guys turn off the HTML?. > Makes the archives a real mess > TIA > Bruce > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Thu Dec 13 22:39:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:20 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:59:20 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Water Injection I don't know the numbers. I forwarded the address to work (T1 line @ work dialup @ home) & surfed for about an hour. I found 2 on ION, one on O2 sensors, & a number on piston combustion engines. they all were very interesting & informative. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of 944Technologist Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 11:42 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Water Injection Which report numbers did you find useful? There are so many turbine engine reports. FR Wilk ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 8:25 PM Subject: RE: Water Injection > Bob, > > Right on, I found a bunch of stuff @ that site that is VERY informative. I > would love to spend someone else's money blowing stuff up & learning about > how things work & how they don't, this would definately be the ultimate job, > now if only I can get that job & have them not pay me minimum wage. > > interesting commentary on HRM & such, the more I learn, the less in enjoy my > monthly subscriptions, lots of great commercials going on there. > > Tanx for the info. > BW > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Robert Harris > Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 9:23 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Water Injection > > > When you grow up enough to get tired of the HRM and other myths, > misinformation, conjecture, hype, anti-hype and general bullshit you might > just want to read up on what your tax payer dollars paid for on the subject > when lives were dependent upon the advantages it provides. > > Check out the NACA report server - there are literally dozens of reports > here > that were created using test engines, dynos etc specifically testing to > destruction various facets of engine design including water injection. > > http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/ > > Some generals from the testing. Water injection works as an internal > coolant > - absorbing energy from both the charge and the cylinder. Works well enough > that at high levels greatly reduces the heat lost to the jacket. Fact - > read > the reports. > > Water injection replaces excess fuel used for coolant with little power > change > ( favoring water injection ) right down to about stoic. Fact - read the > reports again. > > Excess fuel ( Rich mixture ) is used primarily for charge/internal coolant. > Power output water vs rich about the same up to the detontation limit for > fuel. Water however, can be used to much higher limits and allows major > increases in power over fuel because far more charge at much higher > pressures > can be consumed in a cylinder. > > Upper limit for water injection testing was limited not by combustion, but > by > severe water contamination of the lubricating oil. > > The NACA stuff is kind of hard to accept. Silly arsed bastards didn't use > computers or math models - they actually built engines, tested them to > destruction and recorded their results. Oh - silly me - that's primary > research. > > If you worship the Taylors, did you know they did the research for most of > their books at NACA and you can get copies of the original research? Same > for > most of the other prominent writers. You can read the sound bites in > Heywood > or read the research at NACA. > > Pleasant reading for the few - the rest - enjoy the myths. > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Thu Dec 13 23:41:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 06:00:24 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 06:00:24 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question Here's a couple... GM OE# 1004771 has 153 teeth. No weight (Some 305 Pontiacs) GM OE# 25501868 has 131 teeth. (Some 3.8L Buicks) Another has 135 teeth on a 4 cyl 1.8L Buick (who cares, right ?) 153 teeth on some 92 305 truck chassis, too--so one would have to be sure. Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Orin" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:13 AM Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > Kinda surprised nobody's mentioned all the available > > tooth counts....148, 160, 162, etc...wouldn't this be > > an added nightmare ? > > Only if it's not a multiple of the number of cylinders/2. > IE. you have an integer number of teeth between each firing. > > Running some numbers on the Audi 5 cyl engines: > > 135 teeth - so 270 per cycle, 72 between each cyl firing. > Resolution is 360/135 degrees - or it would be if they > didn't use BOTH edges of the tooth signal - giving a resolution > of 360/270 or 1.33 degrees. > > Orin. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:36:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:36:43 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:36:43 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Any reason not to go with the longer 6.125" rods if I can find them for a > reasonable price? Not really, except for the fact that you may not want the piston ring pack that close to the crown due to heat build up. See how close the top ring is to the piston top I don't think you need to worry about side loading on that block if you destroke it and use longer rods The long stroke and short rods are what cuases the high cylinder wall loads on the stock 400 > Not really, but if the gasses are shot out of the quench area at a super > high velocity, it might break apart the flame front in the chamber area. The > grooves mentioned earlier sound like a good idea, if you can design it > correctly. >From what I understand that high velocity is what mixes the gases in a more homogenous manner to avoid detonation. > Nice! Now what exactly constitutes a 3 core intercooler compared to a single > core or double core? I assume it's just 3 small ones welded side to side? > I'm running the Spearco 2-182 core with 3" mandrel bent/TIG'd plumbing > in/out of the IC, and 2.5" to the merge prior to the IC. 3 side by side with 3 inch tubing full length from compressor to throttle body ( converted 4 barrel Holley base with tps and IAC) > > Probably switching from ACCEL DFI to FAST bank to bank wide band > > O2 control. > > I'm going to try and make the DFI work for this iteration, but I'll need to > source a VIC cheaply somehow. I just don't have the time to build the > MegaFueler y'all designed here :( I have DFI ECU, harness,software.cable and spare ECU to control extra injectors for sale. Interested? > > Hydraulic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in bungs > Do you know anyone running this manifold on boost? (yeah, it sounds like > drugs.. Uh huh. I'm on boost, but I'm staying off the wagon!) He he he. Only John Legenfelter > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > http://www.skulte.com > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:37:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:37:01 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:37:01 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor bcroe@juno.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:53:21 -0800 (PST) James Montebello > writes: > > Watching many teeth also gives you the ability to watch > > the rate of change of the crank speed more closely, and > > potentially divine things like misfires (which should show > > up as two anomolously large changes in crank speed > > during one or two revolutions) for very sophisticated > > control strategies. > I also have thought for a long time, that differentiating > the velocity of teeth moving by would be a good way to > see the relative power output of each cylinder, with the > right dispay. Another project for retirement. Also published in SAE's SP-1418: "Indicated and Load Torque Estimation using Crankshaft Angular Velocity Measurement" by P.M. Azzoni, G. Minelli and D. Moro (DIEM - univ. of Bologna) and R. Flora and G. Serra (Magneti Marelli - engine control division) SAE 1999-01-0543 The math's isn't very "comfortable" but necessary for implementation. Their main concern at the time was the "computing load" and simplifying the algorithms. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:37:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:37:31 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:37:31 -0800 From: "James Ballenger" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor IIRC, it is a two tooth wheel (180 degree oppossed teeth) on a cam with a sensor mounted in the valve cover. It is very similar to the crank sensor setup except for it's location difference the the difference in the number of teeth. I don't see why they used two teeth 180 degrees opposed because you then lose the ability to sync your signal according to a particular valve event (say combustion vs intake on #1). James Ballenger > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Santi Udomkesmalee > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:07 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor > > > >The engine we just acquired is a CBR600 F4i. It has a > factory magnetic > >reluctor cam sensor. I haven't pulled the valve cover to > see how it works > >yet, but it is located on the non-driven side of the cam and > the wires exit > >through a rubber grommet between the head and the valve cover. > > if you get a chance to look inside, I'd love to hear how they > set up the cam > sensor. > > -santi > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:37:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:37:55 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:37:55 -0800 From: skulte MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor There were one or two technical sessions exactly about this at last years (2001) SAE World Congress. The Technical Reports should be available off the http://www.sae.org website for $10 non members and $8 members. It will probably shave some time off development if ya decide to retire and go for it! ;) Andris Skulte Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 bcroe@juno.com wrote: > I also have thought for a long time, that differentiating > the velocity of teeth moving by would be a good way to > see the relative power output of each cylinder, with the > right dispay. Another project for retirement. > > Bruce Roe > > On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:53:21 -0800 (PST) James Montebello > writes: > > > Watching many teeth also gives you the ability to watch > > the rate of change of the crank speed more closely, and > > potentially divine things like misfires (which should show > > up as two anomolously large changes in crank speed > > during one or two revolutions) for very sophisticated > > control strategies. > > > james montebello > > > > On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Orin wrote: > > > > > > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > > > > > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs http://www.skulte.com Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:38:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:38:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:38:14 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question The final answer is don't trust the gauge, use a scan tool. The gauge is best used for relative readings. Shannen Bob Wooten wrote: > > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:38:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:38:30 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:38:30 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) At 10:00 PM 12/13/01, Dave Williams wrote: >-> It's been done on some diesels, so nothing new. I think I've also >-> heard of Honda doing some "texturing" in the chambers. > > Some of the new Toyotas have a "fire slot" in the quench area of the >piston to direct a jet of gas as the piston passes TDC. > > I've thought about that one a long while. Best as I can figure it's a >hack to get around a problem with end gasses trapper around the spark >plug. Then again, it might be something entirely different... I'm thinking more like a way to direct a swirl in the chamber in a consistent direction as it burns. Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:39:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:39:31 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:39:31 -0800 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question The number of teeth vs the number of cylinders need not be a limitation. There are at least two ways to go: 1) Hardware: use a Phase Locked Loop to generate the pulses that correspond to the individual cylinders. 2) Software: use the ECU, or a dedicated PIC, to derive the cylinder timing from the tooth and TDC signals. The number teeth and the number of cylinders are known. Tracking elapsed time from tooth to tooth allows you to determine accelleration, so that any interpolation between tooth signals can be as accurate as possible. Of the two, the software method would probably be the most accurate. It's also posible with ECU or PIC, to create a virtual PLL, using programmable timers in place of the VCO. This allows you to implement some sophisticated loop filter strategies that overcome the limitations of a purely hardware PLL, settling time, loop stability, damping factors, etc. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:39:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:39:43 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:39:43 -0800 From: adam.bahret@vsea.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs So where is the best place to buy the WB O2 sensor for 117.78? Adam In response to : Hey--If you have a Ford FE or Cleveland block for a coffee table base, there are a few here you'd fit right in with-- Greg ::: Does having your wife walk in and catch you with a Honda Engine spread out on the living room floor count? I think I would have been better off if it had been a naked Vic Secret model Adam "efi_student" Sent by: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org 12/13/01 09:57 PM Please respond to diy_efi To: cc: Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs The sensor showed up today at 6 pm PST. I'm impressed with the service, they are in NJ! Sad news, it is a 4 wire. Genuine Bosch, but only 4 wires. I guess the cheapest price is really $117.78... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Gary Schaumberg Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? efi_student wrote: > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 > for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known > good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on > the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. > The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector > C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered > one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one > well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor > of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still > patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what > lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it > would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save > expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with > Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? > Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, > I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a > complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So > I doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce > > From: "rob files" > Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > > different > and > > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; Oxygen > > Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen Sensor > > C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 > > Bosch $57.60 Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's > > only $60???? Rob > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:40:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:40:07 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:40:07 -0800 From: "Nic van der Walt" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: First wb_lcd pic > The first picture of the wb_lcd is up at http://w.shawsr.home.att.net/WB_LCD.JPG (caps count)! Cool. Does it work? ;-) How did you get the 00 to display without a processor connected? Regards, Nic. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 10:40:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:40:40 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:40:40 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question The non contact displacement sensor is what I had mentioned as a potential optical to reflective device, I was just in the wrong frequency range. If we can mount a device that outputs a signal to a reflective surface and then measure the time to return, we know the distance. Sounds easy, however, it would require some technology that can calculate the time for the signal to travel? How complicated is it to design a circuit that would output a voltage relative to a displacement? For shock travel, we are talking about 4 (+/- 1) in Inch displacement. Where can I get info for non contact displacement sensors? I will do a search, but do you have a good source? Sounds like the 180 sensor aren't that expensive after all. Linear Pots (the cheap ones) will not work at the Freqs that the shock moves, I have been told to record between 500 and 1000 Hz for these measurements. How exactly does a strain gauge work? Does the output voltage change depending on how hard you pull on it? -----Original Message----- From: Brian Dessent [mailto:brian@dessent.net] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 6:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data recorder. He meant just put a video camera on a tripod and record the run and then analyze it to death with a computer. Although I don't know how you would deal with the changing angle (assuming a fixed camera to the side.) > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking for a > cheap > way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch and also down track. > > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position sensors, I > am just > looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont allow for that expense when the > money > is needed else where on the car. What about using a non-contact displacement sensor under the fender that measures distance to the ground? You could either use one in the front and one in the rear, or just a single unit at one fender and an inclinometer to measure the body's angle. The ultrasonic rangefinder is cheap and easily available, but I don't know about its distance resolution. They use them all the time in robots to sense when they are coming close to walls, objects, etc, and in this application they are sensing in the tens of feet range. You might be able to adapt one (with a modified controller) to sense the distance from under the fender to the ground. Since the distance does not change much you don't need much dynamic range and so this might enble you to use a high frequency counter to get the resolution you need. Infrared rangefinding might also be in the realm of DIY, I don't know the details but I think most automatic cameras use this to set focus. (The ultimate cheap source of ultrasonic rangefinders for hobbyists used to be Polaroid cameras which used them for focus.) Since money is an issue I don't think you'll be using laser displacement measuring but it would definitely work just fine. What is your resolution requirement? How much does the suspension move and how precisely do you want to measure it? Do you need to measure at all four corners or would just front/back work? What about just sensing the angle of the chassis instead of displacement of the shocks? Other ideas: - Linear potentiometers that have several inches of travel can be had for a few bucks and would work fine for a quick and dirty setup, assuming you could figure out how to mount them. It's a "poor man's LVDT." (LVDT = an inductor whose core moves in and out, changing the inductance. THe ones I've worked with can measure displacement down to about a micron [0.00004 inch] and they have very little to zero friction.) - You could mount a strain gague either directly to part of a coil spring or put a load cell between the coil spring and its housing. If you have a torsion spring this is an even more attractive idea. This might not be linear and it probably wouldn't relate directly to distance but it would relate directly to the force acting on the wheel, which might be equally useful for suspenstion tuning. Bare (unmounted) strain gagues are pretty cheap and you're not really interested in absolute calibration, just repeatable relative measurements. Omeaga sells packages of 10 for $49. Brian (just brainstorming) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Dec 14 07:31:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:01:02 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:01:02 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor bcroe@juno.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:53:21 -0800 (PST) James Montebello > writes: > > Watching many teeth also gives you the ability to watch > > the rate of change of the crank speed more closely, and > > potentially divine things like misfires (which should show > > up as two anomolously large changes in crank speed > > during one or two revolutions) for very sophisticated > > control strategies. > I also have thought for a long time, that differentiating > the velocity of teeth moving by would be a good way to > see the relative power output of each cylinder, with the > right dispay. Another project for retirement. Also published in SAE's SP-1418: "Indicated and Load Torque Estimation using Crankshaft Angular Velocity Measurement" by P.M. Azzoni, G. Minelli and D. Moro (DIEM - univ. of Bologna) and R. Flora and G. Serra (Magneti Marelli - engine control division) SAE 1999-01-0543 The math's isn't very "comfortable" but necessary for implementation. Their main concern at the time was the "computing load" and simplifying the algorithms. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From adam.bahret@vsea.com Fri Dec 14 11:04:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:01:50 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:01:50 -0300 From: adam.bahret@vsea.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs So where is the best place to buy the WB O2 sensor for 117.78? Adam In response to : Hey--If you have a Ford FE or Cleveland block for a coffee table base, there are a few here you'd fit right in with-- Greg ::: Does having your wife walk in and catch you with a Honda Engine spread out on the living room floor count? I think I would have been better off if it had been a naked Vic Secret model Adam "efi_student" Sent by: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org 12/13/01 09:57 PM Please respond to diy_efi To: cc: Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs The sensor showed up today at 6 pm PST. I'm impressed with the service, they are in NJ! Sad news, it is a 4 wire. Genuine Bosch, but only 4 wires. I guess the cheapest price is really $117.78... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Gary Schaumberg Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? efi_student wrote: > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 > for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known > good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on > the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. > The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector > C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered > one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one > well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor > of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still > patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what > lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it > would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save > expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with > Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? > Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, > I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > Lance > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:43 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > Just looking at the prices something is wrong. > Bosch repackages the NTK in their own packaging so as to offer a > complete product line (at least that's what it looks like to me). So > I doubt they would be selling them at or below cost. Bruce > > From: "rob files" > Subject: Which WB O2 sensor is OK? > > I know there was a recent post about this, but the prices are > > different > and > > I want to make sure the bosch part is the same (for the price, it > > can't be beat!). So from www.thepartsbin.com listing under Civic 1.5 > > VX oxygen sensor 1994- for CA only there are three listings; Oxygen > > Sensor C5010-62878 NTK Oxygen Sensor by NGK $94.31 Oxygen Sensor > > C5010-100896 Denso $99.98 Oxygen Sensor OE Connector C5010-88818 > > Bosch $57.60 Can it be true that the Bosch is the same and it's > > only $60???? Rob > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ------ > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nvdw@ifoni.com Fri Dec 14 11:11:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:02 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:02 -0300 From: "Nic van der Walt" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: First wb_lcd pic > The first picture of the wb_lcd is up at http://w.shawsr.home.att.net/WB_LCD.JPG (caps count)! Cool. Does it work? ;-) How did you get the 00 to display without a processor connected? Regards, Nic. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From skulte@skulte.com Fri Dec 14 10:36:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:13 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:13 -0300 From: skulte MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor There were one or two technical sessions exactly about this at last years (2001) SAE World Congress. The Technical Reports should be available off the http://www.sae.org website for $10 non members and $8 members. It will probably shave some time off development if ya decide to retire and go for it! ;) Andris Skulte Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 bcroe@juno.com wrote: > I also have thought for a long time, that differentiating > the velocity of teeth moving by would be a good way to > see the relative power output of each cylinder, with the > right dispay. Another project for retirement. > > Bruce Roe > > On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 13:53:21 -0800 (PST) James Montebello > writes: > > > Watching many teeth also gives you the ability to watch > > the rate of change of the crank speed more closely, and > > potentially divine things like misfires (which should show > > up as two anomolously large changes in crank speed > > during one or two revolutions) for very sophisticated > > control strategies. > > > james montebello > > > > On Tue, 11 Dec 2001, Orin wrote: > > > > > > Bernd Felsche wrote: > > > > > > > > > > You mean the starter drive teeth on the flywheel for timing? > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs http://www.skulte.com Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clshore@yahoo.com Fri Dec 14 11:04:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:14 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:14 -0300 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question The number of teeth vs the number of cylinders need not be a limitation. There are at least two ways to go: 1) Hardware: use a Phase Locked Loop to generate the pulses that correspond to the individual cylinders. 2) Software: use the ECU, or a dedicated PIC, to derive the cylinder timing from the tooth and TDC signals. The number teeth and the number of cylinders are known. Tracking elapsed time from tooth to tooth allows you to determine accelleration, so that any interpolation between tooth signals can be as accurate as possible. Of the two, the software method would probably be the most accurate. It's also posible with ECU or PIC, to create a virtual PLL, using programmable timers in place of the VCO. This allows you to implement some sophisticated loop filter strategies that overcome the limitations of a purely hardware PLL, settling time, loop stability, damping factors, etc. Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 14 11:00:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:24 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:24 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) At 10:00 PM 12/13/01, Dave Williams wrote: >-> It's been done on some diesels, so nothing new. I think I've also >-> heard of Honda doing some "texturing" in the chambers. > > Some of the new Toyotas have a "fire slot" in the quench area of the >piston to direct a jet of gas as the piston passes TDC. > > I've thought about that one a long while. Best as I can figure it's a >hack to get around a problem with end gasses trapper around the spark >plug. Then again, it might be something entirely different... I'm thinking more like a way to direct a swirl in the chamber in a consistent direction as it burns. Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From vtjballeng@yifan.net Fri Dec 14 08:41:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:30 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:30 -0300 From: "James Ballenger" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor IIRC, it is a two tooth wheel (180 degree oppossed teeth) on a cam with a sensor mounted in the valve cover. It is very similar to the crank sensor setup except for it's location difference the the difference in the number of teeth. I don't see why they used two teeth 180 degrees opposed because you then lose the ability to sync your signal according to a particular valve event (say combustion vs intake on #1). James Ballenger > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Santi Udomkesmalee > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2001 12:07 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor > > > >The engine we just acquired is a CBR600 F4i. It has a > factory magnetic > >reluctor cam sensor. I haven't pulled the valve cover to > see how it works > >yet, but it is located on the non-driven side of the cam and > the wires exit > >through a rubber grommet between the head and the valve cover. > > if you get a chance to look inside, I'd love to hear how they > set up the cam > sensor. > > -santi > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at > http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Fri Dec 14 06:44:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:32 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:32 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Any reason not to go with the longer 6.125" rods if I can find them for a > reasonable price? Not really, except for the fact that you may not want the piston ring pack that close to the crown due to heat build up. See how close the top ring is to the piston top I don't think you need to worry about side loading on that block if you destroke it and use longer rods The long stroke and short rods are what cuases the high cylinder wall loads on the stock 400 > Not really, but if the gasses are shot out of the quench area at a super > high velocity, it might break apart the flame front in the chamber area. The > grooves mentioned earlier sound like a good idea, if you can design it > correctly. >From what I understand that high velocity is what mixes the gases in a more homogenous manner to avoid detonation. > Nice! Now what exactly constitutes a 3 core intercooler compared to a single > core or double core? I assume it's just 3 small ones welded side to side? > I'm running the Spearco 2-182 core with 3" mandrel bent/TIG'd plumbing > in/out of the IC, and 2.5" to the merge prior to the IC. 3 side by side with 3 inch tubing full length from compressor to throttle body ( converted 4 barrel Holley base with tps and IAC) > > Probably switching from ACCEL DFI to FAST bank to bank wide band > > O2 control. > > I'm going to try and make the DFI work for this iteration, but I'll need to > source a VIC cheaply somehow. I just don't have the time to build the > MegaFueler y'all designed here :( I have DFI ECU, harness,software.cable and spare ECU to control extra injectors for sale. Interested? > > Hydraulic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in bungs > Do you know anyone running this manifold on boost? (yeah, it sounds like > drugs.. Uh huh. I'm on boost, but I'm staying off the wagon!) He he he. Only John Legenfelter > ------------------ > Andris Skulte > Skulte Performance Designs > Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > http://www.skulte.com > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Mon Dec 14 10:38:19 1998 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:40 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:02:40 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question The final answer is don't trust the gauge, use a scan tool. The gauge is best used for relative readings. Shannen Bob Wooten wrote: > > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Fri Dec 14 11:13:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:03:44 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:03:44 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question The non contact displacement sensor is what I had mentioned as a potential optical to reflective device, I was just in the wrong frequency range. If we can mount a device that outputs a signal to a reflective surface and then measure the time to return, we know the distance. Sounds easy, however, it would require some technology that can calculate the time for the signal to travel? How complicated is it to design a circuit that would output a voltage relative to a displacement? For shock travel, we are talking about 4 (+/- 1) in Inch displacement. Where can I get info for non contact displacement sensors? I will do a search, but do you have a good source? Sounds like the 180 sensor aren't that expensive after all. Linear Pots (the cheap ones) will not work at the Freqs that the shock moves, I have been told to record between 500 and 1000 Hz for these measurements. How exactly does a strain gauge work? Does the output voltage change depending on how hard you pull on it? -----Original Message----- From: Brian Dessent [mailto:brian@dessent.net] Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 6:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data recorder. He meant just put a video camera on a tripod and record the run and then analyze it to death with a computer. Although I don't know how you would deal with the changing angle (assuming a fixed camera to the side.) > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking for a > cheap > way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch and also down track. > > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position sensors, I > am just > looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont allow for that expense when the > money > is needed else where on the car. What about using a non-contact displacement sensor under the fender that measures distance to the ground? You could either use one in the front and one in the rear, or just a single unit at one fender and an inclinometer to measure the body's angle. The ultrasonic rangefinder is cheap and easily available, but I don't know about its distance resolution. They use them all the time in robots to sense when they are coming close to walls, objects, etc, and in this application they are sensing in the tens of feet range. You might be able to adapt one (with a modified controller) to sense the distance from under the fender to the ground. Since the distance does not change much you don't need much dynamic range and so this might enble you to use a high frequency counter to get the resolution you need. Infrared rangefinding might also be in the realm of DIY, I don't know the details but I think most automatic cameras use this to set focus. (The ultimate cheap source of ultrasonic rangefinders for hobbyists used to be Polaroid cameras which used them for focus.) Since money is an issue I don't think you'll be using laser displacement measuring but it would definitely work just fine. What is your resolution requirement? How much does the suspension move and how precisely do you want to measure it? Do you need to measure at all four corners or would just front/back work? What about just sensing the angle of the chassis instead of displacement of the shocks? Other ideas: - Linear potentiometers that have several inches of travel can be had for a few bucks and would work fine for a quick and dirty setup, assuming you could figure out how to mount them. It's a "poor man's LVDT." (LVDT = an inductor whose core moves in and out, changing the inductance. THe ones I've worked with can measure displacement down to about a micron [0.00004 inch] and they have very little to zero friction.) - You could mount a strain gague either directly to part of a coil spring or put a load cell between the coil spring and its housing. If you have a torsion spring this is an even more attractive idea. This might not be linear and it probably wouldn't relate directly to distance but it would relate directly to the force acting on the wheel, which might be equally useful for suspenstion tuning. Bare (unmounted) strain gagues are pretty cheap and you're not really interested in absolute calibration, just repeatable relative measurements. Omeaga sells packages of 10 for $49. Brian (just brainstorming) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:17:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:17:59 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:17:59 -0800 From: "Kevin Grover" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Most of the gauges in the newer cars aren't linear. I recall reading an article about the corvette in particular where a customer complained that it was overheating because the gauge got into the upper range. The scan tool said that the temp was only like 200 where the gauge was closer to 260. They move faster in the middle. That mark might really be 200 or 205. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:53 PM Subject: Operating temp Question > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:18:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:18:12 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:18:12 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Bob, It should have a 195 stat--but some of these run on the cool side anyways. Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 8:53 PM Subject: Operating temp Question > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:18:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:18:30 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:18:30 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question I was thinking about the only one that mattered: 168 teeth, evenly divisable by 8. Used on 11" clutched SBC & BBC. (not the only one everybody cares about? ). BobR. Programmer wrote: > Here's a couple... > > GM OE# 1004771 has 153 teeth. No weight (Some 305 Pontiacs) > GM OE# 25501868 has 131 teeth. (Some 3.8L Buicks) > Another has 135 teeth on a 4 cyl 1.8L Buick (who cares, right ?) > 153 teeth on some 92 305 truck chassis, too--so one would have to be sure. > > Lyndon. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Orin" > To: > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:13 AM > Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > > > Kinda surprised nobody's mentioned all the available > > > tooth counts....148, 160, 162, etc...wouldn't this be > > > an added nightmare ? > > > > Only if it's not a multiple of the number of cylinders/2. > > IE. you have an integer number of teeth between each firing. > > > > Running some numbers on the Audi 5 cyl engines: > > > > 135 teeth - so 270 per cycle, 72 between each cyl firing. > > Resolution is 360/135 degrees - or it would be if they > > didn't use BOTH edges of the tooth signal - giving a resolution > > of 360/270 or 1.33 degrees. > > > > Orin. > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:18:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:18:57 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:18:57 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) From: "clayb" > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor > firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the > distributorless ignition stays rock steady. > There can be no doubt this has an impact on my ability to tune near the > edge of detonation. > - Clay At idle it would wonder that much?, or thru out the rpm range. How big of cam?. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:19:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:19:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:19:14 -0800 From: "Jon Snoddy" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Not sure if this will work, but I think is should: Plug the data recorder analog output signal into a laptop's analog audio input and record it to an uncompressed wave file. View it with an audio editing program. Audio editing programs provide a timeline view that will have very accurate time marks in seconds, fractions of seconds and even samples (44k per second). Another cool trick is that the input is stereo, so you can record and display two channels of data at once. Using one of the many multi-track recorders, you can view successive recordings on top of one another on the same time line. Record audio with a microphone on one channel so you can hear bumps and engine speed (easy to arrive at RPM from pitch) in time synch to the shock data. Hmmm. I'm beginning to like this idea. You will need to install a "pad" to reduce the signal from 0-4v down to about 0-1 volt (what is that, 6db?) to keep from overloading the input of the laptop. I imagine you can buy a 6db pad at Radio Shack. Many computers have low pass filters at the front end that make it impossible to record DC which means that any movement at a rate slower than 50 to 20 Hz would come out as a straight line. There are many audio A/D cards available for desktop units or with a firewire connector on a laptop, some of which have defeatable low pass filters. You will want to make sure the voltage is limited to what ever your line input can tolerate. -jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bernd Felsche Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 5:18 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data > recorder. Computer is digital. I wasn't aware of your limitation of an analogue data recorder. If the camera is digital, use IEEE1394 connection for lossless, digital transfer. You measure the displacement on-screen on a field-by-field basis. > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking > for a cheap way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch > and also down track. > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position > sensors, I am just looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont > allow for that expense when the money is needed else where on the > car. Rotary encoders are somewhat cheaper, depending on enclosures and resolution. Cost really depends on if you already have a camcorder. > Thanks though. > > BW??? The recorder can sample from 1 Hz to 1000 Hz max. What's the frequency of the thing you're trying to measure? Normal (road) suspension dampers cannot respond to frequencies much beyond 100Hz. The suspension relies instead on tyre flexure. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > > is launching and driving down track. > > > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > > critical to maximizing the performance. > > Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 > or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal > into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the > displacement over time, from field to field. > > What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be > measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:19:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:19:27 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:19:27 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question GM OEM guages are just slightly less then laughable for accuracy. Whereas some of the Ford ones are. Bruce From: "Bob Wooten" > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the >time. > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > Bob Wooten ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:19:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:19:50 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:19:50 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor >The math's isn't very "comfortable" but necessary for >implementation. Their main concern at the time was the "computing >load" and simplifying the algorithms. Paper published in '99, work probably done in'97 and '98, likely using hardware from '96 or so vintage?? Concern with the cost, feasibility, and processor time of such calculations has decreased by what, 80 or 90%, since then?? 555 PPC "Black Oak", and/or parallel processing, here we come !! Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:20:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:20:43 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:20:43 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > >> > Hydraulic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in >bungs > Take a LONG, careful look at using mushroom lifters instead of rollers for the type of lift, valve rates, and duration you will want for a turbo engine. They will kick even a mechanical roller across the shop for quick and high lift at short durations ! Greg >> Andris Skulte >> Skulte Performance Designs >> Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo >> http://www.skulte.com >> ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:21:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:21:04 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:21:04 -0800 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: When ION's daddy was a gleam in the mailmans eye Technology for auto spark control based on ionization from the 40's. Food for this generation thought. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1947/naca-report-886/naca-report-886.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1945/naca-wr-e-199/naca-wr-e-199.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1940/naca-tn-774/naca-tn-774.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1952/naca-tn-2703/naca-tn-2703.pdf ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:21:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:21:19 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:21:19 -0800 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > The non contact displacement sensor is what I had mentioned as a potential > optical to reflective device, I was just in the wrong frequency range. If > we can mount a device that outputs a signal to a reflective surface and then > measure the time to return, we know the distance. Sounds easy, however, it > would require some technology that can calculate the time for the signal to > travel? How complicated is it to design a circuit that would output a > voltage relative to a displacement? If you do a Google search for "ultrasonic rangefinder" you'll get some OK links. However, the more I think about it I don't think this would be the best way. They probably don't have the resolution you would need. You said you're measuring a 4" shock travel, but what resolution do you need? Knowing this will help you choose the right solution. The ultrasonic transducers would probably only be able to give you a measurement within an inch or two, using the stock electronics. You might be able to build a custom signal conditioner to get higher precision but you could spent a long time working on such a thing. > Linear Pots (the cheap ones) will not work at the Freqs that the shock > moves, I have been told to record between 500 and 1000 Hz for these > measurements. Well, do what you wish, but that seems WAY to high to me. The sprung mass resonates at about 1 Hz and the unsprung mass resonates at around 10-20 Hz. You could roughly estimate these frequencies with sqrt(k/m)/(2*Pi), where k = spring rate and m = mass (make sure to use consistant units.) Vibrations above the resonant frequency are absorbed almost completely by the tires. See: http://www.umtri.umich.edu/erd/roughness/every.pdf I would measure DC (i.e. 0 Hz) to 50 Hz at most. Since you said you are interested in 1/4 mile times, I take this to mean you want to know front/rear weight transfer, and this would be a very LOW frequency signal since you're accelerating hard pretty much the whole time. > How exactly does a strain gauge work? Does the output voltage change > depending on how hard you pull on it? It measures strain. :-) Seriously, take any elastic material and apply a force (stress) and it reacts by deforming (strain.) For solids, stress is proportional to strain and the constant that relates them is called the modulus of elasticity. A strain gauge is usually a thin piece of conductive material that changes its resistance with strain. Used alone, it's pretty worthless. What's so neat about it is you can bond it to whatever structure you're interested in and it will measure the amount of strain, and by doing some calculations you can relate this to the stress in the structure, which in turn will tell you when/if it will fail. For example, you could bond a strain gauge to a steel i-beam in a skyscraper to see how much it flexes in the wind to know if your building is going to fall over in a hurricane. Anyway, what I was talking about would be to buy a small strain gauge, epoxy it to part of the coilspring, build/buy a signal conditioner (simple instrumentation op-amp circuit, the full scale signal is probably 20mV or so), and then datalog the resulting signal. It would be proportional to deflection of the coil spring if you choose the right location for the strain gauge. Go to www.omega.com and find their section on strain gauges, they should have lots of background and application hints. Bernd's idea of mounting a camera on the car with a view of the suspension and then analyzing it with a computer is looking more and more attractive. The hard part would be finding room to mount it where it could record a picture of the suspension. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:33:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:33:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:33:14 -0800 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: Re: Fo Orin: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > 5. Do they do any signal processing for this sensor in their ECU?? > >Simple comparator based circuit on both flywheel teeth and second >'cyl 1' sensor. Just a Schmitt trigger on the flywheel sensor. >The second cyl 1 sensor uses a percentage of the previous peak >level to compare against with a bleed resistor on the capacitor used >to store the previous peak. > >I have the circuits hand drawn and scanned somewhere. < MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Shannen Durphey wrote: > > The final answer is don't trust the gauge, use a scan tool. > The gauge is best used for relative readings. > Shannen My scan tool shows that the gauge is more or less accurate, the thing I'm curious about is the scan tool only shows temps in increments of 12 degrees or so (it's been a while, I can't remember exactly). ie it'll jump from 201 to 213 while sitting at a light, 213 back to 201 when I start going. Not sure if all of them do that or not. BTW, Bob, my temp usually sits in the same place on the gauge as yours. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:45:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:36:21 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:36:21 -0800 From: Brian Renegar Subject: WB 02, get here.... (was: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and >So where is the best place to buy the WB O2 sensor for 117.78? > >Adam www.thepartsbin.com has them for that price. I ordered mine, and got it the next day (NJ to MD). Not to be mean, but this has been discussed MANY times. I really don't see why this issue keeps coming back up (unless from a new comer). Go there and order it. It's that simple! Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 17:00:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:36:54 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:36:54 -0800 From: "William Shurvinton" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 V8 in a sprite, now that even beats the guy on UK version of scrapheap wars who put a jag V12 in a trike. Hrrrm, maybe I should buy that $300 Rx-7 and pop a small block in. ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Williams To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:02 PM Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 > > -> Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have > -> lots of room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is > -> stuffed back into the firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I > -> have small feet :) > > I put a 400 Chevy small block and a Powerglide into a '72 Spitfire, > does that count? I notched the firewall boxes too. The > automatic transmission required from frame surgery, but it was free. A > friend's girlfriend could weld, and she cut the rails out one at a time > where they wrapped around the stock trans, flipped them the other way, > and welded them back in. Then we laid papier-mache over the > transmission and several layers of Wal-Mart fiberglass cloth and resin > to make a new transmission tunnel. Form-fit when we removed the paper. > > It never saw the road, unfortunately. The buddy who owned it went off > to college and lost interest, and instead of selling it to me, he gave > it to the school's engineering department, who removed the V8 and put in > some junkyard bits to convert it to an "electric car." Which proved to > me there was plenty of political correctness but no intelligence at > Oklahoma State... > > The RX7 is a breeze, though. > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:37:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:37:16 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:37:16 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Another, better When you have all the *better* stuff. http://porsche.pdxmax.com/misc/vipercrash.mpeg better, being ABS, etc. well, the air bags worked. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 16:37:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:37:35 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 16:37:35 -0800 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs If you check the site www.gapa.com they have a pic of i think both of the honda sensors for the 96 1.6 auto- i believe they are both 3 wire-- but there is a front and rear sensor- check it out... one of them is listed as NTK sensor by NGK... Camden > >Sensor. For some reason, they call it a connector, but that is >consistent with other Bosch sensors that they list. Odd nomenclature, >but what ever works. They have a decent return policy, so if it is >wrong, the cost is small, shipping and restocking. I believe I have >paid more than that for a number of parts/pieces that got lost/destroyed >in experiments or performance trials. If it is five wire, woohoo! > >Lance > >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On >Behalf Of Gary Schaumberg >Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:53 PM >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs > > >Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? > >efi_student wrote: > > > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 > > for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known > > good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > > > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on > > the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. > > The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector > > C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered > > one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one > > well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor > > of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still > > patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > > > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what > > lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it > > would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save > > expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with > > Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? > > > Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, > > I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > > > Lance > > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:25:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:25:20 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:25:20 -0800 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fo Orin: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > > 5. Do they do any signal processing for this sensor in their ECU?? > > > >Simple comparator based circuit on both flywheel teeth and second > >'cyl 1' sensor. Just a Schmitt trigger on the flywheel sensor. > >The second cyl 1 sensor uses a percentage of the previous peak > >level to compare against with a bleed resistor on the capacitor used > >to store the previous peak. > > > >I have the circuits hand drawn and scanned somewhere. > > > < Subject: DIY_WB Data logging? Thanks for the heads up on the leftover DIY_WB PCB boards and kits....I'm waiting anxiously for my chance to get one. (Warning: I'm about to start talking about things I know very little about.) It looks like the group has the DIY_WB board working since several fellow have successfully tried it out now....and there are at least a couple of people working on output displays. One LED bar graph and another LCD numeric display. I was wondering if anyone has thought of some kind of data logging circuit for the WB 02? I know Fluke makes some nice DMM's that have logging capabilities, but they aren't exactly cheap. And cheap is what I like. I do have some familiarity with some SBC's which would have no problem logging the DIY_WB's voltage signal thru a A/D input board...I'm thinking of PC104...or similar, but this is kind of overkill just to record one voltage signal vs. time. I'm looking at this from the perspective of a drag racer, so the longest sample time I would really need will be 30-60 seconds max, with a sample rate of 0.5 - 1.0 Hz. Therefore we're only talking about 60-120 samples to collect. The playback part will be tricky I suspect. My technical background is in Mechanical Engineering so most electronics go under the "magic smoke" category. Would an embedded PC chip such as the Basic STAMP or PIC chips be able to do something like this for a minimum of $$$$$? If so, is there some info on the web that would give me a quick tutorial on how to accomplish this? It is fairly easy to get a curve fit equation for the 02 volts vs. A/F ratio curve Currently I'm using an old IBM 730TE tablet pc running a package called TurboLink to collect ALDL data during a run. The developer has an optional boost sensing harness that uses the IAT connector to hook up a 3 bar map to get a boost signal into the ALDL stream. It ~MAY~ be possible to sacrifice another sensor (I'm thinking that the coolant temp sensor could be given a "dummy" value of 165degF) to bring the DIY_WB signal into the ALDL. But this may not even be practical. It would be nice to have all the info in TurboLink though. On a side note....Within the Buick Grand National community there is a fellow who makes some pretty nice instrument/gauge enclosures for the GN's. His work is top notch and most of the parts are engraved with graphics and text. He does custom work, so he may be able to fabricate a nice enclosure for the DIY_WB if we can come up with a drawing of what we want. Just an idea...personally I'd rather have a nice looking case sitting on the dash of my car than a breadboard rat's nest of wires (I'm speaking of my own handywork and not anyone's on the list). Sorry for so long. Thanks, John ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:25:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:25:57 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:25:57 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Got a link to any info on them? What can you tell me about them Greg? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Hermann" To: Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 2:32 PM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > > >> > Hydraulic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in > >bungs > > > Take a LONG, careful look at using mushroom lifters instead of rollers for > the type of lift, valve rates, and duration you will want for a turbo > engine. They will kick even a mechanical roller across the shop for quick > and high lift at short durations ! > > Greg > > >> Andris Skulte > >> Skulte Performance Designs > >> Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > >> http://www.skulte.com > >> > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:26:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:26:21 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:26:21 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > At 10:00 PM 12/13/01, Dave Williams wrote: > >-> It's been done on some diesels, so nothing new. I think I've also > >-> heard of Honda doing some "texturing" in the chambers. > > > > Some of the new Toyotas have a "fire slot" in the quench area of the > >piston to direct a jet of gas as the piston passes TDC. > > > > I've thought about that one a long while. Best as I can figure it's a > >hack to get around a problem with end gasses trapper around the spark > >plug. Then again, it might be something entirely different... > > I'm thinking more like a way to direct a swirl in the chamber in a > consistent direction as it burns. > Have any pics or graphics of such? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:26:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:26:56 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:26:56 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Home for an injector Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. Next, has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what kind of success have you had. Bruce Doc's been day dreaming. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:27:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:27:21 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:27:21 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB 02, get here.... (was: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs) From: "Brian Renegar" Subject: WB 02, get here.... (was: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs) > >So where is the best place to buy the WB O2 sensor for 117.78? > >Adam > www.thepartsbin.com has them for that price. I ordered mine, and got it > the next day (NJ to MD). > Not to be mean, but this has been discussed MANY times. I really don't see > why this issue keeps coming back up (unless from a new comer). Go there > and order it. It's that simple! > Brian Sure you are, and petulant, LOL Bruce Just couldn't resist.... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:28:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:28:00 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:28:00 -0800 From: "The Punisher" Subject: WB O2 sensor versions?? I found a NTK 5-wire sensor on a honda civic at a wrecking yard last year. The car was wrecked and striped down quite a lot so I am not sure about the year. BUT the sensor does NOT have the same plug as the one people are using on the DIY-WB unit. It has 2 wires going to one plug and the other three going another plug. I seem to have temporarily misplaced it, but I recall the wire colors being the same as the WB everybody is using. and the 2 wire plug had the same wire colors as the heater wires on the known WB sensor.(seperate driver module for the heater?) Is anybody familiar with this sensor??? thanks: Marvin Fugate >To: > cc: > Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs > > >The sensor showed up today at 6 pm PST. I'm impressed with the service, >they are in NJ! Sad news, it is a 4 wire. Genuine Bosch, but only 4 >wires. I guess the cheapest price is really $117.78... > >Lance > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:28:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:28:42 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:28:42 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Kevin Grover wrote: > > Most of the gauges in the newer cars aren't linear. I recall reading an > article about the corvette in particular where a customer complained that it > was overheating because the gauge got into the upper range. The scan tool > said that the temp was only like 200 where the gauge was closer to 260. > They move faster in the middle. That mark might really be 200 or 205. Dunno about the latest generation 'Vette, but later c4's had a sticker on the instrument cluster saying that the analogue gauges are not accurate. Many of the c4's came with a digital display for temp. This reading was to be used rather than the analogue reading. Bob Wooten wrote: > I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base > or what? Fan speed is usually varied by applying system voltage through PWM rather varying applied voltage through analogue methods. It's kinda like trying to make a single speed hand drill turn at slower speeds by repeatedly pulling and releasing the trigger. Shannen ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:29:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:29:02 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:29:02 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Brian Dessent tapped away at the keyboard with: > Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > > How exactly does a strain gauge work? Does the output voltage change > > depending on how hard you pull on it? > It measures strain. :-) Seriously, take any elastic material and apply > a force (stress) and it reacts by deforming (strain.) For solids, > stress is proportional to strain and the constant that relates them is > called the modulus of elasticity. A strain gauge is usually a thin > piece of conductive material that changes its resistance with strain. > Used alone, it's pretty worthless. What's so neat about it is you can > bond it to whatever structure you're interested in and it will measure > the amount of strain, and by doing some calculations you can relate this > to the stress in the structure, which in turn will tell you when/if it > will fail. For example, you could bond a strain gauge to a steel i-beam > in a skyscraper to see how much it flexes in the wind to know if your > building is going to fall over in a hurricane. Anyway, what I was > talking about would be to buy a small strain gauge, epoxy it to part of > the coilspring, build/buy a signal conditioner (simple instrumentation > op-amp circuit, the full scale signal is probably 20mV or so), and then > datalog the resulting signal. It would be proportional to deflection > of the coil spring if you choose the right location for the strain > gauge. Go to www.omega.com and find their section on strain gauges, > they should have lots of background and application hints. Depending on the spring's mass, you'll also see oscillations over its length following a sudden change of external load. It's a distributed mass-spring oscillation. A low-pass filter should eliminate most of that signal content. > Bernd's idea of mounting a camera on the car with a view of the > suspension and then analyzing it with a computer is looking more and > more attractive. The hard part would be finding room to mount it where > it could record a picture of the suspension. Pointing alongside the vehicle, using mirrors or stakes for the reference points if they're not directly visible. If you use a pair of mirrors and mount the camera pointing downwards, you can see both front and back axles. Some sort of fluid mount (as on the head of most camera tripods) prevents much of the vibration being transferred to the camera. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:29:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:29:36 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:29:36 -0800 From: "gape" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #940 Bruce, I have been reading the Digest format of the DIY Lists on and off for some time. I don't add to much to it very often but wanted to say "gladly admit it Bruce, you like to argue.." and even argue about not arguing, but that's ok cause it adds to the list and Technical stuff can often get dry unless it is spruced up by flavored comments and "discussions". Keeps me awake late at night and often lol. I am all in favor of "discussions". On to business. I would like it that if anyone has access to the wiring diagrams for the turbo 3.1L 727 ECM (<= GM calls it ECM up here) to update the jpgs in the archive so at least they can be read. Also all in favor of updated injector identification list. I can add to the updates as well. Thanks, Joseph Guthrie. AScT. GAPE Guthrie Applied Performance Engineering. Winfield, BC > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:05:23 -0500 > From: "Bruce" > Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > Generally, I'm just trying to point out the less then obvious, and > sometimes, it's hard to get someone's attention. It's odd how often people > leap to use the word arguement when it's just discussion. > Bruce > > > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) > > >BW > > > - ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ------------------------------ > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:30:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:30:08 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:30:08 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >The math's isn't very "comfortable" but necessary for > >implementation. Their main concern at the time was the "computing > >load" and simplifying the algorithms. > Paper published in '99, work probably done in'97 and '98, likely using > hardware from '96 or so vintage?? > Concern with the cost, feasibility, and processor time of such > calculations has decreased by what, 80 or 90%, since then?? Correct... more like 90% in terms of performance. Hardware cost remains relatively unchanged for a "box". Software costs increase with complexity. > 555 PPC "Black Oak", and/or parallel processing, here we come !! It's not immediately necessary to implement the first computation method on the most-powerful uC hardware! Trying to get a relatively- accurate timing reference is something that's useful, but it's not something deserving hundreds of dollars in hardware. There is more than one way to approach the calculation. Certainly more than one way to implement the same algorithm. An cheap 8-bit uC can probably be used to provide accurate micro-ticks and other information directly to the ECU. i.e. your flywheel position sensor becomes a "smart" sensor. That is the trend anyway; to sensors that pre-process the raw data and communicate filtered and compensated data to the ECU. As long as the communications protocol is "open", that promotes modularity. Not only does that mean that the ECU requires less grunt, it also means that sensors can be replaced by improved sensors without any change to the ECU. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Fri Dec 14 13:07:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:30:36 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:30:36 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Bob, It should have a 195 stat--but some of these run on the cool side anyways. Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 8:53 PM Subject: Operating temp Question > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:30:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:30:46 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:30:46 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Operating temp Question Isn't the gauge run off the temp sensor that feeds the ECM? If that is the case, what is inaccurate the sensor or the gauge? BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Shannen Durphey Sent: Monday, December 14, 1998 5:38 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Operating temp Question The final answer is don't trust the gauge, use a scan tool. The gauge is best used for relative readings. Shannen Bob Wooten wrote: > > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:43:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:31:09 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:31:09 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Operating temp Question Hmmmmm, I tried to count the tick marks in the gauge & did not come up with an even number & thought that it must be non linear, but did not think twice about it & just did the little math trick. Suppose that that you might be right. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Kevin Grover Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 6:53 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Most of the gauges in the newer cars aren't linear. I recall reading an article about the corvette in particular where a customer complained that it was overheating because the gauge got into the upper range. The scan tool said that the temp was only like 200 where the gauge was closer to 260. They move faster in the middle. That mark might really be 200 or 205. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:53 PM Subject: Operating temp Question > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:31:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:31:42 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:31:42 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Operating temp Question At 1:12 PM 12/14/01, Bruce wrote: >GM OEM guages are just slightly less then laughable for accuracy. >Whereas some of the Ford ones are. >Bruce > Are WHAT--_TOTALLY_ laughable?? 8-O> Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 14 15:05:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:31:57 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:31:57 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) From: "clayb" > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor > firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the > distributorless ignition stays rock steady. > There can be no doubt this has an impact on my ability to tune near the > edge of detonation. > - Clay At idle it would wonder that much?, or thru out the rpm range. How big of cam?. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 14 21:32:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:32:09 -0800 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:32:09 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 Hello William, A bike was recently sold here that held the record as the longest in the world, packing 3 V12 Jag engines, the pictures were quite impressive, unfortunately I cant find you any pics Saturday, December 15, 2001, 10:28:56 AM, you wrote: WS> V8 in a sprite, now that even beats the guy on UK version of scrapheap wars WS> who put a jag V12 in a trike. WS> Hrrrm, maybe I should buy that $300 Rx-7 and pop a small block in. -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 14 16:28:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:32:22 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:32:22 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor >The math's isn't very "comfortable" but necessary for >implementation. Their main concern at the time was the "computing >load" and simplifying the algorithms. Paper published in '99, work probably done in'97 and '98, likely using hardware from '96 or so vintage?? Concern with the cost, feasibility, and processor time of such calculations has decreased by what, 80 or 90%, since then?? 555 PPC "Black Oak", and/or parallel processing, here we come !! Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bob@bobthecomputerguy.com Fri Dec 14 17:32:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:32:29 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:32:29 -0300 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: When ION's daddy was a gleam in the mailmans eye Technology for auto spark control based on ionization from the 40's. Food for this generation thought. http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1947/naca-report-886/naca-report-886.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1945/naca-wr-e-199/naca-wr-e-199.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1940/naca-tn-774/naca-tn-774.pdf http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/reports/1952/naca-tn-2703/naca-tn-2703.pdf ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 14 15:12:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:32:33 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:32:33 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question GM OEM guages are just slightly less then laughable for accuracy. Whereas some of the Ford ones are. Bruce From: "Bob Wooten" > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the >time. > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > Bob Wooten ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From brian@dessent.net Fri Dec 14 17:57:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:33:04 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:33:04 -0300 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > The non contact displacement sensor is what I had mentioned as a potential > optical to reflective device, I was just in the wrong frequency range. If > we can mount a device that outputs a signal to a reflective surface and then > measure the time to return, we know the distance. Sounds easy, however, it > would require some technology that can calculate the time for the signal to > travel? How complicated is it to design a circuit that would output a > voltage relative to a displacement? If you do a Google search for "ultrasonic rangefinder" you'll get some OK links. However, the more I think about it I don't think this would be the best way. They probably don't have the resolution you would need. You said you're measuring a 4" shock travel, but what resolution do you need? Knowing this will help you choose the right solution. The ultrasonic transducers would probably only be able to give you a measurement within an inch or two, using the stock electronics. You might be able to build a custom signal conditioner to get higher precision but you could spent a long time working on such a thing. > Linear Pots (the cheap ones) will not work at the Freqs that the shock > moves, I have been told to record between 500 and 1000 Hz for these > measurements. Well, do what you wish, but that seems WAY to high to me. The sprung mass resonates at about 1 Hz and the unsprung mass resonates at around 10-20 Hz. You could roughly estimate these frequencies with sqrt(k/m)/(2*Pi), where k = spring rate and m = mass (make sure to use consistant units.) Vibrations above the resonant frequency are absorbed almost completely by the tires. See: http://www.umtri.umich.edu/erd/roughness/every.pdf I would measure DC (i.e. 0 Hz) to 50 Hz at most. Since you said you are interested in 1/4 mile times, I take this to mean you want to know front/rear weight transfer, and this would be a very LOW frequency signal since you're accelerating hard pretty much the whole time. > How exactly does a strain gauge work? Does the output voltage change > depending on how hard you pull on it? It measures strain. :-) Seriously, take any elastic material and apply a force (stress) and it reacts by deforming (strain.) For solids, stress is proportional to strain and the constant that relates them is called the modulus of elasticity. A strain gauge is usually a thin piece of conductive material that changes its resistance with strain. Used alone, it's pretty worthless. What's so neat about it is you can bond it to whatever structure you're interested in and it will measure the amount of strain, and by doing some calculations you can relate this to the stress in the structure, which in turn will tell you when/if it will fail. For example, you could bond a strain gauge to a steel i-beam in a skyscraper to see how much it flexes in the wind to know if your building is going to fall over in a hurricane. Anyway, what I was talking about would be to buy a small strain gauge, epoxy it to part of the coilspring, build/buy a signal conditioner (simple instrumentation op-amp circuit, the full scale signal is probably 20mV or so), and then datalog the resulting signal. It would be proportional to deflection of the coil spring if you choose the right location for the strain gauge. Go to www.omega.com and find their section on strain gauges, they should have lots of background and application hints. Bernd's idea of mounting a camera on the car with a view of the suspension and then analyzing it with a computer is looking more and more attractive. The hard part would be finding room to mount it where it could record a picture of the suspension. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Jon@Snoddy.net Fri Dec 14 15:13:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:33:07 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:33:07 -0300 From: "Jon Snoddy" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Not sure if this will work, but I think is should: Plug the data recorder analog output signal into a laptop's analog audio input and record it to an uncompressed wave file. View it with an audio editing program. Audio editing programs provide a timeline view that will have very accurate time marks in seconds, fractions of seconds and even samples (44k per second). Another cool trick is that the input is stereo, so you can record and display two channels of data at once. Using one of the many multi-track recorders, you can view successive recordings on top of one another on the same time line. Record audio with a microphone on one channel so you can hear bumps and engine speed (easy to arrive at RPM from pitch) in time synch to the shock data. Hmmm. I'm beginning to like this idea. You will need to install a "pad" to reduce the signal from 0-4v down to about 0-1 volt (what is that, 6db?) to keep from overloading the input of the laptop. I imagine you can buy a 6db pad at Radio Shack. Many computers have low pass filters at the front end that make it impossible to record DC which means that any movement at a rate slower than 50 to 20 Hz would come out as a straight line. There are many audio A/D cards available for desktop units or with a firewire connector on a laptop, some of which have defeatable low pass filters. You will want to make sure the voltage is limited to what ever your line input can tolerate. -jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bernd Felsche Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 5:18 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data > recorder. Computer is digital. I wasn't aware of your limitation of an analogue data recorder. If the camera is digital, use IEEE1394 connection for lossless, digital transfer. You measure the displacement on-screen on a field-by-field basis. > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking > for a cheap way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch > and also down track. > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position > sensors, I am just looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont > allow for that expense when the money is needed else where on the > car. Rotary encoders are somewhat cheaper, depending on enclosures and resolution. Cost really depends on if you already have a camcorder. > Thanks though. > > BW??? The recorder can sample from 1 Hz to 1000 Hz max. What's the frequency of the thing you're trying to measure? Normal (road) suspension dampers cannot respond to frequencies much beyond 100Hz. The suspension relies instead on tyre flexure. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > > is launching and driving down track. > > > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > > critical to maximizing the performance. > > Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 > or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal > into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the > displacement over time, from field to field. > > What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be > measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Fri Dec 14 14:43:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:37:23 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:37:23 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question I was thinking about the only one that mattered: 168 teeth, evenly divisable by 8. Used on 11" clutched SBC & BBC. (not the only one everybody cares about? ). BobR. Programmer wrote: > Here's a couple... > > GM OE# 1004771 has 153 teeth. No weight (Some 305 Pontiacs) > GM OE# 25501868 has 131 teeth. (Some 3.8L Buicks) > Another has 135 teeth on a 4 cyl 1.8L Buick (who cares, right ?) > 153 teeth on some 92 305 truck chassis, too--so one would have to be sure. > > Lyndon. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Orin" > To: > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:13 AM > Subject: Re: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > > > Kinda surprised nobody's mentioned all the available > > > tooth counts....148, 160, 162, etc...wouldn't this be > > > an added nightmare ? > > > > Only if it's not a multiple of the number of cylinders/2. > > IE. you have an integer number of teeth between each firing. > > > > Running some numbers on the Audi 5 cyl engines: > > > > 135 teeth - so 270 per cycle, 72 between each cyl firing. > > Resolution is 360/135 degrees - or it would be if they > > didn't use BOTH edges of the tooth signal - giving a resolution > > of 360/270 or 1.33 degrees. > > > > Orin. > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From atvman@rochester.rr.com Fri Dec 14 11:52:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:38:42 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:38:42 -0300 From: "Kevin Grover" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Most of the gauges in the newer cars aren't linear. I recall reading an article about the corvette in particular where a customer complained that it was overheating because the gauge got into the upper range. The scan tool said that the temp was only like 200 where the gauge was closer to 260. They move faster in the middle. That mark might really be 200 or 205. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:53 PM Subject: Operating temp Question > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Fri Dec 14 16:32:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:45:02 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:45:02 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > >> > Hydraulic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in >bungs > Take a LONG, careful look at using mushroom lifters instead of rollers for the type of lift, valve rates, and duration you will want for a turbo engine. They will kick even a mechanical roller across the shop for quick and high lift at short durations ! Greg >> Andris Skulte >> Skulte Performance Designs >> Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo >> http://www.skulte.com >> ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 14 20:30:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:45:34 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:45:34 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Another, better When you have all the *better* stuff. http://porsche.pdxmax.com/misc/vipercrash.mpeg better, being ABS, etc. well, the air bags worked. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From cjl169@hotmail.com Fri Dec 14 18:01:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:45:42 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:45:42 -0300 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs If you check the site www.gapa.com they have a pic of i think both of the honda sensors for the 96 1.6 auto- i believe they are both 3 wire-- but there is a front and rear sensor- check it out... one of them is listed as NTK sensor by NGK... Camden > >Sensor. For some reason, they call it a connector, but that is >consistent with other Bosch sensors that they list. Odd nomenclature, >but what ever works. They have a decent return policy, so if it is >wrong, the cost is small, shipping and restocking. I believe I have >paid more than that for a number of parts/pieces that got lost/destroyed >in experiments or performance trials. If it is five wire, woohoo! > >Lance > >-----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On >Behalf Of Gary Schaumberg >Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 8:53 PM >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs > > >Am I missing something here? Are you ordering a connector or a sensor? > >efi_student wrote: > > > > I've been researching this a little, Napa lists the Echlin ECHOS729 > > for the '96 and later Civic HX 1.6l auto, that is one of the known > > good units from previous posts. I went to a Honda parts site > > www.hondaautomotiveparts.com and determined that Honda has two > > equivalent sensors for this engine, and there are no notes to indicate > > > that one is different from the other. The same two parts end up on > > the parts breakdown on the Civic VX for reasons that are not clear. > > The Partsbin seems confident that the Oxygen Sensor OE Connector > > C5010-88818 Bosch is an equivalent, so on a small gamble, I ordered > > one. If it ends up being wrong, I'll just exchange it for the one > > well known to be correct. It is rather hard to imagine a UEGO sensor > > of any kind for only $57.60, delivered to the door. Since I am still > > patiently waiting for my parts kits, I have time to spare... > > > > Another question about the actual construction of the kit. The wiring > > > from the box to the sensor isn't specified, so I am curious what > > lengths have been tested and since I am building a few, I figure it > > would be best to get something on a decent sized roll to save > > expenses. Would a sheathed 8 conductor 18 ga about 15' long with > > Beldfoil (or equivalent) be too much? Is anyone having noise issues? > > > Is this an experiment and report back to the list item (that's fine, > > I'll do it, just don't want to reinvent the wheel here)? > > > > Lance > > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From cjl169@hotmail.com Fri Dec 14 18:14:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:45:58 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 21:45:58 -0300 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: Re: Fo Orin: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > 5. Do they do any signal processing for this sensor in their ECU?? > >Simple comparator based circuit on both flywheel teeth and second >'cyl 1' sensor. Just a Schmitt trigger on the flywheel sensor. >The second cyl 1 sensor uses a percentage of the previous peak >level to compare against with a bleed resistor on the capacitor used >to store the previous peak. > >I have the circuits hand drawn and scanned somewhere. < Subject: WB 02, get here.... (was: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and >So where is the best place to buy the WB O2 sensor for 117.78? > >Adam www.thepartsbin.com has them for that price. I ordered mine, and got it the next day (NJ to MD). Not to be mean, but this has been discussed MANY times. I really don't see why this issue keeps coming back up (unless from a new comer). Go there and order it. It's that simple! Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sravet@arm.com Fri Dec 14 18:14:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:14:58 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:14:58 -0300 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Shannen Durphey wrote: > > The final answer is don't trust the gauge, use a scan tool. > The gauge is best used for relative readings. > Shannen My scan tool shows that the gauge is more or less accurate, the thing I'm curious about is the scan tool only shows temps in increments of 12 degrees or so (it's been a while, I can't remember exactly). ie it'll jump from 201 to 213 while sitting at a light, 213 back to 201 when I start going. Not sure if all of them do that or not. BTW, Bob, my temp usually sits in the same place on the gauge as yours. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shurvinton@orange.net Fri Dec 14 20:28:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:19:26 -0300 Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 22:19:26 -0300 From: "William Shurvinton" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 V8 in a sprite, now that even beats the guy on UK version of scrapheap wars who put a jag V12 in a trike. Hrrrm, maybe I should buy that $300 Rx-7 and pop a small block in. ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Williams To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:02 PM Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 > > -> Try putting a SBF into a 68 Triumph GT6, the RX7 is a breeze. I have > -> lots of room at the front of the engine bay since the engine is > -> stuffed back into the firewall. Footwell room though... good thing I > -> have small feet :) > > I put a 400 Chevy small block and a Powerglide into a '72 Spitfire, > does that count? I notched the firewall boxes too. The > automatic transmission required from frame surgery, but it was free. A > friend's girlfriend could weld, and she cut the rails out one at a time > where they wrapped around the stock trans, flipped them the other way, > and welded them back in. Then we laid papier-mache over the > transmission and several layers of Wal-Mart fiberglass cloth and resin > to make a new transmission tunnel. Form-fit when we removed the paper. > > It never saw the road, unfortunately. The buddy who owned it went off > to college and lost interest, and instead of selling it to me, he gave > it to the school's engineering department, who removed the V8 and put in > some junkyard bits to convert it to an "electric car." Which proved to > me there was plenty of political correctness but no intelligence at > Oklahoma State... > > The RX7 is a breeze, though. > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Sat Dec 15 00:40:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:40:48 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:40:48 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Operating temp Question Isn't the gauge run off the temp sensor that feeds the ECM? If that is the case, what is inaccurate the sensor or the gauge? BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Shannen Durphey Sent: Monday, December 14, 1998 5:38 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Operating temp Question The final answer is don't trust the gauge, use a scan tool. The gauge is best used for relative readings. Shannen Bob Wooten wrote: > > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 15 00:37:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:40:48 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:40:48 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor Greg Hermann tapped away at the keyboard with: > >The math's isn't very "comfortable" but necessary for > >implementation. Their main concern at the time was the "computing > >load" and simplifying the algorithms. > Paper published in '99, work probably done in'97 and '98, likely using > hardware from '96 or so vintage?? > Concern with the cost, feasibility, and processor time of such > calculations has decreased by what, 80 or 90%, since then?? Correct... more like 90% in terms of performance. Hardware cost remains relatively unchanged for a "box". Software costs increase with complexity. > 555 PPC "Black Oak", and/or parallel processing, here we come !! It's not immediately necessary to implement the first computation method on the most-powerful uC hardware! Trying to get a relatively- accurate timing reference is something that's useful, but it's not something deserving hundreds of dollars in hardware. There is more than one way to approach the calculation. Certainly more than one way to implement the same algorithm. An cheap 8-bit uC can probably be used to provide accurate micro-ticks and other information directly to the ECU. i.e. your flywheel position sensor becomes a "smart" sensor. That is the trend anyway; to sensors that pre-process the raw data and communicate filtered and compensated data to the ECU. As long as the communications protocol is "open", that promotes modularity. Not only does that mean that the ECU requires less grunt, it also means that sensors can be replaced by improved sensors without any change to the ECU. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From orin@diy-efi.org Fri Dec 14 21:49:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:40:55 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:40:55 -0300 From: Orin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Fo Orin: Starter Tooth Sensor Question > > > 5. Do they do any signal processing for this sensor in their ECU?? > > > >Simple comparator based circuit on both flywheel teeth and second > >'cyl 1' sensor. Just a Schmitt trigger on the flywheel sensor. > >The second cyl 1 sensor uses a percentage of the previous peak > >level to compare against with a bleed resistor on the capacitor used > >to store the previous peak. > > > >I have the circuits hand drawn and scanned somewhere. > > > < MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #940 Bruce, I have been reading the Digest format of the DIY Lists on and off for some time. I don't add to much to it very often but wanted to say "gladly admit it Bruce, you like to argue.." and even argue about not arguing, but that's ok cause it adds to the list and Technical stuff can often get dry unless it is spruced up by flavored comments and "discussions". Keeps me awake late at night and often lol. I am all in favor of "discussions". On to business. I would like it that if anyone has access to the wiring diagrams for the turbo 3.1L 727 ECM (<= GM calls it ECM up here) to update the jpgs in the archive so at least they can be read. Also all in favor of updated injector identification list. I can add to the updates as well. Thanks, Joseph Guthrie. AScT. GAPE Guthrie Applied Performance Engineering. Winfield, BC > Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:05:23 -0500 > From: "Bruce" > Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts > > Generally, I'm just trying to point out the less then obvious, and > sometimes, it's hard to get someone's attention. It's odd how often people > leap to use the word arguement when it's just discussion. > Bruce > > > >No arguments from me, that's grumpy's job, ;-) > > >BW > > > - ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ------------------------------ > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sat Dec 15 00:15:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:02 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:02 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Brian Dessent tapped away at the keyboard with: > Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > > How exactly does a strain gauge work? Does the output voltage change > > depending on how hard you pull on it? > It measures strain. :-) Seriously, take any elastic material and apply > a force (stress) and it reacts by deforming (strain.) For solids, > stress is proportional to strain and the constant that relates them is > called the modulus of elasticity. A strain gauge is usually a thin > piece of conductive material that changes its resistance with strain. > Used alone, it's pretty worthless. What's so neat about it is you can > bond it to whatever structure you're interested in and it will measure > the amount of strain, and by doing some calculations you can relate this > to the stress in the structure, which in turn will tell you when/if it > will fail. For example, you could bond a strain gauge to a steel i-beam > in a skyscraper to see how much it flexes in the wind to know if your > building is going to fall over in a hurricane. Anyway, what I was > talking about would be to buy a small strain gauge, epoxy it to part of > the coilspring, build/buy a signal conditioner (simple instrumentation > op-amp circuit, the full scale signal is probably 20mV or so), and then > datalog the resulting signal. It would be proportional to deflection > of the coil spring if you choose the right location for the strain > gauge. Go to www.omega.com and find their section on strain gauges, > they should have lots of background and application hints. Depending on the spring's mass, you'll also see oscillations over its length following a sudden change of external load. It's a distributed mass-spring oscillation. A low-pass filter should eliminate most of that signal content. > Bernd's idea of mounting a camera on the car with a view of the > suspension and then analyzing it with a computer is looking more and > more attractive. The hard part would be finding room to mount it where > it could record a picture of the suspension. Pointing alongside the vehicle, using mirrors or stakes for the reference points if they're not directly visible. If you use a pair of mirrors and mount the camera pointing downwards, you can see both front and back axles. Some sort of fluid mount (as on the head of most camera tripods) prevents much of the vibration being transferred to the camera. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From punisher454@hotmail.com Fri Dec 14 23:45:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:04 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:04 -0300 From: "The Punisher" Subject: WB O2 sensor versions?? I found a NTK 5-wire sensor on a honda civic at a wrecking yard last year. The car was wrecked and striped down quite a lot so I am not sure about the year. BUT the sensor does NOT have the same plug as the one people are using on the DIY-WB unit. It has 2 wires going to one plug and the other three going another plug. I seem to have temporarily misplaced it, but I recall the wire colors being the same as the WB everybody is using. and the 2 wire plug had the same wire colors as the heater wires on the known WB sensor.(seperate driver module for the heater?) Is anybody familiar with this sensor??? thanks: Marvin Fugate >To: > cc: > Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs > > >The sensor showed up today at 6 pm PST. I'm impressed with the service, >they are in NJ! Sad news, it is a 4 wire. Genuine Bosch, but only 4 >wires. I guess the cheapest price is really $117.78... > >Lance > _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Tue Dec 15 00:05:40 1998 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:14 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:14 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Kevin Grover wrote: > > Most of the gauges in the newer cars aren't linear. I recall reading an > article about the corvette in particular where a customer complained that it > was overheating because the gauge got into the upper range. The scan tool > said that the temp was only like 200 where the gauge was closer to 260. > They move faster in the middle. That mark might really be 200 or 205. Dunno about the latest generation 'Vette, but later c4's had a sticker on the instrument cluster saying that the analogue gauges are not accurate. Many of the c4's came with a digital display for temp. This reading was to be used rather than the analogue reading. Bob Wooten wrote: > I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base > or what? Fan speed is usually varied by applying system voltage through PWM rather varying applied voltage through analogue methods. It's kinda like trying to make a single speed hand drill turn at slower speeds by repeatedly pulling and releasing the trigger. Shannen ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jmcclure@sstelco.com Fri Dec 14 22:13:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:19 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:19 -0300 From: John & Meleaia McClure Subject: DIY_WB Data logging? Thanks for the heads up on the leftover DIY_WB PCB boards and kits....I'm waiting anxiously for my chance to get one. (Warning: I'm about to start talking about things I know very little about.) It looks like the group has the DIY_WB board working since several fellow have successfully tried it out now....and there are at least a couple of people working on output displays. One LED bar graph and another LCD numeric display. I was wondering if anyone has thought of some kind of data logging circuit for the WB 02? I know Fluke makes some nice DMM's that have logging capabilities, but they aren't exactly cheap. And cheap is what I like. I do have some familiarity with some SBC's which would have no problem logging the DIY_WB's voltage signal thru a A/D input board...I'm thinking of PC104...or similar, but this is kind of overkill just to record one voltage signal vs. time. I'm looking at this from the perspective of a drag racer, so the longest sample time I would really need will be 30-60 seconds max, with a sample rate of 0.5 - 1.0 Hz. Therefore we're only talking about 60-120 samples to collect. The playback part will be tricky I suspect. My technical background is in Mechanical Engineering so most electronics go under the "magic smoke" category. Would an embedded PC chip such as the Basic STAMP or PIC chips be able to do something like this for a minimum of $$$$$? If so, is there some info on the web that would give me a quick tutorial on how to accomplish this? It is fairly easy to get a curve fit equation for the 02 volts vs. A/F ratio curve Currently I'm using an old IBM 730TE tablet pc running a package called TurboLink to collect ALDL data during a run. The developer has an optional boost sensing harness that uses the IAT connector to hook up a 3 bar map to get a boost signal into the ALDL stream. It ~MAY~ be possible to sacrifice another sensor (I'm thinking that the coolant temp sensor could be given a "dummy" value of 165degF) to bring the DIY_WB signal into the ALDL. But this may not even be practical. It would be nice to have all the info in TurboLink though. On a side note....Within the Buick Grand National community there is a fellow who makes some pretty nice instrument/gauge enclosures for the GN's. His work is top notch and most of the parts are engraved with graphics and text. He does custom work, so he may be able to fabricate a nice enclosure for the DIY_WB if we can come up with a drawing of what we want. Just an idea...personally I'd rather have a nice looking case sitting on the dash of my car than a breadboard rat's nest of wires (I'm speaking of my own handywork and not anyone's on the list). Sorry for so long. Thanks, John ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 15 01:11:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:38 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:38 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Operating temp Question At 1:12 PM 12/14/01, Bruce wrote: >GM OEM guages are just slightly less then laughable for accuracy. >Whereas some of the Ford ones are. >Bruce > Are WHAT--_TOTALLY_ laughable?? 8-O> Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Fri Dec 14 22:39:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:38 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:38 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > At 10:00 PM 12/13/01, Dave Williams wrote: > >-> It's been done on some diesels, so nothing new. I think I've also > >-> heard of Honda doing some "texturing" in the chambers. > > > > Some of the new Toyotas have a "fire slot" in the quench area of the > >piston to direct a jet of gas as the piston passes TDC. > > > > I've thought about that one a long while. Best as I can figure it's a > >hack to get around a problem with end gasses trapper around the spark > >plug. Then again, it might be something entirely different... > > I'm thinking more like a way to direct a swirl in the chamber in a > consistent direction as it burns. > Have any pics or graphics of such? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 14 22:55:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:45 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:41:45 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB 02, get here.... (was: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs) From: "Brian Renegar" Subject: WB 02, get here.... (was: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs) > >So where is the best place to buy the WB O2 sensor for 117.78? > >Adam > www.thepartsbin.com has them for that price. I ordered mine, and got it > the next day (NJ to MD). > Not to be mean, but this has been discussed MANY times. I really don't see > why this issue keeps coming back up (unless from a new comer). Go there > and order it. It's that simple! > Brian Sure you are, and petulant, LOL Bruce Just couldn't resist.... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Sat Dec 15 02:05:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:42:00 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:42:00 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #937 Hello William, A bike was recently sold here that held the record as the longest in the world, packing 3 V12 Jag engines, the pictures were quite impressive, unfortunately I cant find you any pics Saturday, December 15, 2001, 10:28:56 AM, you wrote: WS> V8 in a sprite, now that even beats the guy on UK version of scrapheap wars WS> who put a jag V12 in a trike. WS> Hrrrm, maybe I should buy that $300 Rx-7 and pop a small block in. -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Fri Dec 14 22:24:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:42:21 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:42:21 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Got a link to any info on them? What can you tell me about them Greg? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Hermann" To: Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 2:32 PM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > > >> > Hydraulic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in > >bungs > > > Take a LONG, careful look at using mushroom lifters instead of rollers for > the type of lift, valve rates, and duration you will want for a turbo > engine. They will kick even a mechanical roller across the shop for quick > and high lift at short durations ! > > Greg > > >> Andris Skulte > >> Skulte Performance Designs > >> Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > >> http://www.skulte.com > >> > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 14 22:51:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:42:22 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:42:22 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Home for an injector Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. Next, has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what kind of success have you had. Bruce Doc's been day dreaming. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Sat Dec 15 00:42:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:55:04 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:55:04 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Operating temp Question Hmmmmm, I tried to count the tick marks in the gauge & did not come up with an even number & thought that it must be non linear, but did not think twice about it & just did the little math trick. Suppose that that you might be right. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Kevin Grover Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 6:53 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Operating temp Question Most of the gauges in the newer cars aren't linear. I recall reading an article about the corvette in particular where a customer complained that it was overheating because the gauge got into the upper range. The scan tool said that the temp was only like 200 where the gauge was closer to 260. They move faster in the middle. That mark might really be 200 or 205. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Wooten" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 10:53 PM Subject: Operating temp Question > I have a 98 Grand Prix, 3.8L NA motor. I was noticing that it appears to > run cold. how hot is it supposed to run? > > the gauge looks like this. the "--->" is where the temp sits most of the > time. > > 260 ------ > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 210 ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --> ----- > --- > --- > --- > --- > --- > 160 ----- > > > If I take (210-160)/2 + 160 this indicates that the motor is running @ 185. > this seems to be pretty darn cold considering that this is a 98 model car. > my 71 came with a 185 stat, I would think that this car would tend to want > to run warmer, maybe 210 or so where the middle of the gauge is. > unfortunately I don't have a scanner for the car, so I don't know what the > ECM thinks the temp is, but it seems to be quite happy. > > it also appears that that the ECM controls the voltage to the cooling fans. > when it gets up @ just above this 185 point both of the fans come on, but > they only draw a small amount of air. I cant imagine that this is all these > fans can pull, so I am guessing that it has a DAC or something that it > outputs to the fans to control how much air they pull. am I way off base or > what? > > Boy, these new fangled cars gots all kind O stuff in dem. > > Bob Wooten > r71chevy@earthlink.net > www.r71camaro.homestead.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:32:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:32:19 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:32:19 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_WB Data logging? From: "John & Meleaia McClure" > Currently I'm using an old IBM 730TE tablet pc running a package called > TurboLink to collect ALDL data during a run. The developer has an optional > boost sensing harness that uses the IAT connector to hook up a 3 bar map to > get a boost signal into the ALDL stream. It ~MAY~ be possible to sacrifice > another sensor (I'm thinking that the coolant temp sensor could be given a > "dummy" value of 165degF) to bring the DIY_WB signal into the ALDL. But > this may not even be practical. It would be nice to have all the info in > TurboLink though. That should work just fine with the WB output feed into where the MAP signal would go. >Just an > idea...personally I'd rather have a nice looking case sitting on the dash of > my car than a breadboard rat's nest of wires (I'm speaking of my own > handywork and not anyone's on the list). And what's wrong with rat's nests?. After all rat's like em. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:32:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:32:38 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:32:38 -0800 From: clayb Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > From: "Bruce" > > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor > > firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the > > distributorless ignition stays rock steady. > > There can be no doubt this has an impact on my ability to tune near the > > edge of detonation. > > At idle it would wonder that much?, or thru out the rpm range. > How big of cam?. > Bruce It wasn't always that bad at idle, but it did wander noticeably. Seemed the worst timing accuracy was when the engine ran at constant speed, like 2000 or 3000 rpm. Any slack in the system is then noticeable. Under smooth acceleration, the chain and gear are preloaded in one direction. Cam is 241/234 degrees. - Clay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:32:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:32:58 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:32:58 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question From: "Greg Hermann" Subject: Re: Operating temp Question > At 1:12 PM 12/14/01, Bruce wrote: > >GM OEM guages are just slightly less then laughable for accuracy. > >Whereas some of the Ford ones are. > >Bruce > Are WHAT--_TOTALLY_ laughable?? 8-O> > Greg Some fords have an on-off sender wired to a guage, rather then a idiot light. There was a thread here about that. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:33:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:33:19 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:33:19 -0800 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Newish Member Post I've been lurking for some time so I figured it's time for an intro post. I've got an 85 F150 with a 351W on LPG. I'm interested in trying to build/hack/modify some type of LPG injection for it, maybe port, maybe TBI. I've had some experience playing with PIC's, mostly 16C887's. I've been thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because of the high fuel pressures you get with LPG and maybe a diesel injector pump as well. Before I get too deep into this project is there anyone out there who has done the same thing? I was thinking about maybe using the Magasquirt for TBI, or hacking a Ford ECM for port injection. Does anyone have any input? Thanks, Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:34:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:34:05 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:34:05 -0800 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) clayb wrote: > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor > firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the > distributorless ignition stays rock steady. You must have had a bad timing chain or something... was it one of those GMs with the phenolic gear on the cam? I have a DOHC 4 with a optical pickup on the cam and a mile long single-row timing chain and I have never seen any ignition bounce. Jon Davis ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:34:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:34:29 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:34:29 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Teeth Sensor Sounds like other people like the idea. As Carter says, a little processing will give you lots of information. I don't think this is so hard, but I wonder how useful it would be. Do you really need to be able to spot a weak cylinder this way? How is the information to be displayed? My vision is a scope trace that starts as #1 goes into the power stroke. Acceleration would be the vertical scale, so you would have 6 or 8 hills as you passed each cylinder, but a bad one would be small or even a valley. We need more projects! Bruce Roe On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:36:14 -0800 (PST) skulte writes: > There were one or two technical sessions exactly > about this at last years (2001) SAE World Congress. > The Technical Reports should be available off the > http://www.sae.org website for $10 non members > and $8 members. > Andris Skulte > On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > I also have thought for a long time, that differentiating > > the velocity of teeth moving by would be a good way to > > see the relative power output of each cylinder, with the > > right dispay. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:35:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:35:00 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:35:00 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Gauge Question I have recalibrated quite a few of the gauges in my GMs to get acceptable accuracy. In some cases that included pulling the tank sending unit and changing the float arm. Some older units needed the wire cleaned up in the cluster because of high resistance caused by oxidation. Bruce Roe On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 13:12:48 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > GM OEM guages are just slightly less then laughable for > accuracy. Whereas some of the Ford ones are. > Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:35:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:35:49 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:35:49 -0800 From: "The Punisher" Subject: re: DIY_WB Data logging? You can get flash pic chips that run at 20MHZ for around $5.00-8.00US. Then an EPIC programmer from Micro Engineering Labs for about 50 bucks(I think I payed 59.00 3 years ago) and make youre own ICSP(in circuit serial programming) cable (made mine from scraps in about :30). Write youre code in assembly for free, or get Micro Engineering Labs "Pic Basic Compiler" for 99 bucks(250 for the full tilt pro edition) and do it the easy way in basic (this compiler optimizes very well, you wont loose much speed over hand assembly). A compiled program like this will run tens to hundred times faster than interpeted code like on a stamp. The 16f877 is popular and inexpensive. It has 8k of code space, 368 bytes ram, and 256 bytes of eeprom on the chip. The only external components needed would be a 5 volt regulator, a crystal, 2 cap's(to help the crystal oscillate), and a couple resistors. It has multichannel AD converter built in(8 channels IIRC). You could VERY easly acomplish youre datalogging and display on an inexpensive LCD display (2x16,2x20 and 4x20 are common). for extra data storage you could get a serial eeprom (I2C bus is built in just for this). If youre going to build just one unit and dont need high speed the stamp is a bit cheaper. but not MUCH easier. After the second or third stamp purchase then the compiled pic is more cost effective(and still way more powerfull). At least thats been My experience with Embedded controllers. >From: John & Meleaia McClure >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: DIY_WB Data logging? >Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:13:30 -0600 > >Thanks for the heads up on the leftover DIY_WB PCB boards and kits....I'm >waiting anxiously for my chance to get one. > >(Warning: I'm about to start talking about things I know very little >about.) > >It looks like the group has the DIY_WB board working since several fellow >have successfully tried it out now....and there are at least a couple of >people working on output displays. One LED bar graph and another LCD >numeric display. I was wondering if anyone has thought of some kind of >data >logging circuit for the WB 02? > >I know Fluke makes some nice DMM's that have logging capabilities, but they >aren't exactly cheap. And cheap is what I like. I do have some >familiarity >with some SBC's which would have no problem logging the DIY_WB's voltage >signal thru a A/D input board...I'm thinking of PC104...or similar, but >this >is kind of overkill just to record one voltage signal vs. time. I'm >looking >at this from the perspective of a drag racer, so the longest sample time I >would really need will be 30-60 seconds max, with a sample rate of 0.5 - >1.0 >Hz. Therefore we're only talking about 60-120 samples to collect. The >playback part will be tricky I suspect. > >My technical background is in Mechanical Engineering so most electronics go >under the "magic smoke" category. Would an embedded PC chip such as the >Basic STAMP or PIC chips be able to do something like this for a minimum of >$$$$$? If so, is there some info on the web that would give me a quick >tutorial on how to accomplish this? >It is fairly easy to get a curve fit equation for the 02 volts vs. A/F >ratio >curve > >Currently I'm using an old IBM 730TE tablet pc running a package called >TurboLink to collect ALDL data during a run. The developer has an optional >boost sensing harness that uses the IAT connector to hook up a 3 bar map to >get a boost signal into the ALDL stream. It ~MAY~ be possible to sacrifice >another sensor (I'm thinking that the coolant temp sensor could be given a >"dummy" value of 165degF) to bring the DIY_WB signal into the ALDL. But >this may not even be practical. It would be nice to have all the info in >TurboLink though. > >On a side note....Within the Buick Grand National community there is a >fellow who makes some pretty nice instrument/gauge enclosures for the GN's. >His work is top notch and most of the parts are engraved with graphics and >text. He does custom work, so he may be able to fabricate a nice enclosure >for the DIY_WB if we can come up with a drawing of what we want. Just an >idea...personally I'd rather have a nice looking case sitting on the dash >of >my car than a breadboard rat's nest of wires (I'm speaking of my own >handywork and not anyone's on the list). > >Sorry for so long. > >Thanks, >John > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:36:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:36:06 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:36:06 -0800 From: "William Shurvinton" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector No practical, but I the 'rails' that came with the weber TBs I have are clips to go on the injectors and then you link them with rubber hose. They have been installed on at least 2 cars in their life, so I know they work. They are a weber part, so I'll call webcon on monday and see if you can still get them. Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: Bruce To: > Next, > has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what kind of > success have you had. > Bruce > Doc's been day dreaming. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 13:36:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:36:47 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 13:36:47 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Do you mean in the archives or someplace else? I actually have chosen a different compression and there fore rods and crank as well. But I am curious as to what you are alluding to. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:23 AM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > Might investigate Eagle Rods a bit further. > they're done by the same crowd as the Scat Cranks. > Oh and read about Scat cranks for related info.. > Bruce > > From: "elcamino73" > > Building a 380 with 400 block 3.50 inch eagle crank and 5.85 eagle rods JE > > d-dish (-32cc) pistons > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 15 02:42:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:46:56 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:46:56 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_WB Data logging? From: "John & Meleaia McClure" > Currently I'm using an old IBM 730TE tablet pc running a package called > TurboLink to collect ALDL data during a run. The developer has an optional > boost sensing harness that uses the IAT connector to hook up a 3 bar map to > get a boost signal into the ALDL stream. It ~MAY~ be possible to sacrifice > another sensor (I'm thinking that the coolant temp sensor could be given a > "dummy" value of 165degF) to bring the DIY_WB signal into the ALDL. But > this may not even be practical. It would be nice to have all the info in > TurboLink though. That should work just fine with the WB output feed into where the MAP signal would go. >Just an > idea...personally I'd rather have a nice looking case sitting on the dash of > my car than a breadboard rat's nest of wires (I'm speaking of my own > handywork and not anyone's on the list). And what's wrong with rat's nests?. After all rat's like em. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From punisher454@hotmail.com Sat Dec 15 07:51:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:46:56 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:46:56 -0300 From: "The Punisher" Subject: re: DIY_WB Data logging? You can get flash pic chips that run at 20MHZ for around $5.00-8.00US. Then an EPIC programmer from Micro Engineering Labs for about 50 bucks(I think I payed 59.00 3 years ago) and make youre own ICSP(in circuit serial programming) cable (made mine from scraps in about :30). Write youre code in assembly for free, or get Micro Engineering Labs "Pic Basic Compiler" for 99 bucks(250 for the full tilt pro edition) and do it the easy way in basic (this compiler optimizes very well, you wont loose much speed over hand assembly). A compiled program like this will run tens to hundred times faster than interpeted code like on a stamp. The 16f877 is popular and inexpensive. It has 8k of code space, 368 bytes ram, and 256 bytes of eeprom on the chip. The only external components needed would be a 5 volt regulator, a crystal, 2 cap's(to help the crystal oscillate), and a couple resistors. It has multichannel AD converter built in(8 channels IIRC). You could VERY easly acomplish youre datalogging and display on an inexpensive LCD display (2x16,2x20 and 4x20 are common). for extra data storage you could get a serial eeprom (I2C bus is built in just for this). If youre going to build just one unit and dont need high speed the stamp is a bit cheaper. but not MUCH easier. After the second or third stamp purchase then the compiled pic is more cost effective(and still way more powerfull). At least thats been My experience with Embedded controllers. From: John & Meleaia McClure >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: DIY_WB Data logging? >Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2001 19:13:30 -0600 > >Thanks for the heads up on the leftover DIY_WB PCB boards and kits....I'm >waiting anxiously for my chance to get one. > >(Warning: I'm about to start talking about things I know very little >about.) > >It looks like the group has the DIY_WB board working since several fellow >have successfully tried it out now....and there are at least a couple of >people working on output displays. One LED bar graph and another LCD >numeric display. I was wondering if anyone has thought of some kind of >data >logging circuit for the WB 02? > >I know Fluke makes some nice DMM's that have logging capabilities, but they >aren't exactly cheap. And cheap is what I like. I do have some >familiarity >with some SBC's which would have no problem logging the DIY_WB's voltage >signal thru a A/D input board...I'm thinking of PC104...or similar, but >this >is kind of overkill just to record one voltage signal vs. time. I'm >looking >at this from the perspective of a drag racer, so the longest sample time I >would really need will be 30-60 seconds max, with a sample rate of 0.5 - >1.0 >Hz. Therefore we're only talking about 60-120 samples to collect. The >playback part will be tricky I suspect. > >My technical background is in Mechanical Engineering so most electronics go >under the "magic smoke" category. Would an embedded PC chip such as the >Basic STAMP or PIC chips be able to do something like this for a minimum of >$$$$$? If so, is there some info on the web that would give me a quick >tutorial on how to accomplish this? >It is fairly easy to get a curve fit equation for the 02 volts vs. A/F >ratio >curve > >Currently I'm using an old IBM 730TE tablet pc running a package called >TurboLink to collect ALDL data during a run. The developer has an optional >boost sensing harness that uses the IAT connector to hook up a 3 bar map to >get a boost signal into the ALDL stream. It ~MAY~ be possible to sacrifice >another sensor (I'm thinking that the coolant temp sensor could be given a >"dummy" value of 165degF) to bring the DIY_WB signal into the ALDL. But >this may not even be practical. It would be nice to have all the info in >TurboLink though. > >On a side note....Within the Buick Grand National community there is a >fellow who makes some pretty nice instrument/gauge enclosures for the GN's. >His work is top notch and most of the parts are engraved with graphics and >text. He does custom work, so he may be able to fabricate a nice enclosure >for the DIY_WB if we can come up with a drawing of what we want. Just an >idea...personally I'd rather have a nice looking case sitting on the dash >of >my car than a breadboard rat's nest of wires (I'm speaking of my own >handywork and not anyone's on the list). > >Sorry for so long. > >Thanks, >John > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clayb@sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 15 02:53:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:46:56 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:46:56 -0300 From: clayb Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > From: "Bruce" > > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor > > firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the > > distributorless ignition stays rock steady. > > There can be no doubt this has an impact on my ability to tune near the > > edge of detonation. > > At idle it would wonder that much?, or thru out the rpm range. > How big of cam?. > Bruce It wasn't always that bad at idle, but it did wander noticeably. Seemed the worst timing accuracy was when the engine ran at constant speed, like 2000 or 3000 rpm. Any slack in the system is then noticeable. Under smooth acceleration, the chain and gear are preloaded in one direction. Cam is 241/234 degrees. - Clay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chrism@cnx.net Sat Dec 15 03:05:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:47:02 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:47:02 -0300 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Newish Member Post I've been lurking for some time so I figured it's time for an intro post. I've got an 85 F150 with a 351W on LPG. I'm interested in trying to build/hack/modify some type of LPG injection for it, maybe port, maybe TBI. I've had some experience playing with PIC's, mostly 16C887's. I've been thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because of the high fuel pressures you get with LPG and maybe a diesel injector pump as well. Before I get too deep into this project is there anyone out there who has done the same thing? I was thinking about maybe using the Magasquirt for TBI, or hacking a Ford ECM for port injection. Does anyone have any input? Thanks, Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Sat Dec 15 08:50:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:47:43 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:47:43 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Do you mean in the archives or someplace else? I actually have chosen a different compression and there fore rods and crank as well. But I am curious as to what you are alluding to. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bruce" To: Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 12:23 AM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > Might investigate Eagle Rods a bit further. > they're done by the same crowd as the Scat Cranks. > Oh and read about Scat cranks for related info.. > Bruce > > From: "elcamino73" > > Building a 380 with 400 block 3.50 inch eagle crank and 5.85 eagle rods JE > > d-dish (-32cc) pistons > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shurvinton@orange.net Sat Dec 15 08:11:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:47:45 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:47:45 -0300 From: "William Shurvinton" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector No practical, but I the 'rails' that came with the weber TBs I have are clips to go on the injectors and then you link them with rubber hose. They have been installed on at least 2 cars in their life, so I know they work. They are a weber part, so I'll call webcon on monday and see if you can still get them. Bill ----- Original Message ----- From: Bruce To: > Next, > has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what kind of > success have you had. > Bruce > Doc's been day dreaming. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Sat Dec 15 06:56:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:47:54 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:47:54 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Gauge Question I have recalibrated quite a few of the gauges in my GMs to get acceptable accuracy. In some cases that included pulling the tank sending unit and changing the float arm. Some older units needed the wire cleaned up in the cluster because of high resistance caused by oxidation. Bruce Roe On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 13:12:48 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > GM OEM guages are just slightly less then laughable for > accuracy. Whereas some of the Ford ones are. > Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 15 02:50:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:48:05 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:48:05 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Operating temp Question From: "Greg Hermann" Subject: Re: Operating temp Question > At 1:12 PM 12/14/01, Bruce wrote: > >GM OEM guages are just slightly less then laughable for accuracy. > >Whereas some of the Ford ones are. > >Bruce > Are WHAT--_TOTALLY_ laughable?? 8-O> > Greg Some fords have an on-off sender wired to a guage, rather then a idiot light. There was a thread here about that. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Sat Dec 15 06:03:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:48:47 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:48:47 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Starter Teeth Sensor Sounds like other people like the idea. As Carter says, a little processing will give you lots of information. I don't think this is so hard, but I wonder how useful it would be. Do you really need to be able to spot a weak cylinder this way? How is the information to be displayed? My vision is a scope trace that starts as #1 goes into the power stroke. Acceleration would be the vertical scale, so you would have 6 or 8 hills as you passed each cylinder, but a bad one would be small or even a valley. We need more projects! Bruce Roe On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 05:36:14 -0800 (PST) skulte writes: > There were one or two technical sessions exactly > about this at last years (2001) SAE World Congress. > The Technical Reports should be available off the > http://www.sae.org website for $10 non members > and $8 members. > Andris Skulte > On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > I also have thought for a long time, that differentiating > > the velocity of teeth moving by would be a good way to > > see the relative power output of each cylinder, with the > > right dispay. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jfdavis@epix.net Sat Dec 15 04:53:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:50:55 -0300 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 18:50:55 -0300 From: "Jon Davis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) clayb wrote: > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor > firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the > distributorless ignition stays rock steady. You must have had a bad timing chain or something... was it one of those GMs with the phenolic gear on the cam? I have a DOHC 4 with a optical pickup on the cam and a mile long single-row timing chain and I have never seen any ignition bounce. Jon Davis ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:22:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:22:30 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:22:30 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 sensor versions?? There are some sensors in production that measure the lean side only. They are the predecessors to the WB O2 sensor. Whether this is one or not I can not say. BobR. The Punisher wrote: > I found a NTK 5-wire sensor on a honda civic at a wrecking yard last year. > The car was wrecked and striped down quite a lot so I am not sure about the > year. BUT the sensor does NOT have the same plug as the one people are using > on the DIY-WB unit. It has 2 wires going to one plug and the other three > going another plug. I seem to have temporarily misplaced it, but I recall > the wire colors being the same as the WB everybody is using. and the 2 wire > plug had the same wire colors as the heater wires on the known WB > sensor.(seperate driver module for the heater?) Is anybody familiar with > this sensor??? > > thanks: Marvin Fugate > > >To: > > cc: > > Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs > > > > > >The sensor showed up today at 6 pm PST. I'm impressed with the service, > >they are in NJ! Sad news, it is a 4 wire. Genuine Bosch, but only 4 > >wires. I guess the cheapest price is really $117.78... > > > >Lance > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:22:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:22:46 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:22:46 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_WB Data logging? The most effective method of data logging entails tying the DIY-WB value in with the rest of the ECM variables. Most ECMs have an extra ADC input that can be used. Hang the DIY-WB off that and add the code to do a convert on it. Then output the DIY-WB ADC counts to the ALDL stream. If using a C3 ECM another possibility is using the Lockers setup. BobR. John & Meleaia McClure wrote: > Thanks for the heads up on the leftover DIY_WB PCB boards and kits....I'm > waiting anxiously for my chance to get one. > > (Warning: I'm about to start talking about things I know very little about.) > > It looks like the group has the DIY_WB board working since several fellow > have successfully tried it out now....and there are at least a couple of > people working on output displays. One LED bar graph and another LCD > numeric display. I was wondering if anyone has thought of some kind of data > logging circuit for the WB 02? > > I know Fluke makes some nice DMM's that have logging capabilities, but they > aren't exactly cheap. And cheap is what I like. I do have some familiarity > with some SBC's which would have no problem logging the DIY_WB's voltage > signal thru a A/D input board...I'm thinking of PC104...or similar, but this > is kind of overkill just to record one voltage signal vs. time. I'm looking > at this from the perspective of a drag racer, so the longest sample time I > would really need will be 30-60 seconds max, with a sample rate of 0.5 - 1.0 > Hz. Therefore we're only talking about 60-120 samples to collect. The > playback part will be tricky I suspect. > > My technical background is in Mechanical Engineering so most electronics go > under the "magic smoke" category. Would an embedded PC chip such as the > Basic STAMP or PIC chips be able to do something like this for a minimum of > $$$$$? If so, is there some info on the web that would give me a quick > tutorial on how to accomplish this? > It is fairly easy to get a curve fit equation for the 02 volts vs. A/F ratio > curve > > Currently I'm using an old IBM 730TE tablet pc running a package called > TurboLink to collect ALDL data during a run. The developer has an optional > boost sensing harness that uses the IAT connector to hook up a 3 bar map to > get a boost signal into the ALDL stream. It ~MAY~ be possible to sacrifice > another sensor (I'm thinking that the coolant temp sensor could be given a > "dummy" value of 165degF) to bring the DIY_WB signal into the ALDL. But > this may not even be practical. It would be nice to have all the info in > TurboLink though. > > On a side note....Within the Buick Grand National community there is a > fellow who makes some pretty nice instrument/gauge enclosures for the GN's. > His work is top notch and most of the parts are engraved with graphics and > text. He does custom work, so he may be able to fabricate a nice enclosure > for the DIY_WB if we can come up with a drawing of what we want. Just an > idea...personally I'd rather have a nice looking case sitting on the dash of > my car than a breadboard rat's nest of wires (I'm speaking of my own > handywork and not anyone's on the list). > > Sorry for so long. > > Thanks, > John ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:22:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:22:59 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:22:59 -0800 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:28:56 William Shurvinton wrote: > V8 in a sprite, now that even beats the guy on UK > version of scrapheap wars who put a jag V12 in a > trike. Uhh, William, that's a *SPITFIRE* not a Sprite! Not the same at all. (Might as well accuse a Finn of being Swedish) Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:23:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:23:20 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:23:20 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) At 8:24 PM 12/14/01, elcamino73 wrote: >Got a link to any info on them? >What can you tell me about them Greg? > I'm aware of a cam profile for a mushroom tappet that will (roughly) do as follows: duration at .050" CAM lift = 207° CAM lift = .370" (multiply by rocker ratio to get valve lift) Lift rate = .011" CAM lift per CAM degree Lifter requirement= 1.375" face diameter. Lifters like this are/were a Sealed Power part--1.375" head, .625" body . Was used in the IHC RD series 404/450/501 cid I-6 truck engines. I think a typical SBC flat tappet "high energy" type cam is lucky if it gets .004 or .005" of cam lift per cam degree!! A big advantage to mushrooms over rollers is that you don't get the big side loads on the lifter bores in the block. This size lifter may not fit into an SBC without having the OD of the lifter face clip the lobes for valves on the other bank, but I am SURE there's gotta be someone out there who knows what to do for putting mushrooms in an SBC, somebody always does EVERYTHING for SBC's !! :-) If I remember correctly, it was Charlie Reichard at Cam Dynamics (???) in Maryland (???) that told me he had this cam lobe design. Charlie does a lot of puller cams. If my rememberer is working right, they do have a web site. Charlie also told me you can use MUCH shorter clearance ramps on a mushroom cam than on a roller, thus keeping the "advertised" duration much closer to the .050" duration. Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some NASCAR guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see if the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) Mushrooms are a PITA to assemble--they basically have got to be the first thing into the block after the cam bearings. Then the cam, after the lifters, then everything else. Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:23:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:23:56 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:23:56 -0800 From: Mark Chauvin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Single-board computer Has anyone ever used one of these from ZWorld? http://www.zworld.com/products/bl1800/index.html It's the only 12-volt one I could find that doesn't cost a fortune. Thinking of using it to make my own Scanmaster-type OBD2 display. Has anybody else done this? Thanks... -Mark ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:24:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:24:32 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:24:32 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Home for an injector -> Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector -> in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. I don't see any problems with that. You might want to be particular about the type of wiring you use; some of the cheap stuff doesn't like oil much. The connectors should be no problem; the old Cadillac V8-6-4 Eaton solenoids use the same connector as an ordinary Bendix type injector. -> Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. It gets easily that hot under the hood anyway. -> has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what -> kind of success have you had. BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. MSD sells some nice bits to mount a hose on the end using the stock O-ring setup and a wireform clip to hold the adapter in place. ==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? ============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:25:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:25:27 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:25:27 -0800 From: Guy Hammer MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, Any good data > about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. Wouldn't that sort of temperature boil the fuel? Or is that the result you are looking for? -- Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~guyh -- 10:35am up 39 days, 13:21, 8 users, load average: 1.04, 1.01, 1.00 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:25:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:25:45 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:25:45 -0800 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question If the problem were mine, I'd take a close look at slide pots first, I'll bet they'll work fine. I'd get a handful of different ones, linear not the logarithmic (sp) audio kind like might be used in a graphic equalizer, grab a variable speed drill, make an eccentric, use a piece of stiff wire for a connecting rod, and start cycling the pot like a piston in an engine. Use an o'scope or datalogger to see the signal, increasing the drill speed until my nice sine wave has a problem like noise from the slider chattering or some such. Math out the linear speed of the slider. If this test's results look promising, then I'd put it on a street car for more real world test, my mental picture is the pot held to the shock barrel w/ hose clamps, a wire or spring from the slider to the other half of the shock, held w/ a third hose clamp. Assuming things still look good, then figure out how to do the race car, if not, then pursue some of the other more expensive and complex suggestions. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:26:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:26:08 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:26:08 -0800 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question IIRC from a long time ago, the minimum distance for the Polaroid ultrasonic rangefinder is about 6 ft, the reason being the transducer is used as both a speaker and a microphone, and you have to allow time for the speaker to stop oscillating before you can use it to listen as a microphone. A couple of possiblities to minimize the problem would be to use less power when transmitting, perhaps to apply a burst of signal 180* out of phase to help stop the oscillations, or use 2 seperate transducers. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:26:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:26:36 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:26:36 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Operating temp Question Fan speed is usually varied by applying system voltage through PWM rather varying applied voltage through analogue methods. It's kinda like trying to make a single speed hand drill turn at slower speeds by repeatedly pulling and releasing the trigger. Shannen => Gotcha, should have guessed, same result less $. Tanx BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 15 19:26:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:26:54 -0800 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 19:26:54 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Crower makes a flavor. My buddy was running them in his 406 B4 he went BBC. I guess that they take a standard Ford lifter & machine them down to fit into the Chevy hole. I have not seen it, just knew that to get them in he had to turn the motor up side down & feed them in from the bottom & then slide the cam in to hold them into place. Kinda trick really. I never thought about the benefits of them for a turbo app, VS a Roller. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of elcamino73 Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 5:24 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Got a link to any info on them? What can you tell me about them Greg? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Hermann" To: Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 2:32 PM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > > >> > Hydraulic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in > >bungs > > > Take a LONG, careful look at using mushroom lifters instead of rollers for > the type of lift, valve rates, and duration you will want for a turbo > engine. They will kick even a mechanical roller across the shop for quick > and high lift at short durations ! > > Greg > > >> Andris Skulte > >> Skulte Performance Designs > >> Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > >> http://www.skulte.com > >> > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chauvin@ghg.net Sat Dec 15 12:46:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:10 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:10 -0300 From: Mark Chauvin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Single-board computer Has anyone ever used one of these from ZWorld? http://www.zworld.com/products/bl1800/index.html It's the only 12-volt one I could find that doesn't cost a fortune. Thinking of using it to make my own Scanmaster-type OBD2 display. Has anybody else done this? Thanks... -Mark ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Sat Dec 15 16:22:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:10 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:10 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Operating temp Question Fan speed is usually varied by applying system voltage through PWM rather varying applied voltage through analogue methods. It's kinda like trying to make a single speed hand drill turn at slower speeds by repeatedly pulling and releasing the trigger. Shannen => Gotcha, should have guessed, same result less $. Tanx BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ilphayunterhay@yahoo.com Sat Dec 15 16:11:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:10 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:10 -0300 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question IIRC from a long time ago, the minimum distance for the Polaroid ultrasonic rangefinder is about 6 ft, the reason being the transducer is used as both a speaker and a microphone, and you have to allow time for the speaker to stop oscillating before you can use it to listen as a microphone. A couple of possiblities to minimize the problem would be to use less power when transmitting, perhaps to apply a burst of signal 180* out of phase to help stop the oscillations, or use 2 seperate transducers. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Sat Dec 15 10:51:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:13 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:13 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Home for an injector -> Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector -> in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. I don't see any problems with that. You might want to be particular about the type of wiring you use; some of the cheap stuff doesn't like oil much. The connectors should be no problem; the old Cadillac V8-6-4 Eaton solenoids use the same connector as an ordinary Bendix type injector. -> Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. It gets easily that hot under the hood anyway. -> has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what -> kind of success have you had. BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. MSD sells some nice bits to mount a hose on the end using the stock O-ring setup and a wireform clip to hold the adapter in place. ==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? ============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Sat Dec 15 10:32:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:14 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:14 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 sensor versions?? There are some sensors in production that measure the lean side only. They are the predecessors to the WB O2 sensor. Whether this is one or not I can not say. BobR. The Punisher wrote: > I found a NTK 5-wire sensor on a honda civic at a wrecking yard last year. > The car was wrecked and striped down quite a lot so I am not sure about the > year. BUT the sensor does NOT have the same plug as the one people are using > on the DIY-WB unit. It has 2 wires going to one plug and the other three > going another plug. I seem to have temporarily misplaced it, but I recall > the wire colors being the same as the WB everybody is using. and the 2 wire > plug had the same wire colors as the heater wires on the known WB > sensor.(seperate driver module for the heater?) Is anybody familiar with > this sensor??? > > thanks: Marvin Fugate > > >To: > > cc: > > Subject: RE: Which WB O2 sensor is OK and Wiring Qs > > > > > >The sensor showed up today at 6 pm PST. I'm impressed with the service, > >they are in NJ! Sad news, it is a 4 wire. Genuine Bosch, but only 4 > >wires. I guess the cheapest price is really $117.78... > > > >Lance > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 15 11:13:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:21 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:21 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) At 8:24 PM 12/14/01, elcamino73 wrote: >Got a link to any info on them? >What can you tell me about them Greg? > I'm aware of a cam profile for a mushroom tappet that will (roughly) do as follows: duration at .050" CAM lift = 207° CAM lift = .370" (multiply by rocker ratio to get valve lift) Lift rate = .011" CAM lift per CAM degree Lifter requirement= 1.375" face diameter. Lifters like this are/were a Sealed Power part--1.375" head, .625" body . Was used in the IHC RD series 404/450/501 cid I-6 truck engines. I think a typical SBC flat tappet "high energy" type cam is lucky if it gets .004 or .005" of cam lift per cam degree!! A big advantage to mushrooms over rollers is that you don't get the big side loads on the lifter bores in the block. This size lifter may not fit into an SBC without having the OD of the lifter face clip the lobes for valves on the other bank, but I am SURE there's gotta be someone out there who knows what to do for putting mushrooms in an SBC, somebody always does EVERYTHING for SBC's !! :-) If I remember correctly, it was Charlie Reichard at Cam Dynamics (???) in Maryland (???) that told me he had this cam lobe design. Charlie does a lot of puller cams. If my rememberer is working right, they do have a web site. Charlie also told me you can use MUCH shorter clearance ramps on a mushroom cam than on a roller, thus keeping the "advertised" duration much closer to the .050" duration. Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some NASCAR guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see if the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) Mushrooms are a PITA to assemble--they basically have got to be the first thing into the block after the cam bearings. Then the cam, after the lifters, then everything else. Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ilphayunterhay@yahoo.com Sat Dec 15 15:54:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:26 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:26 -0300 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question If the problem were mine, I'd take a close look at slide pots first, I'll bet they'll work fine. I'd get a handful of different ones, linear not the logarithmic (sp) audio kind like might be used in a graphic equalizer, grab a variable speed drill, make an eccentric, use a piece of stiff wire for a connecting rod, and start cycling the pot like a piston in an engine. Use an o'scope or datalogger to see the signal, increasing the drill speed until my nice sine wave has a problem like noise from the slider chattering or some such. Math out the linear speed of the slider. If this test's results look promising, then I'd put it on a street car for more real world test, my mental picture is the pot held to the shock barrel w/ hose clamps, a wire or spring from the slider to the other half of the shock, held w/ a third hose clamp. Assuming things still look good, then figure out how to do the race car, if not, then pursue some of the other more expensive and complex suggestions. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Sat Dec 15 10:39:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:38 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:38 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_WB Data logging? The most effective method of data logging entails tying the DIY-WB value in with the rest of the ECM variables. Most ECMs have an extra ADC input that can be used. Hang the DIY-WB off that and add the code to do a convert on it. Then output the DIY-WB ADC counts to the ALDL stream. If using a C3 ECM another possibility is using the Lockers setup. BobR. John & Meleaia McClure wrote: > Thanks for the heads up on the leftover DIY_WB PCB boards and kits....I'm > waiting anxiously for my chance to get one. > > (Warning: I'm about to start talking about things I know very little about.) > > It looks like the group has the DIY_WB board working since several fellow > have successfully tried it out now....and there are at least a couple of > people working on output displays. One LED bar graph and another LCD > numeric display. I was wondering if anyone has thought of some kind of data > logging circuit for the WB 02? > > I know Fluke makes some nice DMM's that have logging capabilities, but they > aren't exactly cheap. And cheap is what I like. I do have some familiarity > with some SBC's which would have no problem logging the DIY_WB's voltage > signal thru a A/D input board...I'm thinking of PC104...or similar, but this > is kind of overkill just to record one voltage signal vs. time. I'm looking > at this from the perspective of a drag racer, so the longest sample time I > would really need will be 30-60 seconds max, with a sample rate of 0.5 - 1.0 > Hz. Therefore we're only talking about 60-120 samples to collect. The > playback part will be tricky I suspect. > > My technical background is in Mechanical Engineering so most electronics go > under the "magic smoke" category. Would an embedded PC chip such as the > Basic STAMP or PIC chips be able to do something like this for a minimum of > $$$$$? If so, is there some info on the web that would give me a quick > tutorial on how to accomplish this? > It is fairly easy to get a curve fit equation for the 02 volts vs. A/F ratio > curve > > Currently I'm using an old IBM 730TE tablet pc running a package called > TurboLink to collect ALDL data during a run. The developer has an optional > boost sensing harness that uses the IAT connector to hook up a 3 bar map to > get a boost signal into the ALDL stream. It ~MAY~ be possible to sacrifice > another sensor (I'm thinking that the coolant temp sensor could be given a > "dummy" value of 165degF) to bring the DIY_WB signal into the ALDL. But > this may not even be practical. It would be nice to have all the info in > TurboLink though. > > On a side note....Within the Buick Grand National community there is a > fellow who makes some pretty nice instrument/gauge enclosures for the GN's. > His work is top notch and most of the parts are engraved with graphics and > text. He does custom work, so he may be able to fabricate a nice enclosure > for the DIY_WB if we can come up with a drawing of what we want. Just an > idea...personally I'd rather have a nice looking case sitting on the dash of > my car than a breadboard rat's nest of wires (I'm speaking of my own > handywork and not anyone's on the list). > > Sorry for so long. > > Thanks, > John ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Sat Dec 15 16:25:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:49 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:49 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Crower makes a flavor. My buddy was running them in his 406 B4 he went BBC. I guess that they take a standard Ford lifter & machine them down to fit into the Chevy hole. I have not seen it, just knew that to get them in he had to turn the motor up side down & feed them in from the bottom & then slide the cam in to hold them into place. Kinda trick really. I never thought about the benefits of them for a turbo app, VS a Roller. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of elcamino73 Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 5:24 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Got a link to any info on them? What can you tell me about them Greg? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Hermann" To: Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 2:32 PM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > > >> > Hydraulic roller cam 224/236 duration. ACCEl manifold with cast in > >bungs > > > Take a LONG, careful look at using mushroom lifters instead of rollers for > the type of lift, valve rates, and duration you will want for a turbo > engine. They will kick even a mechanical roller across the shop for quick > and high lift at short durations ! > > Greg > > >> Andris Skulte > >> Skulte Performance Designs > >> Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo > >> http://www.skulte.com > >> > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clshore@yahoo.com Sat Dec 15 10:49:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:58 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:42:58 -0300 From: Carter Shore MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:28:56 William Shurvinton wrote: > V8 in a sprite, now that even beats the guy on UK > version of scrapheap wars who put a jag V12 in a > trike. Uhh, William, that's a *SPITFIRE* not a Sprite! Not the same at all. (Might as well accuse a Finn of being Swedish) Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From guyh@aracnet.com Sat Dec 15 15:37:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:44:49 -0300 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 00:44:49 -0300 From: Guy Hammer MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, Any good data > about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. Wouldn't that sort of temperature boil the fuel? Or is that the result you are looking for? -- Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~guyh -- 10:35am up 39 days, 13:21, 8 users, load average: 1.04, 1.01, 1.00 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 22:59:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:59:26 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 22:59:26 -0800 From: "EFI Schott" Subject: Re: DIY_WB Data logging? >I know Fluke makes some nice DMM's that have logging capabilities, but they >aren't exactly cheap. And cheap is what I like. Maybe you can get one like this and take and repackage it, as it has a PC port output http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=CTLG&category%5Fname=CTLG%5F008%5F002%5F001%5F000&product%5Fid=22%2D805 _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:04:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:04:40 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:04:40 -0800 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Audio datalogging (was Re: Shock Sensor Question) "Jon Snoddy" wrote: > Not sure if this will work, but I think is should: > Plug the data recorder analog output signal into a > laptop's analog audio input and record it to an > uncompressed wave file. View it with an audio > editing program. Audio editing programs provide a > timeline view that will have very accurate time > marks in seconds, fractions of seconds and even > samples (44k per second). Another cool trick is that > the input is stereo, so you can record and display > two channels of data at once. Using one of the > many multi-track recorders, you can view successive > recordings on top of one another on the same time > line. Record audio with a microphone on one channel > so you can hear bumps and engine speed (easy to > arrive at RPM from pitch) in time synch to the > shock data. Hmmm. I'm beginning to like this idea. > > You will need to install a "pad" to reduce the > signal from 0-4v down to about 0-1 volt (what is > that, 6db?) to keep from overloading the input of > the laptop. I imagine you can buy a 6db pad at > Radio Shack. Many computers have low pass filters > at the front end that make it impossible to record > DC which means that any movement at a rate slower > than 50 to 20 Hz would come out as a straight line. > There are many audio A/D cards available for desktop > units or with a firewire connector on a laptop, > some of which have defeatable low pass filters. > > You will want to make sure the voltage is limited to > what ever your line input can tolerate. > > - -jon Dang, someone else had the same idea, or maybe "great minds think alike", basically using audio recordings as an oscilloscope or datalogger. My thunk was for detecting engine knock by capacitively coupling the cam sensor's digital signal together w/ the output of the ESC into the microphone input, didn't think about using the stereo Line In, but I like it. You'd see only spikes that represent the edges of the signal, but since it's not a symmetrical square wave, one s/b able to figure out where each cylinder would be along the time line, and from there figure out which cylinder(s) are knocking from the position of the ESC's spikes in the middle of the pattern. With a little care, you s/b able to determine if the ping is at the wrong time or too long, indicating "false knock" caused by something else. Doesn't have to be the output from the ESC either, could be directly from the knock sensor or even a microphone. Knowing which cylinders are knocking should help narrow down the possible causes. As for DC being blocked, at the cost of additional complexity you might consider modulating the signal on a high audio frequency carrier, perhaps using something like an NE602 mixer IC. Thanks for the post, Jon, you had some ideas I hadn't thought of. Might just have to get off my dead butt and try it out. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:06:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:06:17 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:06:17 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Brain Zit on Mushroom Lifter Cam Mfgr. !! Hi Guys-- Got that wrong off of the top of my head this AM about Cam Dynamics being the guys to talk to about mushroom lifter cams. No coffee + keyboard = DANGEROUS !! :-) The RIGHT name and contact info is: Camcraft Cams 8357 Black Dog Alley Easton, Maryland,21601 (410) 822-2122 (800) 426-2261 Charlie Reichard The info on cam data was correct, though. Sorry about that--- Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:07:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:07:13 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:07:13 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) My dad builds circle track engines and relayed a story to me that might shed some light here. He built 2 SBCs for different competitors, and they were nearly identical. At the end of the season he got them back for freshen up. One had the timing chain and sprockets nearly beaten to death, the other was practically brand new. His investigation showed only one difference between the two engines worth noting. They had different main bearing in them. One set had an abrupt stop to the center groove on the top bearing where the top bearing met the lower shell. The other had a smooth ramp from full depth on the groove to the height of the lower shell. He surmised, and I agree, that the abrupt transition was causing a hydraulic shock in the oiling system. Of course, the oil pump is driven by the cam, so this shock was being loaded into the timing chain and causing it to stutter and whiplash. He has since abandoned that style of bearings and has not had the problem since. Something like that could certainly cause the conditions that Clayb described. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Jon Davis Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:54 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) clayb wrote: > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a > distributor firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 > degrees, while the distributorless ignition stays rock steady. You must have had a bad timing chain or something... was it one of those GMs with the phenolic gear on the cam? I have a DOHC 4 with a optical pickup on the cam and a mile long single-row timing chain and I have never seen any ignition bounce. Jon Davis ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:07:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:07:36 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:07:36 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) From: "clayb" Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > > From: "Bruce" > > > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > > > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor > > > firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the > > > distributorless ignition stays rock steady. > > > There can be no doubt this has an impact on my ability to tune near the > > > edge of detonation. > > At idle it would wonder that much?, or thru out the rpm range. > > How big of cam?. > > Bruce > It wasn't always that bad at idle, but it did wander noticeably. Seemed > the worst timing accuracy was when the engine ran at constant speed, > like 2000 or 3000 rpm. Any slack in the system is then noticeable. Under > smooth acceleration, the chain and gear are preloaded in one direction. > Cam is 241/234 degrees. > - Clay That much cam (that is at .050", right?), is going to need a whole lot of valve spring, and yes there is a terrific load on the timing chain. The other thing is with the CAM also wondering that much, even if you got the timing rock steady with say a crank sensor'd set up you'd still be in a *hurt* cam timing wise. It might be an easy diagnostic aid to keep the distributor, and from time to time put a light on it to see if the timing is getting erratic, and then you'd know that the chain, gears etc are dead. Just thinking out loud Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:08:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:08:05 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:08:05 -0800 From: "The Punisher" Subject: need that cool F-1 sound I deleted the link to that funny sounding F-1. Could somebody please send me the link. Thanks : Marvin Fugate _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:08:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:08:29 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:08:29 -0800 From: Guy Hammer MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Newish Member Post On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Chris McKinnon wrote: > I've been thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because of the > high fuel pressures you get with LPG and maybe a diesel injector pump > as well. I'd think your biggest challange with LPG in a diesel injector pump would be lubrication. Also the injector pumps I'm familiar with (Stanadyne) are fairly low pressure on the input side, like maybe 5-7 PSI. -- Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~guyh -- 5:40pm up 39 days, 20:26, 8 users, load average: 1.17, 1.06, 1.02 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:53:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:08:54 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:08:54 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Greg Hermann wrote: > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some NASCAR > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see if > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) > Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and nothing in between. ; ) Shannen ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:57:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:09:36 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:09:36 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Single-board computer Mark Chauvin wrote: > > Has anyone ever used one of these from ZWorld? Have you thought of the Gameboy Solution? Colour LCD display, Z80-like processor, neat package, low cost/free development software, etc. This should get you started... http://fms.komkon.org/GameBoy/Tech/Hardware.html http://sourceforge.net/projects/gbdk/ Peter. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:43:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:10:09 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:10:09 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector Fuel? Hell, we can run lots of different stuff thru injectors?. Bruce From: "Guy Hammer" Subject: Re: Home for an injector > On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > > in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, Any good data > > about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > Wouldn't that sort of temperature boil the fuel? Or is that the result > you are looking for? > Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:50:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:11:05 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:11:05 -0800 From: WEG1192@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector In a message dated 12/15/01 10:26:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us writes: > BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them > directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. > I'm doing this but I didn't speak up because you asked what kind of success and its the first time I've tried it. Mainly saves a ton of precise machining. If you mar up the hole when drilling for an O-ring, you're SOL. If you mar up the hole when drilling for a threaded injector, a tap will take care of it. I saved about 20 hours of work from this trick. Now the task is to build a separate fitting for each injector and figure out a way to hold them on the injector. Got an idea but haven't finished machining. JW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:58:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:11:33 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:11:33 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Home for an injector At 8:51 AM 12/15/01, Dave Williams wrote: >-> Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector >-> in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. > > I don't see any problems with that. You might want to be particular >about the type of wiring you use; some of the cheap stuff doesn't like >oil much. The connectors should be no problem; the old Cadillac V8-6-4 >Eaton solenoids use the same connector as an ordinary Bendix type >injector. You would want "type MTW" insulated wire. the "MTW" stands for machine tool wire. Don't think it's good much above 80 or 90° C, though. Forget the actual temp rating on it. Greg > > >-> Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > > It gets easily that hot under the hood anyway. > > >-> has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what >-> kind of success have you had. > > BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them >directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. > > MSD sells some nice bits to mount a hose on the end using the stock >O-ring setup and a wireform clip to hold the adapter in place. > >==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== >I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? >my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? >============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 16 23:33:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:12:38 -0800 Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2001 23:12:38 -0800 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: any javascript experts out there? I promise this is list related. I need help if anyone is good with javascript or any other method of doing client side CGI type programming. Something that's compatible with Netscape and IE. Please reply privately. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efidave@hotmail.com Sat Dec 15 19:35:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:18:25 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:18:25 -0300 From: "EFI Schott" Subject: Re: DIY_WB Data logging? >I know Fluke makes some nice DMM's that have logging capabilities, but they >aren't exactly cheap. And cheap is what I like. Maybe you can get one like this and take and repackage it, as it has a PC port output http://www.radioshack.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=CTLG&category%5Fname=CTLG%5F008%5F002%5F001%5F000&product%5Fid=22%2D805 _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Sat Dec 15 21:28:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:19:33 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:19:33 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) My dad builds circle track engines and relayed a story to me that might shed some light here. He built 2 SBCs for different competitors, and they were nearly identical. At the end of the season he got them back for freshen up. One had the timing chain and sprockets nearly beaten to death, the other was practically brand new. His investigation showed only one difference between the two engines worth noting. They had different main bearing in them. One set had an abrupt stop to the center groove on the top bearing where the top bearing met the lower shell. The other had a smooth ramp from full depth on the groove to the height of the lower shell. He surmised, and I agree, that the abrupt transition was causing a hydraulic shock in the oiling system. Of course, the oil pump is driven by the cam, so this shock was being loaded into the timing chain and causing it to stutter and whiplash. He has since abandoned that style of bearings and has not had the problem since. Something like that could certainly cause the conditions that Clayb described. Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Jon Davis Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 11:54 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) clayb wrote: > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a > distributor firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 > degrees, while the distributorless ignition stays rock steady. You must have had a bad timing chain or something... was it one of those GMs with the phenolic gear on the cam? I have a DOHC 4 with a optical pickup on the cam and a mile long single-row timing chain and I have never seen any ignition bounce. Jon Davis ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 15 21:42:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:20:54 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:20:54 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) From: "clayb" Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > > From: "Bruce" > > > That said, I've found that cam triggering of ignition is definitely > > > inferior, especially when a timing chain is involved. With a distributor > > > firing my turbo 454, timing would bounce at least 5 degrees, while the > > > distributorless ignition stays rock steady. > > > There can be no doubt this has an impact on my ability to tune near the > > > edge of detonation. > > At idle it would wonder that much?, or thru out the rpm range. > > How big of cam?. > > Bruce > It wasn't always that bad at idle, but it did wander noticeably. Seemed > the worst timing accuracy was when the engine ran at constant speed, > like 2000 or 3000 rpm. Any slack in the system is then noticeable. Under > smooth acceleration, the chain and gear are preloaded in one direction. > Cam is 241/234 degrees. > - Clay That much cam (that is at .050", right?), is going to need a whole lot of valve spring, and yes there is a terrific load on the timing chain. The other thing is with the CAM also wondering that much, even if you got the timing rock steady with say a crank sensor'd set up you'd still be in a *hurt* cam timing wise. It might be an easy diagnostic aid to keep the distributor, and from time to time put a light on it to see if the timing is getting erratic, and then you'd know that the chain, gears etc are dead. Just thinking out loud Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sat Dec 15 20:04:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:21:43 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:21:43 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Brain Zit on Mushroom Lifter Cam Mfgr. !! Hi Guys-- Got that wrong off of the top of my head this AM about Cam Dynamics being the guys to talk to about mushroom lifter cams. No coffee + keyboard = DANGEROUS !! :-) The RIGHT name and contact info is: Camcraft Cams 8357 Black Dog Alley Easton, Maryland,21601 (410) 822-2122 (800) 426-2261 Charlie Reichard The info on cam data was correct, though. Sorry about that--- Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From punisher454@hotmail.com Sat Dec 15 22:15:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:21:54 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:21:54 -0300 From: "The Punisher" Subject: need that cool F-1 sound I deleted the link to that funny sounding F-1. Could somebody please send me the link. Thanks : Marvin Fugate _________________________________________________________________ Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From guyh@aracnet.com Sat Dec 15 22:48:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:23:41 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:23:41 -0300 From: Guy Hammer MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Newish Member Post On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Chris McKinnon wrote: > I've been thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because of the > high fuel pressures you get with LPG and maybe a diesel injector pump > as well. I'd think your biggest challange with LPG in a diesel injector pump would be lubrication. Also the injector pumps I'm familiar with (Stanadyne) are fairly low pressure on the input side, like maybe 5-7 PSI. -- Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~guyh -- 5:40pm up 39 days, 20:26, 8 users, load average: 1.17, 1.06, 1.02 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ilphayunterhay@yahoo.com Sat Dec 15 19:46:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:34:35 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:34:35 -0300 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Audio datalogging (was Re: Shock Sensor Question) "Jon Snoddy" wrote: > Not sure if this will work, but I think is should: > Plug the data recorder analog output signal into a > laptop's analog audio input and record it to an > uncompressed wave file. View it with an audio > editing program. Audio editing programs provide a > timeline view that will have very accurate time > marks in seconds, fractions of seconds and even > samples (44k per second). Another cool trick is that > the input is stereo, so you can record and display > two channels of data at once. Using one of the > many multi-track recorders, you can view successive > recordings on top of one another on the same time > line. Record audio with a microphone on one channel > so you can hear bumps and engine speed (easy to > arrive at RPM from pitch) in time synch to the > shock data. Hmmm. I'm beginning to like this idea. > > You will need to install a "pad" to reduce the > signal from 0-4v down to about 0-1 volt (what is > that, 6db?) to keep from overloading the input of > the laptop. I imagine you can buy a 6db pad at > Radio Shack. Many computers have low pass filters > at the front end that make it impossible to record > DC which means that any movement at a rate slower > than 50 to 20 Hz would come out as a straight line. > There are many audio A/D cards available for desktop > units or with a firewire connector on a laptop, > some of which have defeatable low pass filters. > > You will want to make sure the voltage is limited to > what ever your line input can tolerate. > > - -jon Dang, someone else had the same idea, or maybe "great minds think alike", basically using audio recordings as an oscilloscope or datalogger. My thunk was for detecting engine knock by capacitively coupling the cam sensor's digital signal together w/ the output of the ESC into the microphone input, didn't think about using the stereo Line In, but I like it. You'd see only spikes that represent the edges of the signal, but since it's not a symmetrical square wave, one s/b able to figure out where each cylinder would be along the time line, and from there figure out which cylinder(s) are knocking from the position of the ESC's spikes in the middle of the pattern. With a little care, you s/b able to determine if the ping is at the wrong time or too long, indicating "false knock" caused by something else. Doesn't have to be the output from the ESC either, could be directly from the knock sensor or even a microphone. Knowing which cylinders are knocking should help narrow down the possible causes. As for DC being blocked, at the cost of additional complexity you might consider modulating the signal on a high audio frequency carrier, perhaps using something like an NE602 mixer IC. Thanks for the post, Jon, you had some ideas I hadn't thought of. Might just have to get off my dead butt and try it out. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sun Dec 16 01:24:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:52:22 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:52:22 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector Fuel? Hell, we can run lots of different stuff thru injectors?. Bruce From: "Guy Hammer" Subject: Re: Home for an injector > On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > > in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, Any good data > > about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > Wouldn't that sort of temperature boil the fuel? Or is that the result > you are looking for? > Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From sravet@arm.com Mon Dec 17 03:28:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:52:39 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:52:39 -0300 From: steve ravet MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: any javascript experts out there? I promise this is list related. I need help if anyone is good with javascript or any other method of doing client side CGI type programming. Something that's compatible with Netscape and IE. Please reply privately. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From WEG1192@aol.com Sun Dec 16 01:51:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:57:54 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:57:54 -0300 From: WEG1192@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector In a message dated 12/15/01 10:26:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us writes: > BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them > directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. > I'm doing this but I didn't speak up because you asked what kind of success and its the first time I've tried it. Mainly saves a ton of precise machining. If you mar up the hole when drilling for an O-ring, you're SOL. If you mar up the hole when drilling for a threaded injector, a tap will take care of it. I saved about 20 hours of work from this trick. Now the task is to build a separate fitting for each injector and figure out a way to hold them on the injector. Got an idea but haven't finished machining. JW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Wed Dec 16 00:44:38 1998 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:59:00 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 04:59:00 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Greg Hermann wrote: > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some NASCAR > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see if > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) > Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and nothing in between. ; ) Shannen ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Sun Dec 16 01:18:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:06:57 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:06:57 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Single-board computer Mark Chauvin wrote: > > Has anyone ever used one of these from ZWorld? Have you thought of the Gameboy Solution? Colour LCD display, Z80-like processor, neat package, low cost/free development software, etc. This should get you started... http://fms.komkon.org/GameBoy/Tech/Hardware.html http://sourceforge.net/projects/gbdk/ Peter. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Sun Dec 16 03:01:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:08:28 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 05:08:28 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Home for an injector At 8:51 AM 12/15/01, Dave Williams wrote: >-> Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector >-> in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. > > I don't see any problems with that. You might want to be particular >about the type of wiring you use; some of the cheap stuff doesn't like >oil much. The connectors should be no problem; the old Cadillac V8-6-4 >Eaton solenoids use the same connector as an ordinary Bendix type >injector. You would want "type MTW" insulated wire. the "MTW" stands for machine tool wire. Don't think it's good much above 80 or 90° C, though. Forget the actual temp rating on it. Greg > > >-> Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > > It gets easily that hot under the hood anyway. > > >-> has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what >-> kind of success have you had. > > BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them >directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. > > MSD sells some nice bits to mount a hose on the end using the stock >O-ring setup and a wireform clip to hold the adapter in place. > >==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== >I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? >my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? >============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 10:07:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:07:40 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:07:40 -0800 From: "William Shurvinton" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 spit/sprite. It was late, I was tired. Neither has anything like the torsional ridigity to deal with a V8 without some serious chassis reinforcement. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carter Shore > > Uhh, William, that's a *SPITFIRE* not a Sprite! > Not the same at all. > > (Might as well accuse a Finn of being Swedish) > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 10:08:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:08:03 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:08:03 -0800 From: "Leon Rathburn" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Single-board computer would this work on an import? I know we would have to setup a lot of the sensors ourselves, and write our own code, but would it work? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Chauvin" To: Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 9:46 AM Subject: Single-board computer > Has anyone ever used one of these from ZWorld? > > http://www.zworld.com/products/bl1800/index.html > > It's the only 12-volt one I could find that doesn't cost a fortune. > Thinking of using it to make my own Scanmaster-type OBD2 display. Has > anybody else done this? > > Thanks... > > -Mark > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 10:09:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:09:03 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:09:03 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector I have a complete catalog from Kinzler. Would you like any of their info? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Williams" To: Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 8:51 AM Subject: Home for an injector > > > -> Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > -> in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. > > I don't see any problems with that. You might want to be particular > about the type of wiring you use; some of the cheap stuff doesn't like > oil much. The connectors should be no problem; the old Cadillac V8-6-4 > Eaton solenoids use the same connector as an ordinary Bendix type > injector. > > > -> Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > > It gets easily that hot under the hood anyway. > > > -> has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what > -> kind of success have you had. > > BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them > directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. > > MSD sells some nice bits to mount a hose on the end using the stock > O-ring setup and a wireform clip to hold the adapter in place. > > ==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== > I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? > my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? > ============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 10:09:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:09:31 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:09:31 -0800 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Newish Member Post > I've been lurking for some time so I figured it's > time for an intro post. I've got an 85 F150 with a > 351W on LPG. I'm interested in trying to > build/hack/modify some type of LPG injection for it, > maybe port, maybe TBI. I've had some experience > playing with PIC's, mostly 16C887's. I've been > thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because > of the high fuel pressures you get with LPG and > maybe a diesel injector pump as well. Before > I get too deep into this project is there anyone out > there who has done the same thing? > > I was thinking about maybe using the Magasquirt for > TBI, or hacking a Ford ECM for port injection. Does > anyone have any input? > > Thanks, > Chris I've heard that diesel fuel injectors are designed to use the fuel as a lubricant, run gasoline (or propane) thru them and they'll gall. There was a time, and perhaps some still do, when NOX injection kits used propane as the supplemental fuel, high octane (110?), same plumbing as NOX, etc. You might do some investigation into what's available here, doubtful NOX solenoids are designed to cycle on & off like a fuel injector, you might be able to "push the envelope" but that's unlikely to be successful. Summit is/was having a close-out on ADS chips, I noted that they had chips for '91(?) Chevy PU's, one for gas, one for propane, thought it would be interesting to get one of each and compare them to see what the differences where, but I never did. Personally, I'd be more interested in taking advantage of that high octane w/ turbocharging rather than converting to FI. Hmmm...hafta give that some more thought... HTH, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 10:09:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:09:51 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:09:51 -0800 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: re: DIY_WB Data logging? "The Punisher" wrote: [snip] > Write youre code in assembly for free, or get Micro > Engineering Labs "Pic Basic Compiler" for 99 bucks > (250 for the full tilt pro edition) and do it the > easy way in basic (this compiler optimizes very > well, you wont loose much speed over hand assembly). > A compiled program like this will run tens to > hundred times faster than interpeted code like on > a stamp. I've read about an open-source Basic compiler for Atmel uC's, http://www.rvkbob.com, Digi-Key is a source for Atmel chips. [snip] > You could VERY easly acomplish youre datalogging and > display on an inexpensive LCD display (2x16,2x20 and > 4x20 are common). I've mentioned this before, I think it'd be really useful to have the PIC drive a D/A converter to simulate a NB sensor into the ECM, then ALDL scan tools, "lockers", Direct Scan and the like can do the datalogging. With a known relationship between the WB output and the NB ECM input, you eliminate the guesswork of "780mV equals what A/F ratio?" when using a NB sensor beyond it's intended range. Should be useful to just about any EFI vehicle w/ a NB O2 sensor and a scan tool, plus no permanent mods are required, so you could swap it around w/ buddies at Test-n-Tune, for example. I've just started on schematics, anyone further along? [snip] > If youre going to build just one unit and dont need > high speed the stamp is a bit cheaper. but not MUCH > easier. For our purposes, besides speed a feature that's missing in a lot of the Basic Stamps is A/D input so you have to do it externally, but there's at least one variation that has A/D built in, known as the Atom from http://www.basicmicro.com. The Atom40 looks promising too but specs & docs are sparse at the moment. Anyone care to try to make a 30 LED WB bargraph w/ the Atom40, just to "push the envelope" in another direction? [snip] regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 10:10:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:10:11 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:10:11 -0800 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WBO2 testing OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it got brighter. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shurvinton@orange.net Sun Dec 16 05:27:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:31:34 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:31:34 -0300 From: "William Shurvinton" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 spit/sprite. It was late, I was tired. Neither has anything like the torsional ridigity to deal with a V8 without some serious chassis reinforcement. ----- Original Message ----- From: Carter Shore > > Uhh, William, that's a *SPITFIRE* not a Sprite! > Not the same at all. > > (Might as well accuse a Finn of being Swedish) > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Sun Dec 16 09:08:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:31:40 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:31:40 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector I have a complete catalog from Kinzler. Would you like any of their info? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Williams" To: Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 8:51 AM Subject: Home for an injector > > > -> Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > -> in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. > > I don't see any problems with that. You might want to be particular > about the type of wiring you use; some of the cheap stuff doesn't like > oil much. The connectors should be no problem; the old Cadillac V8-6-4 > Eaton solenoids use the same connector as an ordinary Bendix type > injector. > > > -> Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > > It gets easily that hot under the hood anyway. > > > -> has anyone done any injectoe mounting without using a rail, and what > -> kind of success have you had. > > BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them > directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. > > MSD sells some nice bits to mount a hose on the end using the stock > O-ring setup and a wireform clip to hold the adapter in place. > > ==dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us====================================== > I've got a secret / I've been hiding / under my skin / | Who are you? > my heart is human / my blood is boiling / my brain IBM | who, who? > ============================== http://angelfire.com/ar/dw42/index.htm > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ilphayunterhay@yahoo.com Sun Dec 16 14:38:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:31:40 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:31:40 -0300 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Newish Member Post > I've been lurking for some time so I figured it's > time for an intro post. I've got an 85 F150 with a > 351W on LPG. I'm interested in trying to > build/hack/modify some type of LPG injection for it, > maybe port, maybe TBI. I've had some experience > playing with PIC's, mostly 16C887's. I've been > thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because > of the high fuel pressures you get with LPG and > maybe a diesel injector pump as well. Before > I get too deep into this project is there anyone out > there who has done the same thing? > > I was thinking about maybe using the Magasquirt for > TBI, or hacking a Ford ECM for port injection. Does > anyone have any input? > > Thanks, > Chris I've heard that diesel fuel injectors are designed to use the fuel as a lubricant, run gasoline (or propane) thru them and they'll gall. There was a time, and perhaps some still do, when NOX injection kits used propane as the supplemental fuel, high octane (110?), same plumbing as NOX, etc. You might do some investigation into what's available here, doubtful NOX solenoids are designed to cycle on & off like a fuel injector, you might be able to "push the envelope" but that's unlikely to be successful. Summit is/was having a close-out on ADS chips, I noted that they had chips for '91(?) Chevy PU's, one for gas, one for propane, thought it would be interesting to get one of each and compare them to see what the differences where, but I never did. Personally, I'd be more interested in taking advantage of that high octane w/ turbocharging rather than converting to FI. Hmmm...hafta give that some more thought... HTH, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ilphayunterhay@yahoo.com Sun Dec 16 18:27:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:31:42 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:31:42 -0300 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: re: DIY_WB Data logging? "The Punisher" wrote: [snip] > Write youre code in assembly for free, or get Micro > Engineering Labs "Pic Basic Compiler" for 99 bucks > (250 for the full tilt pro edition) and do it the > easy way in basic (this compiler optimizes very > well, you wont loose much speed over hand assembly). > A compiled program like this will run tens to > hundred times faster than interpeted code like on > a stamp. I've read about an open-source Basic compiler for Atmel uC's, http://www.rvkbob.com, Digi-Key is a source for Atmel chips. [snip] > You could VERY easly acomplish youre datalogging and > display on an inexpensive LCD display (2x16,2x20 and > 4x20 are common). I've mentioned this before, I think it'd be really useful to have the PIC drive a D/A converter to simulate a NB sensor into the ECM, then ALDL scan tools, "lockers", Direct Scan and the like can do the datalogging. With a known relationship between the WB output and the NB ECM input, you eliminate the guesswork of "780mV equals what A/F ratio?" when using a NB sensor beyond it's intended range. Should be useful to just about any EFI vehicle w/ a NB O2 sensor and a scan tool, plus no permanent mods are required, so you could swap it around w/ buddies at Test-n-Tune, for example. I've just started on schematics, anyone further along? [snip] > If youre going to build just one unit and dont need > high speed the stamp is a bit cheaper. but not MUCH > easier. For our purposes, besides speed a feature that's missing in a lot of the Basic Stamps is A/D input so you have to do it externally, but there's at least one variation that has A/D built in, known as the Atom from http://www.basicmicro.com. The Atom40 looks promising too but specs & docs are sparse at the moment. Anyone care to try to make a 30 LED WB bargraph w/ the Atom40, just to "push the envelope" in another direction? [snip] regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos68x@yahoo.com Sun Dec 16 07:42:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:33:26 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:33:26 -0300 From: "Leon Rathburn" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Single-board computer would this work on an import? I know we would have to setup a lot of the sensors ourselves, and write our own code, but would it work? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Chauvin" To: Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 9:46 AM Subject: Single-board computer > Has anyone ever used one of these from ZWorld? > > http://www.zworld.com/products/bl1800/index.html > > It's the only 12-volt one I could find that doesn't cost a fortune. > Thinking of using it to make my own Scanmaster-type OBD2 display. Has > anybody else done this? > > Thanks... > > -Mark > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From gbeard1@nycap.rr.com Mon Dec 17 03:04:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:44:54 -0300 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 15:44:54 -0300 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WBO2 testing OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it got brighter. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:28:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:28:38 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:28:38 -0800 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Newish Member Post You are gonna have a very very difficult time with port injection on LPG. We tried to do that at work, and were never successful. And that was at an OEM. Really there's not much point in LPG port injection anyway. It's a completely gaseous fuel by the time it hits the valves! > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris McKinnon [mailto:chrism@cnx.net] > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 1:06 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Newish Member Post > > > I've been lurking for some time so I figured it's time for an > intro post. > I've got an 85 F150 with a 351W on LPG. I'm interested in trying to > build/hack/modify some type of LPG injection for it, maybe > port, maybe TBI. > I've had some experience playing with PIC's, mostly 16C887's. > I've been > thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because of the high fuel > pressures you get with LPG and maybe a diesel injector pump > as well. Before > I get too deep into this project is there anyone out there > who has done the > same thing? > > I was thinking about maybe using the Magasquirt for TBI, or > hacking a Ford > ECM for port injection. Does anyone have any input? > > Thanks, > Chris > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:28:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:28:53 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:28:53 -0800 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) They were legal. Rollers never have been in the "CUP" series. Problem with mushroom lifter camshafts are that they don't last very long. If you put an aggressive grind that will need valve spring to maintain control, then lifter and lobe life is very much shortened over "Normal" flat tappet cam grinds. Also the bottom of the block "must" be spotfaced to prevent one point of the lifter touching a casting tit or bump which breaks the foot off the lifter. Perhaps lifter float cause you were trying to run the lightest springs to cut down on drag and wear. Then the driver does something bright like turn it 9600 on a restart. Also they have to be shimmed front to rear against cam walk cause the opposite lobe will lift the wrong valve with very little aft to fore movement. Used to see pallets of Crane, Competion Cams, Cam Dynamics, Reed, and Crower Cams mushrooms at some of the local "CUP" shops. They couldn't run a cam and lifter but once. Wouldn't make two races. I use to buy the used cams and lifters and run them in short track engines. Valve action with a mushroom can be more radical than a roller ever dreamed about. They just don't last long because of the loading. Oh, the lobes are thinner to help with the "crosslift problem" because of the big foot. The "CUP" stuff was cut for a 1" foot lifter. When Nascar outlawed the mushroom, they all went to the ford lifter size, .850" I think. Precisioneering in Asheville, NC does most of the lifter boring and registering for the teams. They have a factory type lifter boring machine. Duh, that's probably more than anyone would want to know about that "old" stuff. later, Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shannen Durphey" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Greg Hermann wrote: > > > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some NASCAR > > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, > > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see if > > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) > > > Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. > > Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and nothing > in between. ; ) > Shannen > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:29:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:29:10 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:29:10 -0800 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor > IIRC, it is a two tooth wheel (180 degree oppossed teeth) on a cam with a > sensor mounted in the valve cover. It is very similar to the crank sensor > setup except for it's location difference the the difference in the number > of teeth. I don't see why they used two teeth 180 degrees opposed because > you then lose the ability to sync your signal according to a particular > valve event (say combustion vs intake on #1). Actually, I just was messing with the sensor last night. It's a 3-tooth cam sensor. Two of them are 180 degrees apart, and the third one is approximately 30 degrees (haven't measured it) rotated from one of the teeth. The cam trigger is mounted on the exhaust cam, and the sensor is mounted in the head. The trigger wheel has a non-symmetrical bolt pattern, so it's essentially idiot-proof at the factory, but removes the possibility of re-aligning it. On your F4i, you can see through the access hole in the sidecover that the crank trigger is a 12 tooth wheel. Nine of the 12 are straight teeth, while three have "shoulders" of sorts. The shouldered crank teeth align with the crank sensor at approximately the same time as the cam teeth align with the cam sensor (at least to my uncalibrated eye). Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:29:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:29:25 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:29:25 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Its a data recorder, there is no analog out, its all analog inputs. Otherwise it would be a data player. The topic of this was to develop a inexpensive / innovative way to measure linear displacement in a high frequency application (500Hz or faster). I can spend $200 and buy a linear pot that works has a high frequency response, but I wanted to explore ways to do it optically or other, and see if we could do it on a small budget. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Jon Snoddy [mailto:Jon@Snoddy.net] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:13 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Not sure if this will work, but I think is should: Plug the data recorder analog output signal into a laptop's analog audio input and record it to an uncompressed wave file. View it with an audio editing program. Audio editing programs provide a timeline view that will have very accurate time marks in seconds, fractions of seconds and even samples (44k per second). Another cool trick is that the input is stereo, so you can record and display two channels of data at once. Using one of the many multi-track recorders, you can view successive recordings on top of one another on the same time line. Record audio with a microphone on one channel so you can hear bumps and engine speed (easy to arrive at RPM from pitch) in time synch to the shock data. Hmmm. I'm beginning to like this idea. You will need to install a "pad" to reduce the signal from 0-4v down to about 0-1 volt (what is that, 6db?) to keep from overloading the input of the laptop. I imagine you can buy a 6db pad at Radio Shack. Many computers have low pass filters at the front end that make it impossible to record DC which means that any movement at a rate slower than 50 to 20 Hz would come out as a straight line. There are many audio A/D cards available for desktop units or with a firewire connector on a laptop, some of which have defeatable low pass filters. You will want to make sure the voltage is limited to what ever your line input can tolerate. -jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bernd Felsche Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 5:18 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data > recorder. Computer is digital. I wasn't aware of your limitation of an analogue data recorder. If the camera is digital, use IEEE1394 connection for lossless, digital transfer. You measure the displacement on-screen on a field-by-field basis. > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking > for a cheap way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch > and also down track. > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position > sensors, I am just looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont > allow for that expense when the money is needed else where on the > car. Rotary encoders are somewhat cheaper, depending on enclosures and resolution. Cost really depends on if you already have a camcorder. > Thanks though. > > BW??? The recorder can sample from 1 Hz to 1000 Hz max. What's the frequency of the thing you're trying to measure? Normal (road) suspension dampers cannot respond to frequencies much beyond 100Hz. The suspension relies instead on tyre flexure. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > > is launching and driving down track. > > > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > > critical to maximizing the performance. > > Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 > or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal > into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the > displacement over time, from field to field. > > What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be > measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:29:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:29:53 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:29:53 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Brian, I am not that concerned with what the shocks are doing down track, what I am trying to capture is the exact action of the chassis at the time of launch. Trying to put 1800HP to the ground, the most critical part of the pass is the launch. Warren Johnson samples his Shocks at 1000 Hz, any drag race data logging company will tell you a minimum of 500 Hz for the shocks. A lot happens in that first few seconds and thats what I want to capture. The camera idea wont work. First I think it would fail Tech under the current NHRA regulations, for safety reasons. Not sure of the wind effects under a car going over 200mph. And the frame rate of my cam-corder can barely capture the tire spin on the starting line, never mind a shock movement. The strain gauge sounds interesting though. Curious of how I could apply strain gauges to measure wheelie bar Hit? Any ideas? The question is where should it be attached. Are they always attached to a coil/spring or can you actually bond it to a metal bar and measure the bend, basically when the wheelie bars hit the ground, the bars may flex some, this way we could tell which bar is hitting harder. How about calibrating this, any ideas? The only other concern is position of the sensor, if you bond a stain device to the bottom of the bar assuming it will flex up, when we adjust the whellie bars, we rotate the bar (on a bolt) to adjust in or out. Any time the bars are turned, the sensor will rotate. Wont be easy to implement and make it functional so that it allows for changing the position of the bars. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Brian Dessent [mailto:brian@dessent.net] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 3:57 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > The non contact displacement sensor is what I had mentioned as a potential > optical to reflective device, I was just in the wrong frequency range. If > we can mount a device that outputs a signal to a reflective surface and then > measure the time to return, we know the distance. Sounds easy, however, it > would require some technology that can calculate the time for the signal to > travel? How complicated is it to design a circuit that would output a > voltage relative to a displacement? If you do a Google search for "ultrasonic rangefinder" you'll get some OK links. However, the more I think about it I don't think this would be the best way. They probably don't have the resolution you would need. You said you're measuring a 4" shock travel, but what resolution do you need? Knowing this will help you choose the right solution. The ultrasonic transducers would probably only be able to give you a measurement within an inch or two, using the stock electronics. You might be able to build a custom signal conditioner to get higher precision but you could spent a long time working on such a thing. > Linear Pots (the cheap ones) will not work at the Freqs that the shock > moves, I have been told to record between 500 and 1000 Hz for these > measurements. Well, do what you wish, but that seems WAY to high to me. The sprung mass resonates at about 1 Hz and the unsprung mass resonates at around 10-20 Hz. You could roughly estimate these frequencies with sqrt(k/m)/(2*Pi), where k = spring rate and m = mass (make sure to use consistant units.) Vibrations above the resonant frequency are absorbed almost completely by the tires. See: http://www.umtri.umich.edu/erd/roughness/every.pdf I would measure DC (i.e. 0 Hz) to 50 Hz at most. Since you said you are interested in 1/4 mile times, I take this to mean you want to know front/rear weight transfer, and this would be a very LOW frequency signal since you're accelerating hard pretty much the whole time. > How exactly does a strain gauge work? Does the output voltage change > depending on how hard you pull on it? It measures strain. :-) Seriously, take any elastic material and apply a force (stress) and it reacts by deforming (strain.) For solids, stress is proportional to strain and the constant that relates them is called the modulus of elasticity. A strain gauge is usually a thin piece of conductive material that changes its resistance with strain. Used alone, it's pretty worthless. What's so neat about it is you can bond it to whatever structure you're interested in and it will measure the amount of strain, and by doing some calculations you can relate this to the stress in the structure, which in turn will tell you when/if it will fail. For example, you could bond a strain gauge to a steel i-beam in a skyscraper to see how much it flexes in the wind to know if your building is going to fall over in a hurricane. Anyway, what I was talking about would be to buy a small strain gauge, epoxy it to part of the coilspring, build/buy a signal conditioner (simple instrumentation op-amp circuit, the full scale signal is probably 20mV or so), and then datalog the resulting signal. It would be proportional to deflection of the coil spring if you choose the right location for the strain gauge. Go to www.omega.com and find their section on strain gauges, they should have lots of background and application hints. Bernd's idea of mounting a camera on the car with a view of the suspension and then analyzing it with a computer is looking more and more attractive. The hard part would be finding room to mount it where it could record a picture of the suspension. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:30:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:30:45 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:30:45 -0800 From: "Jon Snoddy" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: any javascript experts out there? Steve, Not sure if you are looking to hire someone or looking for a favor. I know several good freelance programmers, if you want to hire one. They cost between $45 and $150 an hour. Happy to hook you up with one if you like. Unfortunately, while they are excellent programmers I don't think any of them know anything about cars, much less fuel injection. -jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of steve ravet Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 10:29 PM To: diy_efi; gmecm@diy-efi.org; efi_332 Subject: any javascript experts out there? I promise this is list related. I need help if anyone is good with javascript or any other method of doing client side CGI type programming. Something that's compatible with Netscape and IE. Please reply privately. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:30:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:30:52 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:30:52 -0800 From: "Obie Fayth" Subject: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? Hi Everyone, I just signed up to the list a few days ago and wanted to introduce myself. I don't know much about electronics, but I am a computer programmer by trade and am eager to learn more about hardware. I can see there are some very knowledgable people on the list and I look forward to learning more about building an efi system for my car. I came across the list by way of the MegaSquirt site -- anyone on the list using that? One off topic question: A couple of days after signing up for this list I got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY turbocharging list. I responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard anything since. I accidentally deleted the original email, but was wondering if anyone out there might know the list I am talking about or could recommend an alternative list for someone interested in learning more about turbocharging a vehicle (turbo selection, exh. manifold construction, etc.). thanks, -Obie Tacoma, Wa. _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:31:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:31:11 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:31:11 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing The exhaust contributes a HUGE amount of heat to warm the sensor, without that heat source your asking the circuit to supply all that energy. In use mine barely warms a 4x6 .040ish" sheet of AL. Bruce From: "Glen Beard" Subject: WBO2 testing > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:31:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:31:31 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:31:31 -0800 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 -> spit/sprite. It was late, I was tired. Neither has anything like the -> torsional ridigity to deal with a V8 without some serious chassis -> reinforcement. I doubt it's an issue. The one I built never made it to the road, but I've seen others. The tires simply go up in smoke before anything's loaded much. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 17 22:32:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:32:14 -0800 Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 22:32:14 -0800 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Re: Newish Member Post >I've heard that diesel fuel injectors are designed to >use the fuel as a lubricant, run gasoline (or propane) >thru them and they'll gall. I'll have to ask one of the diesel mechanic's I know for a couple of old injectors. Then I can try to test them to destruction. >There was a time, and perhaps some still do, when NOX >injection kits used propane as the supplemental fuel, >high octane (110?), same plumbing as NOX, etc. You >might do some investigation into what's available >here, doubtful NOX solenoids are designed to cycle on >& off like a fuel injector, you might be able to >"push the envelope" but that's unlikely to be >successful. That could be worth a shot, I'll look into it. >Summit is/was having a close-out on ADS chips, I noted >that they had chips for '91(?) Chevy PU's, one for >gas, one for propane, thought it would be interesting >to get one of each and compare them to see what the >differences where, but I never did. As far as I know the differences are in the ignition curves. You can jack up the timing a bit more on LPG at higher revs. >Personally, I'd be more interested in taking advantage >of that high octane w/ turbocharging rather than >converting to FI. Hmmm...hafta give that some more >thought... The thing I like about LPG is the fact that you can run up to about 14:1 compression and the extra torque it give at lower RPM's. Plus the fact that LPG is worth about 2/3 of gas. Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chrism@cnx.net Mon Dec 17 17:59:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:54 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:54 -0300 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Re: Newish Member Post >I've heard that diesel fuel injectors are designed to >use the fuel as a lubricant, run gasoline (or propane) >thru them and they'll gall. I'll have to ask one of the diesel mechanic's I know for a couple of old injectors. Then I can try to test them to destruction. >There was a time, and perhaps some still do, when NOX >injection kits used propane as the supplemental fuel, >high octane (110?), same plumbing as NOX, etc. You >might do some investigation into what's available >here, doubtful NOX solenoids are designed to cycle on >& off like a fuel injector, you might be able to >"push the envelope" but that's unlikely to be >successful. That could be worth a shot, I'll look into it. >Summit is/was having a close-out on ADS chips, I noted >that they had chips for '91(?) Chevy PU's, one for >gas, one for propane, thought it would be interesting >to get one of each and compare them to see what the >differences where, but I never did. As far as I know the differences are in the ignition curves. You can jack up the timing a bit more on LPG at higher revs. >Personally, I'd be more interested in taking advantage >of that high octane w/ turbocharging rather than >converting to FI. Hmmm...hafta give that some more >thought... The thing I like about LPG is the fact that you can run up to about 14:1 compression and the extra torque it give at lower RPM's. Plus the fact that LPG is worth about 2/3 of gas. Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Jon@Snoddy.net Mon Dec 17 14:59:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:54 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:54 -0300 From: "Jon Snoddy" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: any javascript experts out there? Steve, Not sure if you are looking to hire someone or looking for a favor. I know several good freelance programmers, if you want to hire one. They cost between $45 and $150 an hour. Happy to hook you up with one if you like. Unfortunately, while they are excellent programmers I don't think any of them know anything about cars, much less fuel injection. -jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of steve ravet Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 10:29 PM To: diy_efi; gmecm@diy-efi.org; efi_332 Subject: any javascript experts out there? I promise this is list related. I need help if anyone is good with javascript or any other method of doing client side CGI type programming. Something that's compatible with Netscape and IE. Please reply privately. --steve -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@arm.com ARM,Inc. www.arm.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Mon Dec 17 12:09:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:54 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:54 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Brian, I am not that concerned with what the shocks are doing down track, what I am trying to capture is the exact action of the chassis at the time of launch. Trying to put 1800HP to the ground, the most critical part of the pass is the launch. Warren Johnson samples his Shocks at 1000 Hz, any drag race data logging company will tell you a minimum of 500 Hz for the shocks. A lot happens in that first few seconds and thats what I want to capture. The camera idea wont work. First I think it would fail Tech under the current NHRA regulations, for safety reasons. Not sure of the wind effects under a car going over 200mph. And the frame rate of my cam-corder can barely capture the tire spin on the starting line, never mind a shock movement. The strain gauge sounds interesting though. Curious of how I could apply strain gauges to measure wheelie bar Hit? Any ideas? The question is where should it be attached. Are they always attached to a coil/spring or can you actually bond it to a metal bar and measure the bend, basically when the wheelie bars hit the ground, the bars may flex some, this way we could tell which bar is hitting harder. How about calibrating this, any ideas? The only other concern is position of the sensor, if you bond a stain device to the bottom of the bar assuming it will flex up, when we adjust the whellie bars, we rotate the bar (on a bolt) to adjust in or out. Any time the bars are turned, the sensor will rotate. Wont be easy to implement and make it functional so that it allows for changing the position of the bars. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Brian Dessent [mailto:brian@dessent.net] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 3:57 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > The non contact displacement sensor is what I had mentioned as a potential > optical to reflective device, I was just in the wrong frequency range. If > we can mount a device that outputs a signal to a reflective surface and then > measure the time to return, we know the distance. Sounds easy, however, it > would require some technology that can calculate the time for the signal to > travel? How complicated is it to design a circuit that would output a > voltage relative to a displacement? If you do a Google search for "ultrasonic rangefinder" you'll get some OK links. However, the more I think about it I don't think this would be the best way. They probably don't have the resolution you would need. You said you're measuring a 4" shock travel, but what resolution do you need? Knowing this will help you choose the right solution. The ultrasonic transducers would probably only be able to give you a measurement within an inch or two, using the stock electronics. You might be able to build a custom signal conditioner to get higher precision but you could spent a long time working on such a thing. > Linear Pots (the cheap ones) will not work at the Freqs that the shock > moves, I have been told to record between 500 and 1000 Hz for these > measurements. Well, do what you wish, but that seems WAY to high to me. The sprung mass resonates at about 1 Hz and the unsprung mass resonates at around 10-20 Hz. You could roughly estimate these frequencies with sqrt(k/m)/(2*Pi), where k = spring rate and m = mass (make sure to use consistant units.) Vibrations above the resonant frequency are absorbed almost completely by the tires. See: http://www.umtri.umich.edu/erd/roughness/every.pdf I would measure DC (i.e. 0 Hz) to 50 Hz at most. Since you said you are interested in 1/4 mile times, I take this to mean you want to know front/rear weight transfer, and this would be a very LOW frequency signal since you're accelerating hard pretty much the whole time. > How exactly does a strain gauge work? Does the output voltage change > depending on how hard you pull on it? It measures strain. :-) Seriously, take any elastic material and apply a force (stress) and it reacts by deforming (strain.) For solids, stress is proportional to strain and the constant that relates them is called the modulus of elasticity. A strain gauge is usually a thin piece of conductive material that changes its resistance with strain. Used alone, it's pretty worthless. What's so neat about it is you can bond it to whatever structure you're interested in and it will measure the amount of strain, and by doing some calculations you can relate this to the stress in the structure, which in turn will tell you when/if it will fail. For example, you could bond a strain gauge to a steel i-beam in a skyscraper to see how much it flexes in the wind to know if your building is going to fall over in a hurricane. Anyway, what I was talking about would be to buy a small strain gauge, epoxy it to part of the coilspring, build/buy a signal conditioner (simple instrumentation op-amp circuit, the full scale signal is probably 20mV or so), and then datalog the resulting signal. It would be proportional to deflection of the coil spring if you choose the right location for the strain gauge. Go to www.omega.com and find their section on strain gauges, they should have lots of background and application hints. Bernd's idea of mounting a camera on the car with a view of the suspension and then analyzing it with a computer is looking more and more attractive. The hard part would be finding room to mount it where it could record a picture of the suspension. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us Mon Dec 17 14:30:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:55 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:55 -0300 From: dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 -> spit/sprite. It was late, I was tired. Neither has anything like the -> torsional ridigity to deal with a V8 without some serious chassis -> reinforcement. I doubt it's an issue. The one I built never made it to the road, but I've seen others. The tires simply go up in smoke before anything's loaded much. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bibendum59@hotmail.com Mon Dec 17 15:15:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:55 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:55 -0300 From: "Obie Fayth" Subject: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? Hi Everyone, I just signed up to the list a few days ago and wanted to introduce myself. I don't know much about electronics, but I am a computer programmer by trade and am eager to learn more about hardware. I can see there are some very knowledgable people on the list and I look forward to learning more about building an efi system for my car. I came across the list by way of the MegaSquirt site -- anyone on the list using that? One off topic question: A couple of days after signing up for this list I got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY turbocharging list. I responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard anything since. I accidentally deleted the original email, but was wondering if anyone out there might know the list I am talking about or could recommend an alternative list for someone interested in learning more about turbocharging a vehicle (turbo selection, exh. manifold construction, etc.). thanks, -Obie Tacoma, Wa. _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From MarkRShirley@eaton.com Mon Dec 17 10:25:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:55 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:55 -0300 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Newish Member Post You are gonna have a very very difficult time with port injection on LPG. We tried to do that at work, and were never successful. And that was at an OEM. Really there's not much point in LPG port injection anyway. It's a completely gaseous fuel by the time it hits the valves! > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris McKinnon [mailto:chrism@cnx.net] > Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 1:06 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Newish Member Post > > > I've been lurking for some time so I figured it's time for an > intro post. > I've got an 85 F150 with a 351W on LPG. I'm interested in trying to > build/hack/modify some type of LPG injection for it, maybe > port, maybe TBI. > I've had some experience playing with PIC's, mostly 16C887's. > I've been > thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because of the high fuel > pressures you get with LPG and maybe a diesel injector pump > as well. Before > I get too deep into this project is there anyone out there > who has done the > same thing? > > I was thinking about maybe using the Magasquirt for TBI, or > hacking a Ford > ECM for port injection. Does anyone have any input? > > Thanks, > Chris > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Mon Dec 17 11:53:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:55 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:55 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Its a data recorder, there is no analog out, its all analog inputs. Otherwise it would be a data player. The topic of this was to develop a inexpensive / innovative way to measure linear displacement in a high frequency application (500Hz or faster). I can spend $200 and buy a linear pot that works has a high frequency response, but I wanted to explore ways to do it optically or other, and see if we could do it on a small budget. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Jon Snoddy [mailto:Jon@Snoddy.net] Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 1:13 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: RE: Shock Sensor Question Not sure if this will work, but I think is should: Plug the data recorder analog output signal into a laptop's analog audio input and record it to an uncompressed wave file. View it with an audio editing program. Audio editing programs provide a timeline view that will have very accurate time marks in seconds, fractions of seconds and even samples (44k per second). Another cool trick is that the input is stereo, so you can record and display two channels of data at once. Using one of the many multi-track recorders, you can view successive recordings on top of one another on the same time line. Record audio with a microphone on one channel so you can hear bumps and engine speed (easy to arrive at RPM from pitch) in time synch to the shock data. Hmmm. I'm beginning to like this idea. You will need to install a "pad" to reduce the signal from 0-4v down to about 0-1 volt (what is that, 6db?) to keep from overloading the input of the laptop. I imagine you can buy a 6db pad at Radio Shack. Many computers have low pass filters at the front end that make it impossible to record DC which means that any movement at a rate slower than 50 to 20 Hz would come out as a straight line. There are many audio A/D cards available for desktop units or with a firewire connector on a laptop, some of which have defeatable low pass filters. You will want to make sure the voltage is limited to what ever your line input can tolerate. -jon -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bernd Felsche Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 5:18 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > Don't know how you can record Digital pictures into an analog data > recorder. Computer is digital. I wasn't aware of your limitation of an analogue data recorder. If the camera is digital, use IEEE1394 connection for lossless, digital transfer. You measure the displacement on-screen on a field-by-field basis. > I have a multi channel 0-4V analog data recorder, and am looking > for a cheap way to monitor the position of my shocks on the launch > and also down track. > The expensive way is to use the $180-$200 dollar linear position > sensors, I am just looking for a cheaper way. The budget wont > allow for that expense when the money is needed else where on the > car. Rotary encoders are somewhat cheaper, depending on enclosures and resolution. Cost really depends on if you already have a camcorder. > Thanks though. > > BW??? The recorder can sample from 1 Hz to 1000 Hz max. What's the frequency of the thing you're trying to measure? Normal (road) suspension dampers cannot respond to frequencies much beyond 100Hz. The suspension relies instead on tyre flexure. > -----Original Message----- > From: Bernd Felsche [mailto:bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au] > Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com tapped away at the keyboard with: > > > Application is to monitor the shocks on our 1/4 mile car. This > > way I can determine if I need an adjustment based on how the car > > is launching and driving down track. > > > We can adjust both compression and extension of the shock, so it > > would be nice to see how the adjustments actually effect > > performance. Tuning the start line reaction of a chassis is > > critical to maximizing the performance. > > Consider a high-speed camera. Even a low-end camcorder delivers 50 > or 60 fields per second (depending on video system). Plug the signal > into a computer (digital camcorder makes that easy) and measure the > displacement over time, from field to field. > > What sort of bandwidth and displacement do you think you'll be > measuring? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From crdotson@vt.edu Mon Dec 17 11:36:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:57 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:46:57 -0300 From: "Craig Dotson" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor > IIRC, it is a two tooth wheel (180 degree oppossed teeth) on a cam with a > sensor mounted in the valve cover. It is very similar to the crank sensor > setup except for it's location difference the the difference in the number > of teeth. I don't see why they used two teeth 180 degrees opposed because > you then lose the ability to sync your signal according to a particular > valve event (say combustion vs intake on #1). Actually, I just was messing with the sensor last night. It's a 3-tooth cam sensor. Two of them are 180 degrees apart, and the third one is approximately 30 degrees (haven't measured it) rotated from one of the teeth. The cam trigger is mounted on the exhaust cam, and the sensor is mounted in the head. The trigger wheel has a non-symmetrical bolt pattern, so it's essentially idiot-proof at the factory, but removes the possibility of re-aligning it. On your F4i, you can see through the access hole in the sidecover that the crank trigger is a 12 tooth wheel. Nine of the 12 are straight teeth, while three have "shoulders" of sorts. The shouldered crank teeth align with the crank sensor at approximately the same time as the cam teeth align with the cam sensor (at least to my uncalibrated eye). Craig Dotson crdotson@vt.edu 2002 VT FormulaSAE ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com Mon Dec 17 11:34:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:47:04 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:47:04 -0300 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) They were legal. Rollers never have been in the "CUP" series. Problem with mushroom lifter camshafts are that they don't last very long. If you put an aggressive grind that will need valve spring to maintain control, then lifter and lobe life is very much shortened over "Normal" flat tappet cam grinds. Also the bottom of the block "must" be spotfaced to prevent one point of the lifter touching a casting tit or bump which breaks the foot off the lifter. Perhaps lifter float cause you were trying to run the lightest springs to cut down on drag and wear. Then the driver does something bright like turn it 9600 on a restart. Also they have to be shimmed front to rear against cam walk cause the opposite lobe will lift the wrong valve with very little aft to fore movement. Used to see pallets of Crane, Competion Cams, Cam Dynamics, Reed, and Crower Cams mushrooms at some of the local "CUP" shops. They couldn't run a cam and lifter but once. Wouldn't make two races. I use to buy the used cams and lifters and run them in short track engines. Valve action with a mushroom can be more radical than a roller ever dreamed about. They just don't last long because of the loading. Oh, the lobes are thinner to help with the "crosslift problem" because of the big foot. The "CUP" stuff was cut for a 1" foot lifter. When Nascar outlawed the mushroom, they all went to the ford lifter size, .850" I think. Precisioneering in Asheville, NC does most of the lifter boring and registering for the teams. They have a factory type lifter boring machine. Duh, that's probably more than anyone would want to know about that "old" stuff. later, Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shannen Durphey" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Greg Hermann wrote: > > > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some NASCAR > > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, > > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see if > > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) > > > Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. > > Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and nothing > in between. ; ) > Shannen > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 17 15:41:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:47:06 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:47:06 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing The exhaust contributes a HUGE amount of heat to warm the sensor, without that heat source your asking the circuit to supply all that energy. In use mine barely warms a 4x6 .040ish" sheet of AL. Bruce From: "Glen Beard" Subject: WBO2 testing > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 14:07:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:07:57 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:07:57 -0800 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Re: Newish Member Post >> I've been thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because of the >> high fuel pressures you get with LPG and maybe a diesel injector pump >> as well. > >I'd think your biggest challange with LPG in a diesel injector pump >would be lubrication. Also the injector pumps I'm familiar with >(Stanadyne) are fairly low pressure on the input side, like maybe 5-7 >PSI. I'm not sure either. What I really need is a pumps that can take around 350 PSI at the input and can produce up to 350 PSI or so of boost. The reason I like the injector pump is because they are seem soildly built. I suppose the other approch would be to run a variable pressure fuel rail with a pressure sensor to change the injector pulse width depending on the rail pressure. My biggest worry is finding injectors that can handle a 350 PSI fuel rail and the lack of lubricating additives found in LPG. Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 14:08:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:08:24 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:08:24 -0800 From: Derek Dawson MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Hello. I am new to this list and I have some difficult (for me, not you) EFI related questions. I will post more on them soon. Thank you, Derek Dawson '86 Z-28 12.48@114, 1.97 60' (Someday will be much quicker!) '93 S-10 excab. Phantom. SPL 154.4 db. http://www.chevroletpower.cz28.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 14:08:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:08:37 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:08:37 -0800 From: "Porter, Bill" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Follow instructions at this link http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/homedyno/homedyno.htm#inst to make an inductive pick up. The link uses the pick up to drive the MIC input on your laptop. From here I'm unsure of how to configure to time sync with the wide band and the DataQ software. I haven't used the DataQ yet to see if it will accept outside signals. Don't know what type of voltage you will get off of pick up to drive DataQ directly Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:39:31 -0500 From: Stephen Andersen Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Thanks for the pointer. I am actually thinking about buying the USB logger board ($99) which has a built-in 32bit counter. I can snag the rpm signal to the DME in my car and multiply it by 20 to get rpm (So I'm told). I think with the 8 single ended inputs I can record enough (including the WB) for some decent tuning data... Not exactly DIY though!!! Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Don DRI05 Ricciardiello > Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal > > I have two words of advice and they are "Brian Dessent". He > was a great > help as I had the exact same question for the DataQ DI-194 > I'm using. I > have a variable reluctance magnetic pick-up sensing crank > rotationon on my > bike. Brian suggested using the LM2917 Frequency to voltage > converters. I'm > bread-boarding mine at the moment to test it out. > > Don *************************************************************************** Visit O'Neal, Inc. on the web at http://www.onealinc.com The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company. *************************************************************************** ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 14:09:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:09:57 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:09:57 -0800 From: "Don Berry" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 My favorite is an Allison V12 in a Morris Mini. -----Original Message----- From: Carter Shore [mailto:clshore@yahoo.com] Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 5:49 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:28:56 William Shurvinton wrote: > V8 in a sprite, now that even beats the guy on UK > version of scrapheap wars who put a jag V12 in a > trike. Uhh, William, that's a *SPITFIRE* not a Sprite! Not the same at all. (Might as well accuse a Finn of being Swedish) Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 14:10:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:10:36 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:10:36 -0800 From: "yahoo" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Maximum Piston Speed Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque is being transferred to the crankshaft. Since I'm interested in stroker engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes, I think that piston speed is a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other things being equal that is a HUGE increase. However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of completeness. Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum piston speeds that are associated with long life? Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of high power that kills the rings? Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Do they hurt? Is the offset different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and ignore the long term effects? I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket heads (and a thick head gasket) to attain the piston offset. The target compression ratio is 8.0:1 Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? dh _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 14:10:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:10:53 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:10:53 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shannen Durphey" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Greg Hermann wrote: > > > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some NASCAR > > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, > > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see if > > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) > > > Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. > > Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and nothing > in between. ; ) > Shannen > I spoke to the place in Maryland today. He did not think that the mushroom cam/lifters was an idea he would like to see in my car. He suggested that I use a flat tappet cam. Guess he thought the $$$$ for a roller would not pay very big dividends. Had some interesting ideas about many things, many of them seemed directly apposed to what I have come to feel is the norm. One thing for sure, I need to make things as sure as possible with this part of my upgrade. Toooo many benches full of parts. Toooo many new changed and untried systems on vehicle. Anyone have opinions of roller cams vs. flat tappet? Other than the dollar figure, I thought rollers had thing covered hands down! > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 14:11:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:11:22 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:11:22 -0800 From: Tom Sharpe MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Air Temp effects on Atomization???? Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > 333 deg K at the same P, so 402/333 = 1.20, now wouldn't this 20% increase > in volume, provide for a 20% increase in CFM which should add a decent > amount of horsepower???? > > Now wouldn't the 20% increase in air volume also require a 20% increase in > fuel to prevent going lean? Yes/yes - but will the ignition system handle the extra "pressure"? more retard?? are you seeing detonation? is that where the extra pressure is going?? Same for the fuel system? Both are critical. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 14:11:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:11:47 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:11:47 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector MSD has most of what you would need. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 11:51 PM Subject: Re: Home for an injector > In a message dated 12/15/01 10:26:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, > dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us writes: > > > BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them > > directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. > > > I'm doing this but I didn't speak up because you asked what kind of success > and its the first time I've tried it. Mainly saves a ton of precise > machining. If you mar up the hole when drilling for an O-ring, you're SOL. If > you mar up the hole when drilling for a threaded injector, a tap will take > care of it. I saved about 20 hours of work from this trick. Now the task is > to build a separate fitting for each injector and figure out a way to hold > them on the injector. Got an idea but haven't finished machining. > > JW > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 14:12:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:12:04 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 14:12:04 -0800 From: "Fran and Bud" Subject: WB O2 Display I do better with an Oxy Acetylene torch than with a soldering iron, so this question might bring Yuks from the lists knowledgeable and talented folks - But I still have to ask it. Radio Shack has a panel mount Voltmeter module with 9/16" high 3 1/2 digit LCD display on page 242 of the catalog. P/N 910-4915. Not knowing any better, it seems to me that this could be added to the WB O2's project box to read the sensor output rather than using a hand held DMM. It would still require the table to translate into AFR but it would avoid taking a second meter (DMM) to the races where stuff tends to get abused or broken. Its also a lot cheaper than a new DMM. There is also an analog meter on the same page but it looks to be more fragile and harder to read in poor light. Is it a question of accuracy or is it somehow inappropriate/incompatible/dumb? If it would work OK, then it could also be used to verify the battery voltage >13.5 with the addition of a selector switch. I know that its BIY (Buy It Yourself) rather than DIY but so is the sensor. Is this thought OTL??? Bud ---------- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:34:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:34:36 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:34:36 -0800 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Home for an injector Like water, perhaps??? > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: December 15, 2001 9:24 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > > > Fuel? > Hell, we can run lots of different stuff thru injectors?. > Bruce > > > From: "Guy Hammer" > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > > Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > > > in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, > Any good data > > > about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > > Wouldn't that sort of temperature boil the fuel? Or is that the result > > you are looking for? > > Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:34:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:34:50 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:34:50 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WBO2 testing Measure the voltage across the lamp, and across the 1 ohm resistor. If the lamp has less than 10 volts (and the LED is out), you are probably running in the curent limiting warmup mode. The resistor will measure about 1.25 volt in that case. You probably are using too large a lamp. With a small voltage drop across the lamp and maximum current, you have a large voltage drop (at max current) across the LT1086. This heating it up, apparently to the point of thermal shutdown which dims the light. I would find a smaller bulb, which should run at 10 V with reduced voltage across the 1 ohm (crossover to voltage regulation). A 2" by 3" heatsink is not very generous for this application, unless it has a lot of fins. Bruce Roe On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:04:09 -0500 Glen Beard writes: > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > Glen Beard ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:35:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:15 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:15 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Newish Member Post Shirley, Mark R tapped away at the keyboard with: > You are gonna have a very very difficult time with port injection > on LPG. We tried to do that at work, and were never successful. > And that was at an OEM. Really there's not much point in LPG port > injection anyway. It's a completely gaseous fuel by the time it > hits the valves! Volkswagen recently announced port-injection on their bi-fuel Golf/Bora/Jetta/New Beetle that are fuelled by LNG. They're using the ECU from a V8 to run a set of injectors for each fuel on 4-cylinder engines. As you say; there's probably little to be gained as it's gaseous; other than ensuring equal distribution of fuel to each cylinder. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:35:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:21 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:21 -0800 From: Phil Lamovie MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LPG Injection. The point to LPG injection is both the vastly improved accuracy of the control system and the free super charging that comes with the absorption of heat from the air charge. The average increase in torque with LPG injection over Petrol is approx. 15%. Higher compression ratio is also a freely available side effect and so is the higher than normal boost that takes advantage of the very high octane ratings. By the way we tried it at work and were very successful. Phil ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:35:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:28 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:28 -0800 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Trying To Access Website I'm trying to access the archive files on the diy-efi.org website and I can't even get to the homepage. Help? -David ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:35:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:46 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:46 -0800 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > I am not that concerned with what the shocks are doing down track, what I am > trying to capture is the exact action of the chassis at the time of launch. > Trying to put 1800HP to the ground, the most critical part of the pass is > the launch. Interesting. I would have never thought that freqs that high would be transmitted that far through the suspension, but hey, I know next to nothing about drag racing. :-) > should it be attached. Are they always attached to a coil/spring or can you > actually bond it to a metal bar and measure the bend, basically when the > wheelie bars hit the ground, the bars may flex some, this way we could tell > which bar is hitting harder. Yeah, that definitely sounds like it would work. The best way to calibrate it would be simply to set the bar up in a vice and hang a couple of weights off the end and see how much signal you get. Or, with the bar all setup on the car, take a spring scale and pull up on the end and measure signal output vs. how hard you're pulling. You could try to derive it analytically, but you'd have to know the material properties, the cross sectional profile of the beam, etc, and you'd still want some sort of measured data to back up the calculations. To deal with the part about the bar rotating, well, you could always try attaching it to the fixture in which the bar attaches, or some other place that would otherwise be fixed but expected to bend ever-so-slightly when the bar flexes. You might be surprised how much sensitivity you can get out of some of the sensors with the proper amplifier circuit. Go to omega.com and click on "free literature" and get them to send you their free "Pressure, Strain, and Force Handbook." THeir handbooks have a lot of background info and general helpful advice for how to measure all kinds of stuff, as well as listing all their products with prices. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:35:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:59 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:35:59 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: any javascript experts out there? I'm sure he's looking for a member of the list(s) to contribute some time to making improvements to the "quality of service" provided by the list server. As there are many people here who are more than willing to sign up to receive the free subscriprion and use list services, it's not unreasonable to ask for someone to give a little back to the list. Shannen Jon Snoddy wrote: > > Steve, > > Not sure if you are looking to hire someone or looking for a favor. I know > several good freelance programmers, if you want to hire one. They cost > between $45 and $150 an hour. Happy to hook you up with one if you like. > Unfortunately, while they are excellent programmers I don't think any of > them know anything about cars, much less fuel injection. > > -jon > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf > Of steve ravet > Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 10:29 PM > To: diy_efi; gmecm@diy-efi.org; efi_332 > Subject: any javascript experts out there? > > I promise this is list related. I need help if anyone is good with > javascript or any other method of doing client side CGI type > programming. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:36:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:36:17 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:36:17 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) --- Original Message ----- From: "Mark S. Riley" To: Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:34 AM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > They were legal. Rollers never have been in the "CUP" series. Problem with > mushroom lifter camshafts are that they don't last very long. If you put an > aggressive grind that will need valve spring to maintain control, then > lifter and lobe life is very much shortened over "Normal" flat tappet cam > grinds. Also the bottom of the block "must" be spotfaced to prevent one > point of the lifter touching a casting tit or bump which breaks the foot off > the lifter. Perhaps lifter float cause you were trying to run the lightest > springs to cut down on drag and wear. Then the driver does something bright > like turn it 9600 on a restart. Also they have to be shimmed front to rear > against cam walk cause the opposite lobe will lift the wrong valve with very > little aft to fore movement. Used to see pallets of Crane, Competion Cams, > Cam Dynamics, Reed, and Crower Cams mushrooms at some of the local "CUP" > shops. They couldn't run a cam and lifter but once. Wouldn't make two races. > I use to buy the used cams and lifters and run them in short track engines. > Valve action with a mushroom can be more radical than a roller ever dreamed > about. They just don't last long because of the loading. Oh, the lobes are > thinner to help with the "crosslift problem" because of the big foot. The > "CUP" stuff was cut for a 1" foot lifter. When Nascar outlawed the mushroom, > they all went to the ford lifter size, .850" I think. Precisioneering in > Asheville, NC does most of the lifter boring and registering for the teams. > They have a factory type lifter boring machine. > Duh, that's probably more than anyone would want to know about that "old" > stuff. later, Mark Sounds like exactly what I don't need more aggravation and maintiance. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Shannen Durphey" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > > > Greg Hermann wrote: > > > > > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some > NASCAR > > > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, > > > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see > if > > > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) > > > > > Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. > > > > Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and > nothing > > in between. ; ) > > Shannen > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:36:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:36:43 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:36:43 -0800 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? Boy, I would be REALLY interested in that list if you hear anything!!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: Obie Fayth [mailto:bibendum59@hotmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 1:15 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? > > > Hi Everyone, > I just signed up to the list a few days ago and wanted > to introduce myself. > I don't know much about electronics, but I am a computer > programmer by trade > and am eager to learn more about hardware. I can see there > are some very > knowledgable people on the list and I look forward to > learning more about > building an efi system for my car. I came across the list by > way of the > MegaSquirt site -- anyone on the list using that? > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing > up for this list I > got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY > turbocharging list. I > responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard > anything since. I > accidentally deleted the original email, but was wondering if > anyone out > there might know the list I am talking about or could recommend an > alternative list for someone interested in learning more > about turbocharging > a vehicle (turbo selection, exh. manifold construction, etc.). > > thanks, > -Obie > Tacoma, Wa. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 16:37:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:37:00 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 16:37:00 -0800 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question > The strain gauge sounds interesting though. Curious of how I could apply > strain gauges to measure wheelie bar Hit? Any ideas? The question is where > should it be attached. Are they always attached to a coil/spring or can you > actually bond it to a metal bar and measure the bend, basically when the > wheelie bars hit the ground, the bars may flex some, this way we could tell > which bar is hitting harder. How about calibrating this, any ideas? The > only other concern is position of the sensor, if you bond a stain device to > the bottom of the bar assuming it will flex up, when we adjust the whellie > bars, we rotate the bar (on a bolt) to adjust in or out. Any time the bars > are turned, the sensor will rotate. Wont be easy to implement and make it > functional so that it allows for changing the position of the bars. > > Steve In theory it should work something like this: you put two strain gauges on opposite sides of the bar. By measuring the difference between the two you measure bending. If you add the two signals you measure compression. You can still measure the compression with only one strain gauge if the bar doesn't bend much. All this adding and subtraction is after your wheatstone bridges and differential amplifiers of course. If you want calibrated values use strain gauges with two perpendicular gauges on the same sensor so you can easily compensate for temperature drift, especially with the semiconductor versions. Mounting strain gauges also seems to be an art in itself, the manufacturer should have usefull opinions on this. And finally a disclaimer: I haven't tried this myself so don't take it too seriously. Igor ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dhunt16@yahoo.com Mon Dec 17 20:59:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:32:51 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:32:51 -0300 From: "yahoo" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Maximum Piston Speed Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque is being transferred to the crankshaft. Since I'm interested in stroker engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes, I think that piston speed is a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other things being equal that is a HUGE increase. However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of completeness. Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum piston speeds that are associated with long life? Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of high power that kills the rings? Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Do they hurt? Is the offset different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and ignore the long term effects? I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket heads (and a thick head gasket) to attain the piston offset. The target compression ratio is 8.0:1 Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? dh _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chrism@cnx.net Mon Dec 17 17:59:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:32:51 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:32:51 -0300 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Re: Newish Member Post >> I've been thinking about maybe using diesel injectors because of the >> high fuel pressures you get with LPG and maybe a diesel injector pump >> as well. > >I'd think your biggest challange with LPG in a diesel injector pump >would be lubrication. Also the injector pumps I'm familiar with >(Stanadyne) are fairly low pressure on the input side, like maybe 5-7 >PSI. I'm not sure either. What I really need is a pumps that can take around 350 PSI at the input and can produce up to 350 PSI or so of boost. The reason I like the injector pump is because they are seem soildly built. I suppose the other approch would be to run a variable pressure fuel rail with a pressure sensor to change the injector pulse width depending on the rail pressure. My biggest worry is finding injectors that can handle a 350 PSI fuel rail and the lack of lubricating additives found in LPG. Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Mon Dec 17 22:08:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:32:51 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:32:51 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Shannen Durphey" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > Greg Hermann wrote: > > > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some NASCAR > > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, > > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see if > > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) > > > Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. > > Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and nothing > in between. ; ) > Shannen > I spoke to the place in Maryland today. He did not think that the mushroom cam/lifters was an idea he would like to see in my car. He suggested that I use a flat tappet cam. Guess he thought the $$$$ for a roller would not pay very big dividends. Had some interesting ideas about many things, many of them seemed directly apposed to what I have come to feel is the norm. One thing for sure, I need to make things as sure as possible with this part of my upgrade. Toooo many benches full of parts. Toooo many new changed and untried systems on vehicle. Anyone have opinions of roller cams vs. flat tappet? Other than the dollar figure, I thought rollers had thing covered hands down! > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Tue Dec 18 00:30:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:33:48 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:33:48 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector MSD has most of what you would need. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 11:51 PM Subject: Re: Home for an injector > In a message dated 12/15/01 10:26:30 PM Eastern Standard Time, > dave.williams@chaos.lrk.ar.us writes: > > > BDS cuts screw threads on each end of the injector and screws them > > directly into the intake, then screws a hose fitting on the other end. > > > I'm doing this but I didn't speak up because you asked what kind of success > and its the first time I've tried it. Mainly saves a ton of precise > machining. If you mar up the hole when drilling for an O-ring, you're SOL. If > you mar up the hole when drilling for a threaded injector, a tap will take > care of it. I saved about 20 hours of work from this trick. Now the task is > to build a separate fitting for each injector and figure out a way to hold > them on the injector. Got an idea but haven't finished machining. > > JW > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From twsharpe@mtco.com Tue Dec 18 00:27:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:34:03 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:34:03 -0300 From: Tom Sharpe MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Air Temp effects on Atomization???? Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > 333 deg K at the same P, so 402/333 = 1.20, now wouldn't this 20% increase > in volume, provide for a 20% increase in CFM which should add a decent > amount of horsepower???? > > Now wouldn't the 20% increase in air volume also require a 20% increase in > fuel to prevent going lean? Yes/yes - but will the ignition system handle the extra "pressure"? more retard?? are you seeing detonation? is that where the extra pressure is going?? Same for the fuel system? Both are critical. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From merctech@lakeozark.net Mon Dec 17 18:01:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:34:49 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:34:49 -0300 From: Derek Dawson MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Hello. I am new to this list and I have some difficult (for me, not you) EFI related questions. I will post more on them soon. Thank you, Derek Dawson '86 Z-28 12.48@114, 1.97 60' (Someday will be much quicker!) '93 S-10 excab. Phantom. SPL 154.4 db. http://www.chevroletpower.cz28.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From donbe@MICROSOFT.com Mon Dec 17 19:44:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:35:25 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:35:25 -0300 From: "Don Berry" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 My favorite is an Allison V12 in a Morris Mini. -----Original Message----- From: Carter Shore [mailto:clshore@yahoo.com] Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2001 5:49 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 On Fri, 14 Dec 2001 23:28:56 William Shurvinton wrote: > V8 in a sprite, now that even beats the guy on UK > version of scrapheap wars who put a jag V12 in a > trike. Uhh, William, that's a *SPITFIRE* not a Sprite! Not the same at all. (Might as well accuse a Finn of being Swedish) Carter Shore __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From BPorter@onealinc.com Mon Dec 17 18:25:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:36:31 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:36:31 -0300 From: "Porter, Bill" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Follow instructions at this link http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/homedyno/homedyno.htm#inst to make an inductive pick up. The link uses the pick up to drive the MIC input on your laptop. From here I'm unsure of how to configure to time sync with the wide band and the DataQ software. I haven't used the DataQ yet to see if it will accept outside signals. Don't know what type of voltage you will get off of pick up to drive DataQ directly Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 21:39:31 -0500 From: Stephen Andersen Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Thanks for the pointer. I am actually thinking about buying the USB logger board ($99) which has a built-in 32bit counter. I can snag the rpm signal to the DME in my car and multiply it by 20 to get rpm (So I'm told). I think with the 8 single ended inputs I can record enough (including the WB) for some decent tuning data... Not exactly DIY though!!! Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Don DRI05 Ricciardiello > Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal > > I have two words of advice and they are "Brian Dessent". He > was a great > help as I had the exact same question for the DataQ DI-194 > I'm using. I > have a variable reluctance magnetic pick-up sensing crank > rotationon on my > bike. Brian suggested using the LM2917 Frequency to voltage > converters. I'm > bread-boarding mine at the moment to test it out. > > Don *************************************************************************** Visit O'Neal, Inc. on the web at http://www.onealinc.com The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination, distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company. *************************************************************************** ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From quest100@gte.net Tue Dec 18 00:45:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:37:25 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:37:25 -0300 From: "Fran and Bud" Subject: WB O2 Display I do better with an Oxy Acetylene torch than with a soldering iron, so this question might bring Yuks from the lists knowledgeable and talented folks - But I still have to ask it. Radio Shack has a panel mount Voltmeter module with 9/16" high 3 1/2 digit LCD display on page 242 of the catalog. P/N 910-4915. Not knowing any better, it seems to me that this could be added to the WB O2's project box to read the sensor output rather than using a hand held DMM. It would still require the table to translate into AFR but it would avoid taking a second meter (DMM) to the races where stuff tends to get abused or broken. Its also a lot cheaper than a new DMM. There is also an analog meter on the same page but it looks to be more fragile and harder to read in poor light. Is it a question of accuracy or is it somehow inappropriate/incompatible/dumb? If it would work OK, then it could also be used to verify the battery voltage >13.5 with the addition of a selector switch. I know that its BIY (Buy It Yourself) rather than DIY but so is the sensor. Is this thought OTL??? Bud ---------- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Dorrestijn@corps.nl Tue Dec 18 10:51:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:44 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:44 -0300 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question > The strain gauge sounds interesting though. Curious of how I could apply > strain gauges to measure wheelie bar Hit? Any ideas? The question is where > should it be attached. Are they always attached to a coil/spring or can you > actually bond it to a metal bar and measure the bend, basically when the > wheelie bars hit the ground, the bars may flex some, this way we could tell > which bar is hitting harder. How about calibrating this, any ideas? The > only other concern is position of the sensor, if you bond a stain device to > the bottom of the bar assuming it will flex up, when we adjust the whellie > bars, we rotate the bar (on a bolt) to adjust in or out. Any time the bars > are turned, the sensor will rotate. Wont be easy to implement and make it > functional so that it allows for changing the position of the bars. > > Steve In theory it should work something like this: you put two strain gauges on opposite sides of the bar. By measuring the difference between the two you measure bending. If you add the two signals you measure compression. You can still measure the compression with only one strain gauge if the bar doesn't bend much. All this adding and subtraction is after your wheatstone bridges and differential amplifiers of course. If you want calibrated values use strain gauges with two perpendicular gauges on the same sensor so you can easily compensate for temperature drift, especially with the semiconductor versions. Mounting strain gauges also seems to be an art in itself, the manufacturer should have usefull opinions on this. And finally a disclaimer: I haven't tried this myself so don't take it too seriously. Igor ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Tue Dec 18 08:43:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:44 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:44 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) --- Original Message ----- From: "Mark S. Riley" To: Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 9:34 AM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > They were legal. Rollers never have been in the "CUP" series. Problem with > mushroom lifter camshafts are that they don't last very long. If you put an > aggressive grind that will need valve spring to maintain control, then > lifter and lobe life is very much shortened over "Normal" flat tappet cam > grinds. Also the bottom of the block "must" be spotfaced to prevent one > point of the lifter touching a casting tit or bump which breaks the foot off > the lifter. Perhaps lifter float cause you were trying to run the lightest > springs to cut down on drag and wear. Then the driver does something bright > like turn it 9600 on a restart. Also they have to be shimmed front to rear > against cam walk cause the opposite lobe will lift the wrong valve with very > little aft to fore movement. Used to see pallets of Crane, Competion Cams, > Cam Dynamics, Reed, and Crower Cams mushrooms at some of the local "CUP" > shops. They couldn't run a cam and lifter but once. Wouldn't make two races. > I use to buy the used cams and lifters and run them in short track engines. > Valve action with a mushroom can be more radical than a roller ever dreamed > about. They just don't last long because of the loading. Oh, the lobes are > thinner to help with the "crosslift problem" because of the big foot. The > "CUP" stuff was cut for a 1" foot lifter. When Nascar outlawed the mushroom, > they all went to the ford lifter size, .850" I think. Precisioneering in > Asheville, NC does most of the lifter boring and registering for the teams. > They have a factory type lifter boring machine. > Duh, that's probably more than anyone would want to know about that "old" > stuff. later, Mark Sounds like exactly what I don't need more aggravation and maintiance. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Shannen Durphey" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > > > Greg Hermann wrote: > > > > > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some > NASCAR > > > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, > > > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see > if > > > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) > > > > > Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. > > > > Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and > nothing > > in between. ; ) > > Shannen > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Tue Dec 18 08:34:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:50 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:50 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: any javascript experts out there? I'm sure he's looking for a member of the list(s) to contribute some time to making improvements to the "quality of service" provided by the list server. As there are many people here who are more than willing to sign up to receive the free subscriprion and use list services, it's not unreasonable to ask for someone to give a little back to the list. Shannen Jon Snoddy wrote: > > Steve, > > Not sure if you are looking to hire someone or looking for a favor. I know > several good freelance programmers, if you want to hire one. They cost > between $45 and $150 an hour. Happy to hook you up with one if you like. > Unfortunately, while they are excellent programmers I don't think any of > them know anything about cars, much less fuel injection. > > -jon > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf > Of steve ravet > Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2001 10:29 PM > To: diy_efi; gmecm@diy-efi.org; efi_332 > Subject: any javascript experts out there? > > I promise this is list related. I need help if anyone is good with > javascript or any other method of doing client side CGI type > programming. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From davidmarkusgoldstein@yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 03:52:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:50 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:50 -0300 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Trying To Access Website I'm trying to access the archive files on the diy-efi.org website and I can't even get to the homepage. Help? -David ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From MarkRShirley@eaton.com Tue Dec 18 10:41:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:54 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:54 -0300 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? Boy, I would be REALLY interested in that list if you hear anything!!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: Obie Fayth [mailto:bibendum59@hotmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 1:15 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? > > > Hi Everyone, > I just signed up to the list a few days ago and wanted > to introduce myself. > I don't know much about electronics, but I am a computer > programmer by trade > and am eager to learn more about hardware. I can see there > are some very > knowledgable people on the list and I look forward to > learning more about > building an efi system for my car. I came across the list by > way of the > MegaSquirt site -- anyone on the list using that? > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing > up for this list I > got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY > turbocharging list. I > responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard > anything since. I > accidentally deleted the original email, but was wondering if > anyone out > there might know the list I am talking about or could recommend an > alternative list for someone interested in learning more > about turbocharging > a vehicle (turbo selection, exh. manifold construction, etc.). > > thanks, > -Obie > Tacoma, Wa. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dupuis10@telusplanet.net Tue Dec 18 01:34:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:57 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:51:57 -0300 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Home for an injector Like water, perhaps??? > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bruce > Sent: December 15, 2001 9:24 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > > > Fuel? > Hell, we can run lots of different stuff thru injectors?. > Bruce > > > From: "Guy Hammer" > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, Bruce wrote: > > > Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > > > in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, > Any good data > > > about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > > Wouldn't that sort of temperature boil the fuel? Or is that the result > > you are looking for? > > Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without > the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Tue Dec 18 03:34:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:52:01 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:52:01 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: WBO2 testing Measure the voltage across the lamp, and across the 1 ohm resistor. If the lamp has less than 10 volts (and the LED is out), you are probably running in the curent limiting warmup mode. The resistor will measure about 1.25 volt in that case. You probably are using too large a lamp. With a small voltage drop across the lamp and maximum current, you have a large voltage drop (at max current) across the LT1086. This heating it up, apparently to the point of thermal shutdown which dims the light. I would find a smaller bulb, which should run at 10 V with reduced voltage across the 1 ohm (crossover to voltage regulation). A 2" by 3" heatsink is not very generous for this application, unless it has a lot of fins. Bruce Roe On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:04:09 -0500 Glen Beard writes: > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > Glen Beard ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From phil@injec.com Tue Dec 18 03:47:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:52:08 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:52:08 -0300 From: Phil Lamovie MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LPG Injection. The point to LPG injection is both the vastly improved accuracy of the control system and the free super charging that comes with the absorption of heat from the air charge. The average increase in torque with LPG injection over Petrol is approx. 15%. Higher compression ratio is also a freely available side effect and so is the higher than normal boost that takes advantage of the very high octane ratings. By the way we tried it at work and were very successful. Phil ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Tue Dec 18 03:41:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:52:18 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:52:18 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Newish Member Post Shirley, Mark R tapped away at the keyboard with: > You are gonna have a very very difficult time with port injection > on LPG. We tried to do that at work, and were never successful. > And that was at an OEM. Really there's not much point in LPG port > injection anyway. It's a completely gaseous fuel by the time it > hits the valves! Volkswagen recently announced port-injection on their bi-fuel Golf/Bora/Jetta/New Beetle that are fuelled by LNG. They're using the ECU from a V8 to run a set of injectors for each fuel on 4-cylinder engines. As you say; there's probably little to be gained as it's gaseous; other than ensuring equal distribution of fuel to each cylinder. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From brian@dessent.net Tue Dec 18 06:15:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:52:20 -0300 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 21:52:20 -0300 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Shock Sensor Question Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > I am not that concerned with what the shocks are doing down track, what I am > trying to capture is the exact action of the chassis at the time of launch. > Trying to put 1800HP to the ground, the most critical part of the pass is > the launch. Interesting. I would have never thought that freqs that high would be transmitted that far through the suspension, but hey, I know next to nothing about drag racing. :-) > should it be attached. Are they always attached to a coil/spring or can you > actually bond it to a metal bar and measure the bend, basically when the > wheelie bars hit the ground, the bars may flex some, this way we could tell > which bar is hitting harder. Yeah, that definitely sounds like it would work. The best way to calibrate it would be simply to set the bar up in a vice and hang a couple of weights off the end and see how much signal you get. Or, with the bar all setup on the car, take a spring scale and pull up on the end and measure signal output vs. how hard you're pulling. You could try to derive it analytically, but you'd have to know the material properties, the cross sectional profile of the beam, etc, and you'd still want some sort of measured data to back up the calculations. To deal with the part about the bar rotating, well, you could always try attaching it to the fixture in which the bar attaches, or some other place that would otherwise be fixed but expected to bend ever-so-slightly when the bar flexes. You might be surprised how much sensitivity you can get out of some of the sensors with the proper amplifier circuit. Go to omega.com and click on "free literature" and get them to send you their free "Pressure, Strain, and Force Handbook." THeir handbooks have a lot of background info and general helpful advice for how to measure all kinds of stuff, as well as listing all their products with prices. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:10:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:00 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:00 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing up for this list I >got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY turbocharging list. I >responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard anything since. >-Obie >Tacoma, Wa. > I would be sort of curious to hear about that myself. Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:10:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:15 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:15 -0800 From: w.shawsr@att.net Subject: Re: Single-board computer Yes, I've used the Jackrabbit. It worked out well in a project I did last year. C programmable, reasonable IDE, debugger worked well. I'm not sure how it would work out in an automotive environment, but if you can get stable clean power and signals it may be OK. bs > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Has anyone ever used one of these from ZWorld? > > > > http://www.zworld.com/products/bl1800/index.html > > > > It's the only 12-volt one I could find that doesn't cost a fortune. > > Thinking of using it to make my own Scanmaster-type OBD2 display. Has > > anybody else done this? > > > > Thanks... > > > > -Mark > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:10:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:30 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:30 -0800 From: w.shawsr@att.net Subject: re: WBO2 testing I don't think the LED came on when I was running with the lamp simulating the heater. The regulator gets MUCH hotter with the lamp than with the sensor. It sounds like yours is working ok, hook up the sensor! bs Glen Beard wrote: > > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > > - -- > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 > 355, Vortech, heads, cam... > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:10:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:43 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:43 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) At 9:34 AM 12/17/01, Mark S. Riley wrote: >They were legal. Rollers never have been in the "CUP" series. Problem with >mushroom lifter camshafts are that they don't last very long. If you put an >aggressive grind that will need valve spring to maintain control, then >lifter and lobe life is very much shortened over "Normal" flat tappet cam >grinds. Also the bottom of the block "must" be spotfaced to prevent one >point of the lifter touching a casting tit or bump which breaks the foot off >the lifter. Perhaps lifter float cause you were trying to run the lightest >springs to cut down on drag and wear. Then the driver does something bright >like turn it 9600 on a restart. Also they have to be shimmed front to rear >against cam walk cause the opposite lobe will lift the wrong valve with very >little aft to fore movement. Used to see pallets of Crane, Competion Cams, >Cam Dynamics, Reed, and Crower Cams mushrooms at some of the local "CUP" >shops. They couldn't run a cam and lifter but once. Wouldn't make two races. >I use to buy the used cams and lifters and run them in short track engines. >Valve action with a mushroom can be more radical than a roller ever dreamed >about. They just don't last long because of the loading. Oh, the lobes are >thinner to help with the "crosslift problem" because of the big foot. The >"CUP" stuff was cut for a 1" foot lifter. When Nascar outlawed the mushroom, >they all went to the ford lifter size, .850" I think. Precisioneering in >Asheville, NC does most of the lifter boring and registering for the teams. >They have a factory type lifter boring machine. >Duh, that's probably more than anyone would want to know about that "old" >stuff. later, Mark My thought is that with a turbo engine, get the power with boost and don't turn it all that fast. MUCH more durable that way, overall, so long as you avoid any sign of the devil detonation. Thus, the valve springs can stay more like normal "hi-po" valve springs, since spring requirements vary with the square of the rpm. This ought to cure the wear problem. Another thought is to run a "hi-rev" spring kit in the valley--thus allowing slightly lighter valve springs, and keeping some of the necessary spring force off of the valves and rockers, at least. No doubt, the thinner lobes contribute mightily to the wear problem, too. There are plenty of HD diesels which use mushroom lifters, stock, without wear problems. So did the IHC "Red Diamond" engines. (404/450/501 I-6's). They all do it to improve BSFC under load. Of course, none of these are high rev items, so the springs are reasonably mellow. Point is that the wear/durability problem comes from the spring force used trying to squeeze out the last few rpm, not from the mushroom design itself. In my particular case, 1.375" diameter lifter feet will fit without any cross lift problems, even with stock width (about 5/8" wide) lobes, and the cam is properly and precisely located fore and aft in its stock condition. 5-3/8" bore centers on a V-8 and good basic design will do that sort of thing for you !! :-) Greg > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Shannen Durphey" >To: >Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM >Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > >> Greg Hermann wrote: >> >> > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some >NASCAR >> > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, >> > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see >if >> > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) >> > >> Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. >> >> Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and >nothing >> in between. ; ) >> Shannen >> >> ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >-- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:10:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:57 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:10:57 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Newish Member Post Can you make the cracking pressure necessary to open the injectors ? Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris McKinnon" To: Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 1:59 PM Subject: Re: Newish Member Post > >I've heard that diesel fuel injectors are designed to > >use the fuel as a lubricant, run gasoline (or propane) > >thru them and they'll gall. > > I'll have to ask one of the diesel mechanic's I know for a couple of old > injectors. Then I can try to test them to destruction. > > >There was a time, and perhaps some still do, when NOX > >injection kits used propane as the supplemental fuel, > >high octane (110?), same plumbing as NOX, etc. You > >might do some investigation into what's available > >here, doubtful NOX solenoids are designed to cycle on > >& off like a fuel injector, you might be able to > >"push the envelope" but that's unlikely to be > >successful. > > That could be worth a shot, I'll look into it. > > >Summit is/was having a close-out on ADS chips, I noted > >that they had chips for '91(?) Chevy PU's, one for > >gas, one for propane, thought it would be interesting > >to get one of each and compare them to see what the > >differences where, but I never did. > > > As far as I know the differences are in the ignition curves. You can jack up > the timing a bit more on LPG at higher revs. > > >Personally, I'd be more interested in taking advantage > >of that high octane w/ turbocharging rather than > >converting to FI. Hmmm...hafta give that some more > >thought... > > The thing I like about LPG is the fact that you can run up to about 14:1 > compression and the extra torque it give at lower RPM's. Plus the fact that > LPG is worth about 2/3 of gas. > > Chris > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:11:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:11:19 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:11:19 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing Sounds like you need some of the 15 ohm resistors across R4. The current should be ~1.4A max. And yes the VR does run hot and needs a bit of heat sink. The LED should light once the heater voltage reaches ~10.4V. With too low an Imax this will not occur. Once the heater voltage reaches 10.4V the heater current will taper off to ~1A. BobR. Glen Beard wrote: > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > > -- > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 > 355, Vortech, heads, cam... > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:12:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:12:16 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:12:16 -0800 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: VSS and DRAC questions 95 LT1 engine, harness, and PCM in a 88 5spd pickup truck. Studying the DRAC2.pdf on incoming along with what I have in the Alldata. The truck vss supplys a 40 pulse per driveshaft revolution to the DRAC which then supplys the PCM with a 4000 pulse per mile signal? Am I all wet or just wrong. The DRAC is a pulse amount number changer to the PCM. I guess what I'm wondering is if there is enough change available in the DRAC to make this combination work? Without the vss the idle is off and won't pass state inspection. Many thanks for any observations on this. Mark ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:12:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:12:34 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:12:34 -0800 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing Bruce wrote: > > The exhaust contributes a HUGE amount of heat to warm the sensor, without > that heat source your asking the circuit to supply all that energy. > In use mine barely warms a 4x6 .040ish" sheet of AL. > Bruce OK, I understand. How does the heater controller circuit 'know' how hot the sensor is? Resistance? Current? I could probably come up with a very simple voltage divider to turn on the LED and test the sensor signal portion of the circuit. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:12:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:12:52 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:12:52 -0800 From: clayb Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:53:38 -0500 > From: "Jon Davis" > Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > You must have had a bad timing chain or something... was it one of those GMs > with the phenolic gear on the cam? I have a DOHC 4 with a optical pickup on > the cam and a mile long single-row timing chain and I have never seen any > ignition bounce. The chain and gears were fine, made out of steel. You're example has no helical distributor gear to add slop, and I would also guess you have a chain tensioner. Apples and oranges. - Clay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:13:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:13:46 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:13:46 -0800 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being PWM'd? I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 installation just about completed and was toying with the idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost and/or have a 'valet' mode. In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not really designed for modulation. Any thoughts? thanks --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:13:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:13:59 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:13:59 -0800 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Yet another archive script. I thought this might be useful to some, although it may be a bit late. I got knocked off the GMECM list the beginning of Oct and I'm just now getting back on and catching up, so I missed all the archive stuff a couple months ago. Anyways, I have a Perl script that I wrote to filter out the headers and footers of all my mail archives from the last several years. It works on Unix mail format files (so it works with the archives) and removes all headers except for "From", "To", "Subject", "Date" and "Status". The output remains a valid Unix mail formatted file. It also removes several footers from the DIY-EFI mailing lists and is semi-intelligent enough to account for line breaks and reply pre-fixes (">>") in them. In practice, on my ~ 60M of mail archives, it reduces space by 40% to 50%, and the mail count remains the same so the data is remaining intact. I've also spent several hours scanning before & after files to ensure data integrity. I've done all the testing in DOS, but it also works under Unix. You can pass files or directories to it, or it'll read STDIN and write STDOUT (so you can use it with Procmail for instance). Use the '-h' option for usage information and requirements. I've put it in the "INCOMING" directory on the ftp site. It's called "mailparse.pl". Do what you want with it. If you know Perl, you can customize it to remove additional footers or text as well. Let me know if you do though and I'll try to keep it updated. At this time, I have purposely *not* tried to remove any MIME or HTML types. There is also an issue that a few of my archives contained weird, non-printable characters that would kill the Perl process. I am catching these now, but you may run into some that I don't. It may not be an issue on a Unix OS either. Please verify the output to your satisfaction before deleting the input. I dont' want to get angry emails about data loss. --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-gmecm@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:14:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:14:34 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:14:34 -0800 From: "Richard Alan Evans" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing ... (What I see) Glen: I've just finished testing my heater section for the first time and here's what I found. My regulator is mounted to the ~0.040" aluminum cover of the same Radio Shack box others are using. I first used a T906 dome light bulb (~1.8 ohms cold). With that I saw a peak current of ~0.59 amps (had a nice soft ramp-up) and about 6 seconds for the LED to come on. The regulator didn't heat much if any. Then I tried an 1156 bulb (~0.5 ohms cold). I got a soft ramp-up to ~1.27 amps and I shut it down after about 1.5 minutes without ever getting the LED to light. The regulator did heat up markedly but not to the point of being untouchable. I then realized it's not going to work exactly right unless the bulb resistance matches the O2 heater resistance (~3.3 ohms cold). I gave up looking for the perfect bulb and since it was exhibiting a soft current ramp-up, I decided to just try the real thing. (Sometimes I'm dangerous:) With the real heater, it ramped-up to ~1.27 amps and the LED came on at 64 seconds. The current settled to ~1.18 after 3 minutes of on-time in free air. The regulator was merely warm at that point. Try a bulb closer in cold resistance to the heater resistance the circuit is designed for and see if it doesn't behave more like it should. Glen Beard wrote: > > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > > -- > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 > 355, Vortech, heads, cam... > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:14:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:14:51 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:14:51 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed > Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block > Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 > cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a > 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to > limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't > very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. Might I ask why you would ever see 6500 RPM pulling a boat? I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 inch rods. And then supercharging the set up. Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air flow appeals to me as well. > I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Can you tell me how you figured that out? Isn't max average piston speed always at max RPM? Since I'm interested in stroker engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes. I think that piston speed is a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been > stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other > things being equal that is a HUGE increase. > However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the > square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be > more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main > journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It > seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high > transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my > case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would > consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but > need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't > consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of > completeness. > > Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum > piston speeds that are associated with long life? > Stock bottom end motors should not exceed 3000 ft per min (average) according to Performance trends computer dyno. > Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the > rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of > high power that kills the rings? > > Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Yes Do they hurt? No! Is the offset different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and > ignore the long term effects? > > I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because > most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. > I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket > heads (and a thick head gasket) Worse thing you can do is to trash the squish that is built into this motor. to attain the piston offset. The target > compression ratio is 8.0:1 > > Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? > I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually > seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? > > Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? > > dh > I'll say you have lofty goals! Many of them seem to conflict in what they would like to see in engine geometry. > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Tue Dec 18 23:15:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:15:24 -0800 Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:15:24 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector Water could be a good thing. Bruce From: "The Dupuis" > Like water, perhaps??? > > -----Original Message----- > > Behalf Of Bruce > > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > Fuel? > > Hell, we can run lots of different stuff thru injectors?. > > Bruce > > From: "Guy Hammer" > > > > Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > > > > in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, > > Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > > > Wouldn't that sort of temperature boil the fuel? Or is that the result > > > you are looking for? > > > Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Tue Dec 18 11:02:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:32:49 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:32:49 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing up for this list I >got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY turbocharging list. I >responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard anything since. >-Obie >Tacoma, Wa. > I would be sort of curious to hear about that myself. Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 18 21:48:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:32:49 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:32:49 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector Water could be a good thing. Bruce From: "The Dupuis" > Like water, perhaps??? > > -----Original Message----- > > Behalf Of Bruce > > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > Fuel? > > Hell, we can run lots of different stuff thru injectors?. > > Bruce > > From: "Guy Hammer" > > > > Has anyone any practical experience in mounting a port type injector > > > > in a hot oil environment?. As in the lifter valley?. Or, > > Any good data about how it might survive in a 200dF *world*. > > > Wouldn't that sort of temperature boil the fuel? Or is that the result > > > you are looking for? > > > Guy Hammer, guyh@aracnet.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Tue Dec 18 12:44:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:07 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:07 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing Sounds like you need some of the 15 ohm resistors across R4. The current should be ~1.4A max. And yes the VR does run hot and needs a bit of heat sink. The LED should light once the heater voltage reaches ~10.4V. With too low an Imax this will not occur. Once the heater voltage reaches 10.4V the heater current will taper off to ~1A. BobR. Glen Beard wrote: > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > > -- > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 > 355, Vortech, heads, cam... > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Tue Dec 18 11:20:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:36 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:36 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) At 9:34 AM 12/17/01, Mark S. Riley wrote: >They were legal. Rollers never have been in the "CUP" series. Problem with >mushroom lifter camshafts are that they don't last very long. If you put an >aggressive grind that will need valve spring to maintain control, then >lifter and lobe life is very much shortened over "Normal" flat tappet cam >grinds. Also the bottom of the block "must" be spotfaced to prevent one >point of the lifter touching a casting tit or bump which breaks the foot off >the lifter. Perhaps lifter float cause you were trying to run the lightest >springs to cut down on drag and wear. Then the driver does something bright >like turn it 9600 on a restart. Also they have to be shimmed front to rear >against cam walk cause the opposite lobe will lift the wrong valve with very >little aft to fore movement. Used to see pallets of Crane, Competion Cams, >Cam Dynamics, Reed, and Crower Cams mushrooms at some of the local "CUP" >shops. They couldn't run a cam and lifter but once. Wouldn't make two races. >I use to buy the used cams and lifters and run them in short track engines. >Valve action with a mushroom can be more radical than a roller ever dreamed >about. They just don't last long because of the loading. Oh, the lobes are >thinner to help with the "crosslift problem" because of the big foot. The >"CUP" stuff was cut for a 1" foot lifter. When Nascar outlawed the mushroom, >they all went to the ford lifter size, .850" I think. Precisioneering in >Asheville, NC does most of the lifter boring and registering for the teams. >They have a factory type lifter boring machine. >Duh, that's probably more than anyone would want to know about that "old" >stuff. later, Mark My thought is that with a turbo engine, get the power with boost and don't turn it all that fast. MUCH more durable that way, overall, so long as you avoid any sign of the devil detonation. Thus, the valve springs can stay more like normal "hi-po" valve springs, since spring requirements vary with the square of the rpm. This ought to cure the wear problem. Another thought is to run a "hi-rev" spring kit in the valley--thus allowing slightly lighter valve springs, and keeping some of the necessary spring force off of the valves and rockers, at least. No doubt, the thinner lobes contribute mightily to the wear problem, too. There are plenty of HD diesels which use mushroom lifters, stock, without wear problems. So did the IHC "Red Diamond" engines. (404/450/501 I-6's). They all do it to improve BSFC under load. Of course, none of these are high rev items, so the springs are reasonably mellow. Point is that the wear/durability problem comes from the spring force used trying to squeeze out the last few rpm, not from the mushroom design itself. In my particular case, 1.375" diameter lifter feet will fit without any cross lift problems, even with stock width (about 5/8" wide) lobes, and the cam is properly and precisely located fore and aft in its stock condition. 5-3/8" bore centers on a V-8 and good basic design will do that sort of thing for you !! :-) Greg > >----- Original Message ----- From: "Shannen Durphey" >To: >Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM >Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > > >> Greg Hermann wrote: >> >> > Don't know if they are still doing it for a "cheat", but I know some >NASCAR >> > guys were running mushrooms for a while. Rollers were against the rules, >> > and the tech check was to stick something down the pushrod hole to see >if >> > the lifters would rotate. Mushrooms rotate ! :-) >> > >> Last engine I saw had Ferd lifters. It's been a few years. >> >> Mebbe them lifters is like the gauges, they is either open or close and >nothing >> in between. ; ) >> Shannen >> >> ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------- >-- >> To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >> in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From houlster@user1.inficad.com Tue Dec 18 17:31:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:45 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:45 -0300 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Yet another archive script. I thought this might be useful to some, although it may be a bit late. I got knocked off the GMECM list the beginning of Oct and I'm just now getting back on and catching up, so I missed all the archive stuff a couple months ago. Anyways, I have a Perl script that I wrote to filter out the headers and footers of all my mail archives from the last several years. It works on Unix mail format files (so it works with the archives) and removes all headers except for "From", "To", "Subject", "Date" and "Status". The output remains a valid Unix mail formatted file. It also removes several footers from the DIY-EFI mailing lists and is semi-intelligent enough to account for line breaks and reply pre-fixes (">>") in them. In practice, on my ~ 60M of mail archives, it reduces space by 40% to 50%, and the mail count remains the same so the data is remaining intact. I've also spent several hours scanning before & after files to ensure data integrity. I've done all the testing in DOS, but it also works under Unix. You can pass files or directories to it, or it'll read STDIN and write STDOUT (so you can use it with Procmail for instance). Use the '-h' option for usage information and requirements. I've put it in the "INCOMING" directory on the ftp site. It's called "mailparse.pl". Do what you want with it. If you know Perl, you can customize it to remove additional footers or text as well. Let me know if you do though and I'll try to keep it updated. At this time, I have purposely *not* tried to remove any MIME or HTML types. There is also an issue that a few of my archives contained weird, non-printable characters that would kill the Perl process. I am catching these now, but you may run into some that I don't. It may not be an issue on a Unix OS either. Please verify the output to your satisfaction before deleting the input. I dont' want to get angry emails about data loss. --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-gmecm@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Tue Dec 18 21:32:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:45 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:45 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed > Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block > Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 > cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a > 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to > limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't > very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. Might I ask why you would ever see 6500 RPM pulling a boat? I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 inch rods. And then supercharging the set up. Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air flow appeals to me as well. > I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Can you tell me how you figured that out? Isn't max average piston speed always at max RPM? Since I'm interested in stroker engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes. I think that piston speed is a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been > stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other > things being equal that is a HUGE increase. > However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the > square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be > more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main > journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It > seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high > transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my > case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would > consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but > need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't > consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of > completeness. > > Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum > piston speeds that are associated with long life? > Stock bottom end motors should not exceed 3000 ft per min (average) according to Performance trends computer dyno. > Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the > rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of > high power that kills the rings? > > Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Yes Do they hurt? No! Is the offset different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and > ignore the long term effects? > > I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because > most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. > I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket > heads (and a thick head gasket) Worse thing you can do is to trash the squish that is built into this motor. to attain the piston offset. The target > compression ratio is 8.0:1 > > Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? > I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually > seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? > > Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? > > dh > I'll say you have lofty goals! Many of them seem to conflict in what they would like to see in engine geometry. > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Tue Dec 18 13:33:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:48 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:48 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Newish Member Post Can you make the cracking pressure necessary to open the injectors ? Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris McKinnon" To: Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 1:59 PM Subject: Re: Newish Member Post > >I've heard that diesel fuel injectors are designed to > >use the fuel as a lubricant, run gasoline (or propane) > >thru them and they'll gall. > > I'll have to ask one of the diesel mechanic's I know for a couple of old > injectors. Then I can try to test them to destruction. > > >There was a time, and perhaps some still do, when NOX > >injection kits used propane as the supplemental fuel, > >high octane (110?), same plumbing as NOX, etc. You > >might do some investigation into what's available > >here, doubtful NOX solenoids are designed to cycle on > >& off like a fuel injector, you might be able to > >"push the envelope" but that's unlikely to be > >successful. > > That could be worth a shot, I'll look into it. > > >Summit is/was having a close-out on ADS chips, I noted > >that they had chips for '91(?) Chevy PU's, one for > >gas, one for propane, thought it would be interesting > >to get one of each and compare them to see what the > >differences where, but I never did. > > > As far as I know the differences are in the ignition curves. You can jack up > the timing a bit more on LPG at higher revs. > > >Personally, I'd be more interested in taking advantage > >of that high octane w/ turbocharging rather than > >converting to FI. Hmmm...hafta give that some more > >thought... > > The thing I like about LPG is the fact that you can run up to about 14:1 > compression and the extra torque it give at lower RPM's. Plus the fact that > LPG is worth about 2/3 of gas. > > Chris > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com Tue Dec 18 13:10:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:52 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:33:52 -0300 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: VSS and DRAC questions 95 LT1 engine, harness, and PCM in a 88 5spd pickup truck. Studying the DRAC2.pdf on incoming along with what I have in the Alldata. The truck vss supplys a 40 pulse per driveshaft revolution to the DRAC which then supplys the PCM with a 4000 pulse per mile signal? Am I all wet or just wrong. The DRAC is a pulse amount number changer to the PCM. I guess what I'm wondering is if there is enough change available in the DRAC to make this combination work? Without the vss the idle is off and won't pass state inspection. Many thanks for any observations on this. Mark ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From w.shawsr@att.net Tue Dec 18 11:11:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:03 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:03 -0300 From: w.shawsr@att.net Subject: re: WBO2 testing I don't think the LED came on when I was running with the lamp simulating the heater. The regulator gets MUCH hotter with the lamp than with the sensor. It sounds like yours is working ok, hook up the sensor! bs Glen Beard wrote: > > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > > - -- > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 > 355, Vortech, heads, cam... > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From w.shawsr@att.net Tue Dec 18 11:00:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:05 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:05 -0300 From: w.shawsr@att.net Subject: Re: Single-board computer Yes, I've used the Jackrabbit. It worked out well in a project I did last year. C programmable, reasonable IDE, debugger worked well. I'm not sure how it would work out in an automotive environment, but if you can get stable clean power and signals it may be OK. bs > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Has anyone ever used one of these from ZWorld? > > > > http://www.zworld.com/products/bl1800/index.html > > > > It's the only 12-volt one I could find that doesn't cost a fortune. > > Thinking of using it to make my own Scanmaster-type OBD2 display. Has > > anybody else done this? > > > > Thanks... > > > > -Mark > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From houlster@user1.inficad.com Tue Dec 18 15:25:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:16 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:16 -0300 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being PWM'd? I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 installation just about completed and was toying with the idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost and/or have a 'valet' mode. In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not really designed for modulation. Any thoughts? thanks --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clayb@sbcglobal.net Tue Dec 18 15:04:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:16 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:16 -0300 From: clayb Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2001 02:53:38 -0500 > From: "Jon Davis" > Subject: Re: Sensor Question (and the usefulness of cam sensors) > You must have had a bad timing chain or something... was it one of those GMs > with the phenolic gear on the cam? I have a DOHC 4 with a optical pickup on > the cam and a mile long single-row timing chain and I have never seen any > ignition bounce. The chain and gears were fine, made out of steel. You're example has no helical distributor gear to add slop, and I would also guess you have a chain tensioner. Apples and oranges. - Clay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From gbeard1@nycap.rr.com Tue Dec 18 14:12:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:17 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:17 -0300 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing Bruce wrote: > > The exhaust contributes a HUGE amount of heat to warm the sensor, without > that heat source your asking the circuit to supply all that energy. > In use mine barely warms a 4x6 .040ish" sheet of AL. > Bruce OK, I understand. How does the heater controller circuit 'know' how hot the sensor is? Resistance? Current? I could probably come up with a very simple voltage divider to turn on the LED and test the sensor signal portion of the circuit. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From raevans@qwest.net Tue Dec 18 21:23:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:28 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 04:34:28 -0300 From: "Richard Alan Evans" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing ... (What I see) Glen: I've just finished testing my heater section for the first time and here's what I found. My regulator is mounted to the ~0.040" aluminum cover of the same Radio Shack box others are using. I first used a T906 dome light bulb (~1.8 ohms cold). With that I saw a peak current of ~0.59 amps (had a nice soft ramp-up) and about 6 seconds for the LED to come on. The regulator didn't heat much if any. Then I tried an 1156 bulb (~0.5 ohms cold). I got a soft ramp-up to ~1.27 amps and I shut it down after about 1.5 minutes without ever getting the LED to light. The regulator did heat up markedly but not to the point of being untouchable. I then realized it's not going to work exactly right unless the bulb resistance matches the O2 heater resistance (~3.3 ohms cold). I gave up looking for the perfect bulb and since it was exhibiting a soft current ramp-up, I decided to just try the real thing. (Sometimes I'm dangerous:) With the real heater, it ramped-up to ~1.27 amps and the LED came on at 64 seconds. The current settled to ~1.18 after 3 minutes of on-time in free air. The regulator was merely warm at that point. Try a bulb closer in cold resistance to the heater resistance the circuit is designed for and see if it doesn't behave more like it should. Glen Beard wrote: > > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > got brighter. > > -- > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 > 355, Vortech, heads, cam... > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:24:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:24:39 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:24:39 -0800 From: "Dan Zorde" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re: Newish Member Post Because the LPG is a vapour it is also fully mixed by the time it enters the chambers, allowing you to run leaner than petrol if you are after economy. Friend of mine who does LPG conversions often set up cars to idle at 16:1 with no problems. Any pertol engine I've ever seen at 16:1 would hunt and eventually stall. Dan dzorde@erggroup.com >Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:59:19 -0700 (MST) >From: Chris McKinnon >Subject: Re: Newish Member Post > >>Summit is/was having a close-out on ADS chips, I noted >>that they had chips for '91(?) Chevy PU's, one for >>gas, one for propane, thought it would be interesting >>to get one of each and compare them to see what the >>differences where, but I never did. > >As far as I know the differences are in the ignition curves. You can jack up >the timing a bit more on LPG at higher revs. > >>Personally, I'd be more interested in taking advantage >>of that high octane w/ turbocharging rather than >>converting to FI. Hmmm...hafta give that some more >>thought... > >The thing I like about LPG is the fact that you can run up to about 14:1 >compression and the extra torque it give at lower RPM's. Plus the fact that >LPG is worth about 2/3 of gas. > >Chris ---------------------------- ERG Group -------------------------- The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may only be read by the intended recipient. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:24:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:24:48 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:24:48 -0800 From: Bryan Zublin Subject: RE: MAP Sensor The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html Bryan Zublin At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: >Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost >applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for >like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else >available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, >not for controlling EFI... > >Steve ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:25:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:13 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:13 -0800 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Re: LPG Injection. >The point to LPG injection is both the vastly improved accuracy >of the control system and the free super charging that comes >with the absorption of heat from the air charge. > >The average increase in torque with LPG injection over >Petrol is approx. 15%. > >Higher compression ratio is also a freely available side effect >and so is the higher than normal boost that takes >advantage of the very high octane ratings. > >By the way we tried it at work and were very successful. > >Phil > > So what did you use for injectors? And did you need to circulate LPG through the rails to keep it from boiling? I've heard that this can be a problem. Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:25:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:20 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:20 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing It is starting to appear that I have significantly underestimated the amount of heat sink required for the WBo2. I bought some small heat sinks from RS today that are finned anodized aluminum guys about 1.5" x .75" x .75" or so. I guess one of these isn't enough huh? If that is the case, I am going to have to completely rethink the packaging of the WBo2 and LCD/RS232 display boards. I definitely have not allowed for enough room in the box with larger heat sink(s). Any guidance from those that have completed their WB's and have them functioning? Can someone point me to a properly sized Digikey heat sink? How do you attach the heat sink to the power transistor (I think that is what it is, right?) and the big resistor? Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of bcroe@juno.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:35 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: WBO2 testing > > > Measure the voltage across the lamp, and across the > 1 ohm resistor. If the lamp has less than 10 volts (and > the LED is out), you are probably running in the curent > limiting warmup mode. The resistor will measure > about 1.25 volt in that case. > > You probably are using too large a lamp. With a small > voltage drop across the lamp and maximum current, you > have a large voltage drop (at max current) across the > LT1086. This heating it up, apparently to the point of > thermal shutdown which dims the light. > > I would find a smaller bulb, which should run at 10 V > with reduced voltage across the 1 ohm (crossover to > voltage regulation). A 2" by 3" heatsink is not very > generous for this application, unless it has a lot of fins. > > Bruce Roe > > On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:04:09 -0500 Glen Beard > writes: > > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > > got brighter. > > > Glen Beard > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:25:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:32 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:32 -0800 From: Bryan Zublin Subject: WB O2 Sensor Connector A list member was nice enough to email me photos of the mating connector for the NGK wideband O2 sensor. From these images, I was able to find the Sumitomo part numbers in the catalog that I have. They are sending me some samples which I will forward to the list member to verify that it is the correct connector. I also received a quote today from Sumitomo for the connector shell, retainer, terminals, wire seals and dummy plugs. The total cost is about $1.20 for all pieces required for the connector assembly. Unfortunately, Sumitomo has minimum order quatities of 1000 shells, 7000 retainers, 25,000 teminals, etc. I need to negotiate a lower order quantity, but the total order amount will still be close to $2000 because of handling fees for split lots, shipping charges from Japan, etc. I have odered from Sumitomo once in the past year so I have an account set up. I can arrange a group buy if I can get at least 100 people to participate. The cost would be about $20 per person, and for $20 you would receive enough pieces to assemble at least 5 connectors. I will post updated pricing information once I have it. I have no financial incentive for this group buy. My primary goal is to be able to offer the new connector for current DIY members, and to have enough connectors on hand for at least a couple years to support future DIY'ers. Once my material costs are covered, the remaining connectors that I have would be sold at cost plus shipping. Unfortunately, this means that the first 100 people will pay more than the people after the first 100, but this is the only way that I can think it can work. Regards, Bryan Zublin www.zublin.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:25:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:42 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:42 -0800 From: "David Hunt" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #948 You can sign up for the turbo list at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/diy-turbo/ The problem with that list is the advertisements that come with the messages. If you can live with that then the turbo list is interesting. dh > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:15:10 -0800 > From: "Obie Fayth" > Subject: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? > > Hi Everyone, > I just signed up to the list a few days ago and wanted to introduce myself. > I don't know much about electronics, but I am a computer programmer by trade > and am eager to learn more about hardware. I can see there are some very > knowledgable people on the list and I look forward to learning more about > building an efi system for my car. I came across the list by way of the > MegaSquirt site -- anyone on the list using that? > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing up for this list I > got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY turbocharging list. I > responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard anything since. I > accidentally deleted the original email, but was wondering if anyone out > there might know the list I am talking about or could recommend an > alternative list for someone interested in learning more about turbocharging > a vehicle (turbo selection, exh. manifold construction, etc.). > > thanks, > - -Obie > Tacoma, Wa. > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:25:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:58 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:25:58 -0800 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Rotor profile. Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Craig Dotson wrote: > On your F4i, you can see through the access hole in the sidecover that the > crank trigger is a 12 tooth wheel. Nine of the 12 are straight teeth, while > three have "shoulders" of sorts. The shouldered crank teeth align with the > crank sensor at approximately the same time as the cam teeth align with the > cam sensor (at least to my uncalibrated eye). What effect does the shouldered tooth have? I have never looked at the waveform off one of those, but I'm thinking the difference in waveform is detectable, giving the ECU more timing information? Also, I understand the "normal" teeth produce a waveform with a zero crossing, and a simple comparator circuit can transform that into a nice square wave. What effect on the comparator circuit and its output does the shouldered tooth have? (Yes, I'm being lazy and too time contrained right now to try it myself...) Mos. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 14:02:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:26:11 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:26:11 -0800 From: "Leon Rathburn" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed I am not an expert on this, but I have heard of several benefits from water injection to that purpose. I believe that the water jacket would gain you that extra life and extra performance that you are looking for. However, depending on the amount wyou may want to put in, you would have to adjust the pocketing of the heads and the thickness of the head gasket so that you can keep your goal of 8.0:1 compression. I know that the water will increase compression a little, however how much I'm not sure about. The water injection would also help to decrease your intake charge, which will probably balance out the increase in pressure via the lack of compression from the water, and the cooling effect on the charge decreasing it's volume. To answer the other parts, I can't help you there, I own a Mitsubishi Mirage with a 1.8L, no where near close to the size engine that you have there. Hope this helps, Leon ----- Original Message ----- From: "yahoo" To: ; Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:59 PM Subject: Maximum Piston Speed > > Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block > Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 > cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a > 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to > limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't > very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. > > I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Since I'm interested in stroker > engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes, I think that piston speed is > a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been > stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other > things being equal that is a HUGE increase. > > However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the > square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be > more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main > journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It > seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high > transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my > case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would > consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but > need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't > consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of > completeness. > > Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum > piston speeds that are associated with long life? > > Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the > rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of > high power that kills the rings? > > Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Do they hurt? Is the offset > different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and > ignore the long term effects? > > I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because > most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. > I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket > heads (and a thick head gasket) to attain the piston offset. The target > compression ratio is 8.0:1 > > Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? > I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually > seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? > > Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? > > dh > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 14:01:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:26:17 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:26:17 -0800 From: Tom Sharpe MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Craig Dotson wrote: > > As for racers and automatics--you've obviously not been to the track... > > What kind of racing are you talking about? Ever seen a 10 sec LS6 Chevelle w/ a powerglide? Or one of Jim Hall's Chaparalls (injected SBC powered) thrashing the best in the world --- with a powerglide... Tom ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:26:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:26:27 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:26:27 -0800 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal "Porter, Bill" wrote: > > Follow instructions at this link > http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/homedyno/homedyno.htm#inst to make an > inductive pick up. The link uses the pick up to drive the MIC input on your > laptop. From here I'm unsure of how to configure to time sync with the wide > band and the DataQ software. I haven't used the DataQ yet to see if it will > accept outside signals. Don't know what type of voltage you will get off of > pick up to drive DataQ directly As a matter of fact, I bought that thing from him and made up my own pickup just like he described about 3 years ago. (His software works pretty well as long as the info you feed it isn't too far off.) I haven't measured the output spikes, but they are easily viewable on the waveform editor. It also shows quite a bit of noise. Is there an IC out there to use these triggers to build a nice 0-5V square wave for use as an input to the DAQ? -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:26:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:26:40 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:26:40 -0800 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Measure the voltage across the lamp, and across the > 1 ohm resistor. If the lamp has less than 10 volts (and > the LED is out), you are probably running in the curent > limiting warmup mode. The resistor will measure > about 1.25 volt in that case. > > You probably are using too large a lamp. With a small > voltage drop across the lamp and maximum current, you > have a large voltage drop (at max current) across the > LT1086. This heating it up, apparently to the point of > thermal shutdown which dims the light. > > I would find a smaller bulb, which should run at 10 V > with reduced voltage across the 1 ohm (crossover to > voltage regulation). A 2" by 3" heatsink is not very > generous for this application, unless it has a lot of fins. Thanks for the info. How large of a heat sink do you recommend? Would a very small fan placed inside the project case help? This thing got way hotter than 100C and would have easily melted the black plastic case had it not been sitting out on the bench. The data sheet says thermal shutdown is around 165C. I wonder if it really got that hot... The circuit drew about 1 amp for about a minute. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:27:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:27:36 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:27:36 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed 400 CID SBC 100K miles service life turbo'd 6,500 RPM redline Not very realistic, IMO (If running any serious amount of boost). Yes, a little rich is a good idea. there is no reason to spin a turbo motor very high, for the street. In rough numbers, 18 PSI at 5K will get ya down the road just as fast as 15 at 6.5K and the engine will last alot longer (IMO). Might lurk at the syty boards to get some more ideas about what works in their 4.3s. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "yahoo" To: ; Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:59 PM Subject: Maximum Piston Speed > > Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block > Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 > cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a > 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to > limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't > very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. > > I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Since I'm interested in stroker > engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes, I think that piston speed is > a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been > stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other > things being equal that is a HUGE increase. > > However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the > square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be > more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main > journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It > seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high > transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my > case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would > consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but > need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't > consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of > completeness. > > Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum > piston speeds that are associated with long life? > > Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the > rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of > high power that kills the rings? > > Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Do they hurt? Is the offset > different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and > ignore the long term effects? > > I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because > most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. > I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket > heads (and a thick head gasket) to attain the piston offset. The target > compression ratio is 8.0:1 > > Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? > I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually > seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? > > Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? > > dh > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:28:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:28:17 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:28:17 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Trying To Access Website Working now. Bruce From: "David Goldstein" Subject: Trying To Access Website > I'm trying to access the archive files on the diy-efi.org website and I can't even get to the homepage. > -David ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:28:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:28:39 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:28:39 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Display From: "Fran and Bud" Subject: WB O2 Display > Not knowing any better, it seems to me that this could be added to the WB > O2's project box to read the sensor output rather than using a hand held > DMM. It would still require the table to translate into AFR but it would > avoid taking a second meter (DMM) to the races where stuff tends to get > abused or broken. Its also a lot cheaper than a new DMM. There is also an > analog meter on the same page but it looks to be more fragile and harder to > read in poor light. > Is it a question of accuracy or is it somehow > inappropriate/incompatible/dumb? > If it would work OK, then it could also be used to verify the battery > voltage >13.5 with the addition of a selector switch. > I know that its BIY (Buy It Yourself) rather than DIY but so is the sensor. > Bud A couple guys are doing something along these lines. There are cheap DVMs. The engine doesn't care if you reading the output at 2v or 13:1 AFR. Once you deal with the AFR as just numbers, the actual ratio doesn't matter. Remember you should be tuning for performance and just noting AFR changes, and patterns Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:28:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:28:53 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:28:53 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor From: Subject: Starter Teeth Sensor > I don't think this is so hard, but I wonder how useful > it would be. Do you really need to be able to spot a > weak cylinder this way? Depends on what / when you looking at it. Steady load would be a diagnostics thing (tuning lean cruise), whereas at WOT you might be able to find some traces of detonation, knock. Bruce > How is the information to > be displayed? My vision is a scope trace that starts > as #1 goes into the power stroke. Acceleration would > be the vertical scale, so you would have 6 or 8 hills as > you passed each cylinder, but a bad one would be > small or even a valley. > We need more projects! Bruce Roe ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 13:29:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:29:11 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 13:29:11 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? I would think it to be much simpler to have two proms, one for fun & one for the kid @ the Valet. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Daniel Houlton Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:25 AM To: EFI Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being PWM'd? I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 installation just about completed and was toying with the idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost and/or have a 'valet' mode. In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not really designed for modulation. Any thoughts? thanks --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:45:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:45:26 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:45:26 -0800 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? I found some info on a "diy turbo list" on :http://www.mr2.com/EMail.html Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Shirley, Mark R [mailto:MarkRShirley@eaton.com] Gesendet: Dienstag, 18. Dezember 2001 14:42 An: 'diy_efi@diy-efi.org' Betreff: RE: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? Boy, I would be REALLY interested in that list if you hear anything!!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: Obie Fayth [mailto:bibendum59@hotmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 1:15 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? > > > Hi Everyone, > I just signed up to the list a few days ago and wanted > to introduce myself. > I don't know much about electronics, but I am a computer > programmer by trade > and am eager to learn more about hardware. I can see there > are some very > knowledgable people on the list and I look forward to > learning more about > building an efi system for my car. I came across the list by > way of the > MegaSquirt site -- anyone on the list using that? > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing > up for this list I > got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY > turbocharging list. I > responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard > anything since. I > accidentally deleted the original email, but was wondering if > anyone out > there might know the list I am talking about or could recommend an > alternative list for someone interested in learning more > about turbocharging > a vehicle (turbo selection, exh. manifold construction, etc.). > > thanks, > -Obie > Tacoma, Wa. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:45:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:45:43 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:45:43 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Clutches used on GM systems probably would not like being PWM'd. They would spend more time in slip than in engagement, and with any type of load these clutches fail fairly quickly when slipping. They're steel to steel, ya know. Now if you could figure out a way to place a friction lining between the steel drum and hub without adding enough material to prevent clutch operation, you might have a working design for a "slipping" electromagnetic clutch. Shannen Daniel Houlton wrote: > > Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being > PWM'd? > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:46:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:46:00 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:46:00 -0800 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Hi Dan, I've seen a 4AGZE SC clutch after 12 or so years of use. It didn't look pretty and it no longer clamped properly, and that was with normal use. So yes, they do wear out and I don't think they'd last long at all if you tried to slip them on a regular basis. As for valet mode, just turn the SC off! :) (And open the ABV). You could limit it more by leaving the ABV closed, as the engine would have to suck through the SC (which would spin, slowly). Mos. On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Daniel Houlton wrote: > Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being > PWM'd? > > I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged > MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 > installation just about completed and was toying with the > idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost > and/or have a 'valet' mode. > > In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed > to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure > how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch > would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not > really designed for modulation. > > Any thoughts? > > > thanks > --Dan > houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:46:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:46:13 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:46:13 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: VSS and DRAC questions Mark S. Riley wrote: > > 95 LT1 engine, harness, and PCM in a 88 5spd pickup truck. Studying the > DRAC2.pdf on incoming along with what I have in the Alldata. The truck vss > supplys a 40 pulse per driveshaft revolution to the DRAC which then supplys > the PCM with a 4000 pulse per mile signal? I've messed around with these, though it's been a few years now. 2000 and 4000 ppm outputs are available, as well as a 128000 ppm signal used for RWAL. The ecm originally used the 2000 ppm output. I believe you'll need to use the cruise output for 4kppm. > Am I all wet I dunno. Seem to be on track about most things. > or just wrong. You're right about this. > The > DRAC is a pulse amount number changer to the PCM. I guess what I'm wondering > is if there is enough change available in the DRAC to make this combination > work? Without the vss the idle is off and won't pass state inspection. Sounds like there's two questions here. Will the DRAC provide a valid speed signal for the pcm, and will the drac provide a speed signal that will allow me to pass emissions. I think the answer to both is yes. > Many > thanks for any observations on this. Mark > Not all trucks use a DRAC. If you have found one in your truck, you can use a frequency counting DVOM or a scope to check the outputs and confirm them with the drac2 doc. As yet, no one has confirmed those pinouts. They are a combination of different service manuals and may not be completely accurate. Needless to say, if you check them please forward the results to the list. Also, watch voltage drop caused by connecting both the pcm and the cruise to the same output. You may end up switching over to LT1 style cruise control. And check that cruise output voltage is not significantly higher than the voltage the pcm expects to see. What is "significantly higher"? I dunno. But if there is a difference and you smoke the pcm, you can let us know what not to do. If there is no DRAC on the truck, it's probably because the 88 model year used an instrument cluster based divisor, accessible through the back of the speedometer. If the truck uses a DRAC but the divide ratio is set to 1, the same reason may apply. My memory's foggy here, so get pinouts for the 88 to see where the cruise control signal originates. (Don't use the pinout that is included with the diagnosis for code 24. It's incorrect. And make sure you get 1988 specific pinouts, they're different.) Basically, if the speedo was correct before the swap, you *should* be able to get what you need without too much work. gl. Shannen ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:46:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:46:41 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:46:41 -0800 From: George Dickey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Yet another archive script. Hi Dan Where is the script? Thanks -- George Daniel Houlton wrote: > > Anyways, I have a Perl script that I wrote to filter out > the headers and footers of all my mail archives from the > last several years. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:47:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:47:12 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:47:12 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? How about PWM a bypass valve instead? I have been considering this as an option for my project once I get the basics worked out. It will cost you a bit in parasitic HP to "over"drive the blower, but with the right bits, you could have cockpit adjustable boost control! Then use the clutch just to "switch off" the SC when the bypass is open in steady state low-load operation... Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Daniel Houlton > Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? > > Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being > PWM'd? > > I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged > MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 > installation just about completed and was toying with the > idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost > and/or have a 'valet' mode. > > In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed > to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure > how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch > would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not > really designed for modulation. > > Any thoughts? > > > thanks > --Dan > houlster@inficad.com > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:47:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:47:31 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:47:31 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Home for an injector I remember some people setting up an injector flow bench many years ago, and trying to test injectors with water. I thought there were problems with the pintle locking up rather quickly when used with water. Any logic to this, or am I just remembering poorly? Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bruce > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > Water could be a good thing. > Bruce > > > From: "The Dupuis" > > Like water, perhaps??? > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:48:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:48:06 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:48:06 -0800 From: "Trans Am Temple" Subject: Turbo groups answer Maybe I catch hell, and maybe I don't but since two people now have asked about the turbo groups available I thought I'd go ahead and post the info again. Go to http://groups.yahoo.com and type the word 'turbo' into the search box, you'll find several groups available to sign up. Two of the ones that I've been signed up with are jyturbo and blowthruturbo, both of which have many posts, members and lots of info. The new one was diy-turbo, but it doesn't have much of a following yet. Hope this helps someone, Steve _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:48:35 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:48:35 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:48:35 -0800 From: skulte MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed > > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum > torque > > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Not really. Max torque is a combination of cylinder pressure and crank angle. You should see max cyl pressure somewhere near 10 degrees after TDC. Max crank angle will be closer to 90 degrees, where the pressure has gone down by orders of magnitude. Max instantaneuous piston speed will always be roughly halfway between TDC and BDC. That's not what you should be concerned about. The max acceleration forces put the force on the rotating assembly, which is what you should be designing for, based on RPM and torque expected. The piston speed shouldn't have anything to do with ring sealing. It's the flutter at the top of the stroke, as the piston begins to come back down. Just my 2 cents.. ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs http://www.skulte.com Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:49:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:49:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:49:14 -0800 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Hermann" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:20 AM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > At 9:34 AM 12/17/01, Mark S. Riley wrote: > >They were legal. Rollers never have been in the "CUP" series. Problem with > >mushroom lifter camshafts are that they don't last very long. If you put an > >aggressive grind that will need valve spring to maintain control, then > >lifter and lobe life is very much shortened over "Normal" flat tappet cam > >grinds. Also the bottom of the block "must" be spotfaced to prevent one > >point of the lifter touching a casting tit or bump which breaks the foot off > >the lifter. Perhaps lifter float cause you were trying to run the lightest > >springs to cut down on drag and wear. Then the driver does something bright > >like turn it 9600 on a restart. Also they have to be shimmed front to rear > >against cam walk cause the opposite lobe will lift the wrong valve with very > >little aft to fore movement. Used to see pallets of Crane, Competion Cams, > >Cam Dynamics, Reed, and Crower Cams mushrooms at some of the local "CUP" > >shops. They couldn't run a cam and lifter but once. Wouldn't make two races. > >I use to buy the used cams and lifters and run them in short track engines. > >Valve action with a mushroom can be more radical than a roller ever dreamed > >about. They just don't last long because of the loading. Oh, the lobes are > >thinner to help with the "crosslift problem" because of the big foot. The > >"CUP" stuff was cut for a 1" foot lifter. When Nascar outlawed the mushroom, > >they all went to the ford lifter size, .850" I think. Precisioneering in > >Asheville, NC does most of the lifter boring and registering for the teams. > >They have a factory type lifter boring machine. > >Duh, that's probably more than anyone would want to know about that "old" > >stuff. later, Mark > > My thought is that with a turbo engine, get the power with boost and don't > turn it all that fast. MUCH more durable that way, overall, so long as you > avoid any sign of the devil detonation. Thus, the valve springs can stay > more like normal "hi-po" valve springs, since spring requirements vary with > the square of the rpm. This ought to cure the wear problem. Another thought > is to run a "hi-rev" spring kit in the valley--thus allowing slightly > lighter valve springs, and keeping some of the necessary spring force off > of the valves and rockers, at least. with a "rev-kit" on a flat tappet, you force wiping of the lobes on start up because all the lifters are loaded. The reason for the recent usage of Mushroom cams in race cars, is that the lift per degree of rotation can be higher with the mushroom than a roller is capable of below .300" lift. Thus at the duration events they were running, they had more area under the curve than a roller is capable of. The bigger foot is required because the edge of the lobe wipes past the side of a normal lifter. This high lift per degree of rotation is where the need for high valve spring pressures comes from. Also the mushroom lifter weighs more than the regular flat tappet. Other wise it would be like a "drag stocker" camshaft and they just cut the top off of a really big lobe and toss the valve up with weak springs. Again not very reliable for any type of endurance. If you aren't taking advantage of the lift per degree of rotation then the mushroom lifter isn't worth putting in the engine. Something as simple as a bad lifter turns into a major bit of work with a mushroom. That's why the OEM's quit using them. Especially with a turbo motor, a "killer" camshaft is not needed to make obcene horsepower levels. > > No doubt, the thinner lobes contribute mightily to the wear problem, too. > > There are plenty of HD diesels which use mushroom lifters, stock, without > wear problems. So did the IHC "Red Diamond" engines. (404/450/501 I-6's). I wonder if perhaps the use of mushroom lifters is partly atributable to their use of a camshaft as big as a driveshaft and the other side is because that's the way we've always done it. Thinking about it, I don't work on diesel trucks, but I have several friends who do and they tell me that Mack is the only company that still uses mushrooms in the last 30 years or there abouts. > They all do it to improve BSFC under load. Of course, none of these are > high rev items, so the springs are reasonably mellow. > > Point is that the wear/durability problem comes from the spring force used > trying to squeeze out the last few rpm, not from the mushroom design > itself. I'm not aware of any HD diesels that turn over about 2100 rpm. Since the 40's, I don't think there has been a single engine released by anyone in a "passenger" car that wouldn't turn at least 4500 rpm and in most cases over 5000 rpm. Valve train requirements are drastically different for any engine if you double the operating rpm. If the cam profile doesn't require a mushroom foot, there would be no benefit to using one. They can create more problems than they fix. later, Mark > > In my particular case, 1.375" diameter lifter feet will fit without any > cross lift problems, even with stock width (about 5/8" wide) lobes, and the > cam is properly and precisely located fore and aft in its stock condition. > 5-3/8" bore centers on a V-8 and good basic design will do that sort of > thing for you !! :-) > > Greg > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:49:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:49:42 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:49:42 -0800 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing ... (What I see) Richard Alan Evans wrote: > > I then realized it's not going to work exactly right unless the bulb > resistance matches the O2 heater resistance (~3.3 ohms cold). I was using a T1156 also and measure 1.0 ohms with a Fluke 87. I just found I have a spare 2057NA sitting here and measure 3.8 ohms. This should work great then when I hook it up tonight. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 16:49:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:49:54 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 16:49:54 -0800 From: Erik Quackenbush Subject: Re: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? I'd be interested in such a list if it also covered supercharging. I'm working on a custom supercharger setup for a Triumph GT6 right now. -Erik At 07:02 AM 12/18/2001 -0700, you wrote: > > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing up for > this list I > >got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY turbocharging list. I > >responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard anything since. > >-Obie > >Tacoma, Wa. > > >I would be sort of curious to hear about that myself. > >Greg -- Erik Quackenbush, Midwest Filter Corporation 1-847-680-0566 http://www.midwestfilter.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:20:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:20:57 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:20:57 -0800 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #950 Conventional or Dark Side???? On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:00:12 -0800, you wrote: > >Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:48:09 -0500 >From: "Bruce" >Subject: Re: Home for an injector > >Water could be a good thing. >Bruce > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:21:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:21:17 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:21:17 -0800 From: clayb Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > From: "Shannen Durphey" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > I spoke to the place in Maryland today. He did not think that the mushroom > cam/lifters was an idea he would like to see in my car. He suggested that I > use a flat tappet cam. Guess he thought the $$$$ for a roller would not pay > very big dividends. Had some interesting ideas about many things, many of > them seemed directly apposed to what I have come to feel is the norm. One > thing for sure, I need to make things as sure as possible with this part of > my upgrade. Toooo many benches full of parts. Toooo many new changed and > untried systems on vehicle. > > Anyone have opinions of roller cams vs. flat tappet? > > Other than the dollar figure, I thought rollers had thing covered hands > down! Rollers are great, especially if you want high RPM and a broad powerband. Downsides are: high spring pressure, wear, and semi-regular replacement of the roller lifters. If you want the last ounce of power, and are willing to replace lifters every couple years, you'll get power out of them. For long life and good performance, a mechanical flat tappet is the way to go. Mushroom lifters aren't real practical in a block not designed for them. The .850" Ford lifter would be a reasonable try at improving lift rate, if you could get the machining done cheaply enough (not!) As you're doing a turbo engine, the flat tappets make even more sense. The more conservative cam timing dictated by a turbo will limit your RPM anyway. Turbo engines (at least non-VVT) make power with boost, not RPM. - Clay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:21:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:21:40 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:21:40 -0800 From: Bryan Zublin Subject: RE: MAP Sensor The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html Bryan Zublin At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, not for controlling EFI... Steve ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:21:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:21:54 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:21:54 -0800 From: "rob files" Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Hi Dan, I think this would be a bad idea because of the reason you mentioned. Basically I think it would wear out the clutch very fast. This is basically because you are limiting boost by slipping the clutch. As an MR2SC owner myself I know that the clutches wear out during normal usage which is on above 10" of HG engine vacuum with about 10 seconds of minimum on time. The best way to limit boost is take another page from the Toyota SC setup; a bypas valve. You could pick a bypass valve (some random turbo BOV should work fine) that opens at 8psi say with just the pressure diff across the in and out ports. Then using a Vacuum Switching Valve (VSV in Toyota speak), you could pulse boost pressure to the vacuum port that keep it closed until the desire boost is achieved. Does that make sense? But the real quesiton is why would you want to control boost with an SC setup? The gas pedal does a real good job of it on it's own :). If you have any questions, feel free to email me directly. -Rob >From: Daniel Houlton >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org (EFI ) >Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? >Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:25:13 -0700 (MST) > >Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being >PWM'd? > >I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged >MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 >installation just about completed and was toying with the >idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost >and/or have a 'valet' mode. > >In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed >to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure >how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch >would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not >really designed for modulation. > >Any thoughts? > > >thanks >--Dan >houlster@inficad.com > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:22:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:22:08 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:22:08 -0800 From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing I added two 15 ohm resistors in parallel with the 1 ohm resistor on my unit. The current went from 1.2 to 1.4A and the warm-up time dropped from 4 minutes to 45 seconds. Perfect. Neil > Sounds like you need some of the 15 ohm resistors across R4. The current should be ~1.4A max. And yes the VR does run hot and needs a bit of heat sink. < ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:22:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:22:21 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:22:21 -0800 From: "Todd Danielson" <96Hawk@RMarshall.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Sensor Connector Does Sumitomo have a distributor that could supply a smaller quantity for us? Todd ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Zublin" To: Cc: ; Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 PM Subject: WB O2 Sensor Connector > A list member was nice enough to email me photos of the mating connector > for the NGK wideband O2 sensor. From these images, I was able to find the > Sumitomo part numbers in the catalog that I have. They are sending me some > samples which I will forward to the list member to verify that it is the > correct connector. > > I also received a quote today from Sumitomo for the connector shell, > retainer, terminals, wire seals and dummy plugs. The total cost is about > $1.20 for all pieces required for the connector assembly. Unfortunately, > Sumitomo has minimum order quatities of 1000 shells, 7000 retainers, 25,000 > teminals, etc. I need to negotiate a lower order quantity, but the total > order amount will still be close to $2000 because of handling fees for > split lots, shipping charges from Japan, etc. > > I have odered from Sumitomo once in the past year so I have an account set > up. I can arrange a group buy if I can get at least 100 people to > participate. The cost would be about $20 per person, and for $20 you would > receive enough pieces to assemble at least 5 connectors. > > I will post updated pricing information once I have it. I have no > financial incentive for this group buy. My primary goal is to be able to > offer the new connector for current DIY members, and to have enough > connectors on hand for at least a couple years to support future > DIY'ers. Once my material costs are covered, the remaining connectors that > I have would be sold at cost plus shipping. Unfortunately, this means that > the first 100 people will pay more than the people after the first 100, but > this is the only way that I can think it can work. > > Regards, > Bryan Zublin > www.zublin.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 19:02:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:22:40 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:22:40 -0800 From: "Don DRI05 Ricciardiello" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal The LM2917 perhaps? http://www.national.com/pf/LM/LM2917.html#Datasheet rgds Don From: Glen Beard @diy-efi.org on 18/12/2001 22:47 EST Please respond to diy_efi@diy-efi.org Sent by: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org cc: Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Is there an IC out there to use these triggers to build a nice 0-5V square wave for use as an input to the DAQ? -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 19:16:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:23:04 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:23:04 -0800 From: Jay Wallace Subject: Re: WBO2 testing ... (What I see) Glen, Be aware that the resistivity of a tungsten filament (and most pure metals) changes strongly with temperature. Literature values are 5.5 at 20 C and 65 at 2000 C (units: micro-ohm cm) whereas the resistivity of the heating element in the sensor probably doesn't change more than a few percent from room temperature to operating temperature. Bottom line: if you get a light bulb with the proper high temperature resistance you'll probably draw too much current at room temperature. HTH, Jay At 06:23 PM 12/18/2001 -0600, you wrote: >Glen: > >I've just finished testing my heater section for the first time and >here's what I found. My regulator is mounted to the ~0.040" aluminum >cover of the same Radio Shack box others are using. I first used a T906 >dome light bulb (~1.8 ohms cold). With that I saw a peak current of >~0.59 amps (had a nice soft ramp-up) and about 6 seconds for the LED to >come on. The regulator didn't heat much if any. > >Then I tried an 1156 bulb (~0.5 ohms cold). I got a soft ramp-up to >~1.27 amps and I shut it down after about 1.5 minutes without ever >getting the LED to light. The regulator did heat up markedly but not to >the point of being untouchable. > >I then realized it's not going to work exactly right unless the bulb >resistance matches the O2 heater resistance (~3.3 ohms cold). I gave up >looking for the perfect bulb and since it was exhibiting a soft current >ramp-up, I decided to just try the real thing. (Sometimes I'm >dangerous:) With the real heater, it ramped-up to ~1.27 amps and the LED >came on at 64 seconds. The current settled to ~1.18 after 3 minutes of >on-time in free air. The regulator was merely warm at that point. > >Try a bulb closer in cold resistance to the heater resistance the >circuit is designed for and see if it doesn't behave more like it >should. > > >Glen Beard wrote: > > > > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > > got brighter. > > > > -- > > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 > > 355, Vortech, heads, cam... > > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html > > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 19:12:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:23:27 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:23:27 -0800 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Bob Wooten wrote: > > I would think it to be much simpler to have two proms, one for fun & one for > the kid @ the Valet. > There's several problems with two proms. First, I don't have one, 2nd, there's nothing I can do with my ECM either. It's made by Hitachi. Biggest thing though, is that no prom will change the boost from a supercharger. It's controlled by the pulley ratio. But, if you could PWM a clutch on the SC pulley, you could contol slip to get, in effect, different ratios and lower boost. I'm not trying to get a valet mode here. I'm trying to see if I can lower boost on demand without changing pulleys. What I'm wondering is if anyone has any idea how the clutch would react. PWM'ing it would be kinda like controlled slip in the clutch. Just wondering if it would last very long, or if the coil would burn out or what. I thought maybe somebody's tried something similar before. --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:23:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:23:47 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:23:47 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: LPG Injection. >So what did you use for injectors? And did you need to circulate LPG through >the rails to keep it from boiling? I've heard that this can be a problem. As far as keeping gas phase out of the rails, you need to study how refrigeration (the industrial variety) piping is run so as to avoid trapping gas where you want only liquid. Well developed technology, just not familiar to lots of folks. Greg > >Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:24:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:24:33 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:24:33 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Slipping (modulating) that clutch will probably be about as healthy as slipping a regular trans clutch: a very short trip to destruction. Those A/C clutches get pretty beat up even in normal operation. Bruce Roe On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:25:13 -0700 (MST) Daniel Houlton writes: > Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being > PWM'd? > > I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged > MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 > installation just about completed and was toying with the > idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost > and/or have a 'valet' mode. > > In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed > to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure > how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch > would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not > really designed for modulation. > --Dan ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:24:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:24:50 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:24:50 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing That heat sink might need to dissipate up to 5 watts in normal operation. However, that can be much higher during warmup. Thats OK for half a minute, but if you overload it with a huge lamp it could be tripple power continuously. The T906 lamp mentioned by Richard sounds like a perfect test load. It is large enough to test the current ramp up, but small enough to easily go to voltage (about 10.4V) regulation. Since it is about 1/2 the load of the sensor heater, running a T906 for a while should give you an idea if your heat sink is too small without immediate overheating. Once the circuit is working well, I would expect a 3 X 5 sheet of aluminum to do the job; the cover of a project box. But very thin (.025") metal will localize the heat; I would replace a thin cover with at least a .062" piece, 1/8" is pretty good. A few low profile fins can help too. Remember the regulator is electrically hot, so you must use mica washers & grease (or your favorite version) to insulate the regulator. This keeps exposed heat sinks from blowing fuses & circuits. Everybody is using a 5 amp fuse, right? 3 would be OK. Another approach (I used) was about a 2" X 3" heavy finned heat sink mounted INSIDE, but with plenty of air slots (see my pictures). The regulator then can be mounted without insulation, it runs cooler. The resistor will not need much, except a bit of air flow. A ceramic resistor will tolerate pretty high temperatures, but could damage parts very close to it. Running a fan works, but is a lot of complication over a hunk of metal. Bruce Roe On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:52:58 -0500 Stephen Andersen writes: > It is starting to appear that I have significantly > underestimated the amount of heat sink required for > the WBo2. I bought some small heat sinks from RS today > that are finned anodized aluminum guys about 1.5" x .75" > x .75" or so. I guess one of these isn't enough huh? > > If that is the case, I am going to have to completely > rethink the packaging of the WBo2 and LCD/RS232 display > boards. I definitely have not allowed for enough room in the > box with larger heat sink(s). > > Any guidance from those that have completed their WB's and > have them functioning? > > Can someone point me to a properly sized Digikey heat sink? > > How do you attach the heat sink to the power transistor (I think > that is what it is, right?) and the big resistor? > > Thanks, > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > > Behalf Of bcroe@juno.com > > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:35 AM > > Subject: WBO2 testing > > > > > > Measure the voltage across the lamp, and across the > > 1 ohm resistor. If the lamp has less than 10 volts (and > > the LED is out), you are probably running in the curent > > limiting warmup mode. The resistor will measure > > about 1.25 volt in that case. > > > > You probably are using too large a lamp. With a small > > voltage drop across the lamp and maximum current, you > > have a large voltage drop (at max current) across the > > LT1086. This heating it up, apparently to the point of > > thermal shutdown which dims the light. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 19 18:25:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:25:14 -0800 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:25:14 -0800 From: Clint Corbin Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? It wouldn't like it ONE bit! On or off is fine, but slipping WILL burn up that clutch faster than you can say "does anyone smell something burning???". In a lot of ways, it is exactly like a transistor. It doesn't draw much power off, it doesn't draw much power when it is on, but if you operate it in between (saturation), it uses a LOT of power. In short, nice theory, but reality will quickly bit you in the butt. Clint At 11:25 AM 12/18/2001 -0700, you wrote: >Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being >PWM'd? > >I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged >MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 >installation just about completed and was toying with the >idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost >and/or have a 'valet' mode. > >In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed >to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure >how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch >would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not >really designed for modulation. > >Any thoughts? > > >thanks >--Dan >houlster@inficad.com > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dzorde@erggroup.com Tue Dec 18 21:52:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:24 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:24 -0300 From: "Dan Zorde" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re: Newish Member Post Because the LPG is a vapour it is also fully mixed by the time it enters the chambers, allowing you to run leaner than petrol if you are after economy. Friend of mine who does LPG conversions often set up cars to idle at 16:1 with no problems. Any pertol engine I've ever seen at 16:1 would hunt and eventually stall. Dan dzorde@erggroup.com >Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 13:59:19 -0700 (MST) From: Chris McKinnon >Subject: Re: Newish Member Post > >>Summit is/was having a close-out on ADS chips, I noted >>that they had chips for '91(?) Chevy PU's, one for >>gas, one for propane, thought it would be interesting >>to get one of each and compare them to see what the >>differences where, but I never did. > >As far as I know the differences are in the ignition curves. You can jack up >the timing a bit more on LPG at higher revs. > >>Personally, I'd be more interested in taking advantage >>of that high octane w/ turbocharging rather than >>converting to FI. Hmmm...hafta give that some more >>thought... > >The thing I like about LPG is the fact that you can run up to about 14:1 >compression and the extra torque it give at lower RPM's. Plus the fact that >LPG is worth about 2/3 of gas. > >Chris ---------------------------- ERG Group -------------------------- The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may only be read by the intended recipient. ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 19 02:34:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:26 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:26 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Display From: "Fran and Bud" Subject: WB O2 Display > Not knowing any better, it seems to me that this could be added to the WB > O2's project box to read the sensor output rather than using a hand held > DMM. It would still require the table to translate into AFR but it would > avoid taking a second meter (DMM) to the races where stuff tends to get > abused or broken. Its also a lot cheaper than a new DMM. There is also an > analog meter on the same page but it looks to be more fragile and harder to > read in poor light. > Is it a question of accuracy or is it somehow > inappropriate/incompatible/dumb? > If it would work OK, then it could also be used to verify the battery > voltage >13.5 with the addition of a selector switch. > I know that its BIY (Buy It Yourself) rather than DIY but so is the sensor. > Bud A couple guys are doing something along these lines. There are cheap DVMs. The engine doesn't care if you reading the output at 2v or 13:1 AFR. Once you deal with the AFR as just numbers, the actual ratio doesn't matter. Remember you should be tuning for performance and just noting AFR changes, and patterns Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bzublin@zublin.com Tue Dec 18 23:23:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:26 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:26 -0300 From: Bryan Zublin Subject: WB O2 Sensor Connector A list member was nice enough to email me photos of the mating connector for the NGK wideband O2 sensor. From these images, I was able to find the Sumitomo part numbers in the catalog that I have. They are sending me some samples which I will forward to the list member to verify that it is the correct connector. I also received a quote today from Sumitomo for the connector shell, retainer, terminals, wire seals and dummy plugs. The total cost is about $1.20 for all pieces required for the connector assembly. Unfortunately, Sumitomo has minimum order quatities of 1000 shells, 7000 retainers, 25,000 teminals, etc. I need to negotiate a lower order quantity, but the total order amount will still be close to $2000 because of handling fees for split lots, shipping charges from Japan, etc. I have odered from Sumitomo once in the past year so I have an account set up. I can arrange a group buy if I can get at least 100 people to participate. The cost would be about $20 per person, and for $20 you would receive enough pieces to assemble at least 5 connectors. I will post updated pricing information once I have it. I have no financial incentive for this group buy. My primary goal is to be able to offer the new connector for current DIY members, and to have enough connectors on hand for at least a couple years to support future DIY'ers. Once my material costs are covered, the remaining connectors that I have would be sold at cost plus shipping. Unfortunately, this means that the first 100 people will pay more than the people after the first 100, but this is the only way that I can think it can work. Regards, Bryan Zublin www.zublin.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Tue Dec 18 22:52:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:27 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:27 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing It is starting to appear that I have significantly underestimated the amount of heat sink required for the WBo2. I bought some small heat sinks from RS today that are finned anodized aluminum guys about 1.5" x .75" x .75" or so. I guess one of these isn't enough huh? If that is the case, I am going to have to completely rethink the packaging of the WBo2 and LCD/RS232 display boards. I definitely have not allowed for enough room in the box with larger heat sink(s). Any guidance from those that have completed their WB's and have them functioning? Can someone point me to a properly sized Digikey heat sink? How do you attach the heat sink to the power transistor (I think that is what it is, right?) and the big resistor? Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of bcroe@juno.com > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:35 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: WBO2 testing > > > Measure the voltage across the lamp, and across the > 1 ohm resistor. If the lamp has less than 10 volts (and > the LED is out), you are probably running in the curent > limiting warmup mode. The resistor will measure > about 1.25 volt in that case. > > You probably are using too large a lamp. With a small > voltage drop across the lamp and maximum current, you > have a large voltage drop (at max current) across the > LT1086. This heating it up, apparently to the point of > thermal shutdown which dims the light. > > I would find a smaller bulb, which should run at 10 V > with reduced voltage across the 1 ohm (crossover to > voltage regulation). A 2" by 3" heatsink is not very > generous for this application, unless it has a lot of fins. > > Bruce Roe > > On Mon, 17 Dec 2001 01:04:09 -0500 Glen Beard > writes: > > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > > got brighter. > > > Glen Beard > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 19 02:47:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:35 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:35 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Starter Teeth Sensor From: Subject: Starter Teeth Sensor > I don't think this is so hard, but I wonder how useful > it would be. Do you really need to be able to spot a > weak cylinder this way? Depends on what / when you looking at it. Steady load would be a diagnostics thing (tuning lean cruise), whereas at WOT you might be able to find some traces of detonation, knock. Bruce > How is the information to > be displayed? My vision is a scope trace that starts > as #1 goes into the power stroke. Acceleration would > be the vertical scale, so you would have 6 or 8 hills as > you passed each cylinder, but a bad one would be > small or even a valley. > We need more projects! Bruce Roe ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos@sydney.net Tue Dec 18 23:32:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:40 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:48:40 -0300 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Rotor profile. Re: Cam position sensing w/o a cam sensor On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Craig Dotson wrote: > On your F4i, you can see through the access hole in the sidecover that the > crank trigger is a 12 tooth wheel. Nine of the 12 are straight teeth, while > three have "shoulders" of sorts. The shouldered crank teeth align with the > crank sensor at approximately the same time as the cam teeth align with the > cam sensor (at least to my uncalibrated eye). What effect does the shouldered tooth have? I have never looked at the waveform off one of those, but I'm thinking the difference in waveform is detectable, giving the ECU more timing information? Also, I understand the "normal" teeth produce a waveform with a zero crossing, and a simple comparator circuit can transform that into a nice square wave. What effect on the comparator circuit and its output does the shouldered tooth have? (Yes, I'm being lazy and too time contrained right now to try it myself...) Mos. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From gbeard1@nycap.rr.com Wed Dec 19 00:47:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:10 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:10 -0300 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal "Porter, Bill" wrote: > > Follow instructions at this link > http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/homedyno/homedyno.htm#inst to make an > inductive pick up. The link uses the pick up to drive the MIC input on your > laptop. From here I'm unsure of how to configure to time sync with the wide > band and the DataQ software. I haven't used the DataQ yet to see if it will > accept outside signals. Don't know what type of voltage you will get off of > pick up to drive DataQ directly As a matter of fact, I bought that thing from him and made up my own pickup just like he described about 3 years ago. (His software works pretty well as long as the info you feed it isn't too far off.) I haven't measured the output spikes, but they are easily viewable on the waveform editor. It also shows quite a bit of noise. Is there an IC out there to use these triggers to build a nice 0-5V square wave for use as an input to the DAQ? -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bzublin@zublin.com Tue Dec 18 22:00:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:13 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:13 -0300 From: Bryan Zublin Subject: RE: MAP Sensor The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html Bryan Zublin At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: >Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost >applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for >like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else >available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, >not for controlling EFI... > >Steve ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bamainc@home.com Tue Dec 18 22:30:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:26 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:26 -0300 From: "David Hunt" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #948 You can sign up for the turbo list at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/diy-turbo/ The problem with that list is the advertisements that come with the messages. If you can live with that then the turbo list is interesting. dh > ------------------------------ > > Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2001 10:15:10 -0800 > From: "Obie Fayth" > Subject: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? > > Hi Everyone, > I just signed up to the list a few days ago and wanted to introduce myself. > I don't know much about electronics, but I am a computer programmer by trade > and am eager to learn more about hardware. I can see there are some very > knowledgable people on the list and I look forward to learning more about > building an efi system for my car. I came across the list by way of the > MegaSquirt site -- anyone on the list using that? > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing up for this list I > got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY turbocharging list. I > responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard anything since. I > accidentally deleted the original email, but was wondering if anyone out > there might know the list I am talking about or could recommend an > alternative list for someone interested in learning more about turbocharging > a vehicle (turbo selection, exh. manifold construction, etc.). > > thanks, > - -Obie > Tacoma, Wa. > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 19 02:27:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:28 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:28 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Trying To Access Website Working now. Bruce From: "David Goldstein" Subject: Trying To Access Website > I'm trying to access the archive files on the diy-efi.org website and I can't even get to the homepage. > -David ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Wed Dec 19 02:07:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:35 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:49:35 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed 400 CID SBC 100K miles service life turbo'd 6,500 RPM redline Not very realistic, IMO (If running any serious amount of boost). Yes, a little rich is a good idea. there is no reason to spin a turbo motor very high, for the street. In rough numbers, 18 PSI at 5K will get ya down the road just as fast as 15 at 6.5K and the engine will last alot longer (IMO). Might lurk at the syty boards to get some more ideas about what works in their 4.3s. Bruce ----- Original Message ----- From: "yahoo" To: ; Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 6:59 PM Subject: Maximum Piston Speed > > Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block > Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 > cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a > 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to > limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't > very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. > > I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Since I'm interested in stroker > engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes, I think that piston speed is > a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been > stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other > things being equal that is a HUGE increase. > > However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the > square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be > more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main > journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It > seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high > transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my > case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would > consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but > need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't > consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of > completeness. > > Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum > piston speeds that are associated with long life? > > Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the > rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of > high power that kills the rings? > > Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Do they hurt? Is the offset > different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and > ignore the long term effects? > > I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because > most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. > I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket > heads (and a thick head gasket) to attain the piston offset. The target > compression ratio is 8.0:1 > > Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? > I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually > seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? > > Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? > > dh > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chrism@cnx.net Tue Dec 18 22:01:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:01:34 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:01:34 -0300 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Re: LPG Injection. >The point to LPG injection is both the vastly improved accuracy >of the control system and the free super charging that comes >with the absorption of heat from the air charge. > >The average increase in torque with LPG injection over >Petrol is approx. 15%. > >Higher compression ratio is also a freely available side effect >and so is the higher than normal boost that takes >advantage of the very high octane ratings. > >By the way we tried it at work and were very successful. > >Phil > > So what did you use for injectors? And did you need to circulate LPG through the rails to keep it from boiling? I've heard that this can be a problem. Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From twsharpe@mtco.com Wed Dec 19 00:37:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:13:27 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:13:27 -0300 From: Tom Sharpe MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: CVT (was:Intake manifold construction, intercoolers) Craig Dotson wrote: > > As for racers and automatics--you've obviously not been to the track... > > What kind of racing are you talking about? Ever seen a 10 sec LS6 Chevelle w/ a powerglide? Or one of Jim Hall's Chaparalls (injected SBC powered) thrashing the best in the world --- with a powerglide... Tom ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos68x@yahoo.com Tue Dec 18 23:52:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:14:14 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:14:14 -0300 From: "Leon Rathburn" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed I am not an expert on this, but I have heard of several benefits from water injection to that purpose. I believe that the water jacket would gain you that extra life and extra performance that you are looking for. However, depending on the amount wyou may want to put in, you would have to adjust the pocketing of the heads and the thickness of the head gasket so that you can keep your goal of 8.0:1 compression. I know that the water will increase compression a little, however how much I'm not sure about. The water injection would also help to decrease your intake charge, which will probably balance out the increase in pressure via the lack of compression from the water, and the cooling effect on the charge decreasing it's volume. To answer the other parts, I can't help you there, I own a Mitsubishi Mirage with a 1.8L, no where near close to the size engine that you have there. Hope this helps, Leon ----- Original Message ----- From: "yahoo" To: ; Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:59 PM Subject: Maximum Piston Speed > > Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block > Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 > cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a > 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to > limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't > very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. > > I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Since I'm interested in stroker > engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes, I think that piston speed is > a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been > stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other > things being equal that is a HUGE increase. > > However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the > square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be > more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main > journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It > seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high > transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my > case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would > consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but > need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't > consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of > completeness. > > Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum > piston speeds that are associated with long life? > > Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the > rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of > high power that kills the rings? > > Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Do they hurt? Is the offset > different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and > ignore the long term effects? > > I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because > most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. > I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket > heads (and a thick head gasket) to attain the piston offset. The target > compression ratio is 8.0:1 > > Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? > I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually > seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? > > Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? > > dh > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From gbeard1@nycap.rr.com Wed Dec 19 00:51:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:50:58 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:50:58 -0300 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing bcroe@juno.com wrote: > > Measure the voltage across the lamp, and across the > 1 ohm resistor. If the lamp has less than 10 volts (and > the LED is out), you are probably running in the curent > limiting warmup mode. The resistor will measure > about 1.25 volt in that case. > > You probably are using too large a lamp. With a small > voltage drop across the lamp and maximum current, you > have a large voltage drop (at max current) across the > LT1086. This heating it up, apparently to the point of > thermal shutdown which dims the light. > > I would find a smaller bulb, which should run at 10 V > with reduced voltage across the 1 ohm (crossover to > voltage regulation). A 2" by 3" heatsink is not very > generous for this application, unless it has a lot of fins. Thanks for the info. How large of a heat sink do you recommend? Would a very small fan placed inside the project case help? This thing got way hotter than 100C and would have easily melted the black plastic case had it not been sitting out on the bench. The data sheet says thermal shutdown is around 165C. I wonder if it really got that hot... The circuit drew about 1 amp for about a minute. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Wed Dec 19 04:21:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:51:26 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 19:51:26 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? I would think it to be much simpler to have two proms, one for fun & one for the kid @ the Valet. BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Daniel Houlton Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:25 AM To: EFI Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being PWM'd? I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 installation just about completed and was toying with the idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost and/or have a 'valet' mode. In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not really designed for modulation. Any thoughts? thanks --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From skulte@skulte.com Wed Dec 19 10:28:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:19 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:19 -0300 From: skulte MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed > > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum > torque > > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Not really. Max torque is a combination of cylinder pressure and crank angle. You should see max cyl pressure somewhere near 10 degrees after TDC. Max crank angle will be closer to 90 degrees, where the pressure has gone down by orders of magnitude. Max instantaneuous piston speed will always be roughly halfway between TDC and BDC. That's not what you should be concerned about. The max acceleration forces put the force on the rotating assembly, which is what you should be designing for, based on RPM and torque expected. The piston speed shouldn't have anything to do with ring sealing. It's the flutter at the top of the stroke, as the piston begins to come back down. Just my 2 cents.. ------------------ Andris Skulte Skulte Performance Designs http://www.skulte.com Z28tt-89 IROC T56 DFI Twin Turbo ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From georged@lsil.com Wed Dec 19 07:22:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:19 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:19 -0300 From: George Dickey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Yet another archive script. Hi Dan Where is the script? Thanks -- George Daniel Houlton wrote: > > Anyways, I have a Perl script that I wrote to filter out > the headers and footers of all my mail archives from the > last several years. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From transamtemple@hotmail.com Wed Dec 19 10:26:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:19 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:19 -0300 From: "Trans Am Temple" Subject: Turbo groups answer Maybe I catch hell, and maybe I don't but since two people now have asked about the turbo groups available I thought I'd go ahead and post the info again. Go to http://groups.yahoo.com and type the word 'turbo' into the search box, you'll find several groups available to sign up. Two of the ones that I've been signed up with are jyturbo and blowthruturbo, both of which have many posts, members and lots of info. The new one was diy-turbo, but it doesn't have much of a following yet. Hope this helps someone, Steve _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Wed Dec 19 10:06:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:20 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:20 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Home for an injector I remember some people setting up an injector flow bench many years ago, and trying to test injectors with water. I thought there were problems with the pintle locking up rather quickly when used with water. Any logic to this, or am I just remembering poorly? Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Bruce > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > Water could be a good thing. > Bruce > > > From: "The Dupuis" > > Like water, perhaps??? > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From erik@midwestfilter.com Wed Dec 19 12:45:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:21 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:21 -0300 From: Erik Quackenbush Subject: Re: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? I'd be interested in such a list if it also covered supercharging. I'm working on a custom supercharger setup for a Triumph GT6 right now. -Erik At 07:02 AM 12/18/2001 -0700, you wrote: > > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing up for > this list I > >got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY turbocharging list. I > >responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard anything since. > >-Obie > >Tacoma, Wa. > > >I would be sort of curious to hear about that myself. > >Greg -- Erik Quackenbush, Midwest Filter Corporation 1-847-680-0566 http://www.midwestfilter.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From mos@sydney.net Wed Dec 19 04:39:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:21 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:21 -0300 From: Mos MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Hi Dan, I've seen a 4AGZE SC clutch after 12 or so years of use. It didn't look pretty and it no longer clamped properly, and that was with normal use. So yes, they do wear out and I don't think they'd last long at all if you tried to slip them on a regular basis. As for valet mode, just turn the SC off! :) (And open the ABV). You could limit it more by leaving the ABV closed, as the engine would have to suck through the SC (which would spin, slowly). Mos. On Tue, 18 Dec 2001, Daniel Houlton wrote: > Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being > PWM'd? > > I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged > MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 > installation just about completed and was toying with the > idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost > and/or have a 'valet' mode. > > In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed > to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure > how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch > would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not > really designed for modulation. > > Any thoughts? > > > thanks > --Dan > houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Wed Dec 19 04:36:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:22 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:22 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Clutches used on GM systems probably would not like being PWM'd. They would spend more time in slip than in engagement, and with any type of load these clutches fail fairly quickly when slipping. They're steel to steel, ya know. Now if you could figure out a way to place a friction lining between the steel drum and hub without adding enough material to prevent clutch operation, you might have a working design for a "slipping" electromagnetic clutch. Shannen Daniel Houlton wrote: > > Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being > PWM'd? > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Wed Dec 19 10:03:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:22 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:22 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? How about PWM a bypass valve instead? I have been considering this as an option for my project once I get the basics worked out. It will cost you a bit in parasitic HP to "over"drive the blower, but with the right bits, you could have cockpit adjustable boost control! Then use the clutch just to "switch off" the SC when the bypass is open in steady state low-load operation... Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Daniel Houlton > Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? > > Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being > PWM'd? > > I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged > MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 > installation just about completed and was toying with the > idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost > and/or have a 'valet' mode. > > In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed > to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure > how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch > would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not > really designed for modulation. > > Any thoughts? > > > thanks > --Dan > houlster@inficad.com > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Wed Dec 19 05:07:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:26 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:26 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: VSS and DRAC questions Mark S. Riley wrote: > > 95 LT1 engine, harness, and PCM in a 88 5spd pickup truck. Studying the > DRAC2.pdf on incoming along with what I have in the Alldata. The truck vss > supplys a 40 pulse per driveshaft revolution to the DRAC which then supplys > the PCM with a 4000 pulse per mile signal? I've messed around with these, though it's been a few years now. 2000 and 4000 ppm outputs are available, as well as a 128000 ppm signal used for RWAL. The ecm originally used the 2000 ppm output. I believe you'll need to use the cruise output for 4kppm. > Am I all wet I dunno. Seem to be on track about most things. > or just wrong. You're right about this. > The > DRAC is a pulse amount number changer to the PCM. I guess what I'm wondering > is if there is enough change available in the DRAC to make this combination > work? Without the vss the idle is off and won't pass state inspection. Sounds like there's two questions here. Will the DRAC provide a valid speed signal for the pcm, and will the drac provide a speed signal that will allow me to pass emissions. I think the answer to both is yes. > Many > thanks for any observations on this. Mark > Not all trucks use a DRAC. If you have found one in your truck, you can use a frequency counting DVOM or a scope to check the outputs and confirm them with the drac2 doc. As yet, no one has confirmed those pinouts. They are a combination of different service manuals and may not be completely accurate. Needless to say, if you check them please forward the results to the list. Also, watch voltage drop caused by connecting both the pcm and the cruise to the same output. You may end up switching over to LT1 style cruise control. And check that cruise output voltage is not significantly higher than the voltage the pcm expects to see. What is "significantly higher"? I dunno. But if there is a difference and you smoke the pcm, you can let us know what not to do. If there is no DRAC on the truck, it's probably because the 88 model year used an instrument cluster based divisor, accessible through the back of the speedometer. If the truck uses a DRAC but the divide ratio is set to 1, the same reason may apply. My memory's foggy here, so get pinouts for the 88 to see where the cruise control signal originates. (Don't use the pinout that is included with the diagnosis for code 24. It's incorrect. And make sure you get 1988 specific pinouts, they're different.) Basically, if the speedo was correct before the swap, you *should* be able to get what you need without too much work. gl. Shannen ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From br@rnt.de Wed Dec 19 04:32:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:26 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:26 -0300 From: "Rausch, Bernd" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AW: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? I found some info on a "diy turbo list" on :http://www.mr2.com/EMail.html Bernd -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Shirley, Mark R [mailto:MarkRShirley@eaton.com] Gesendet: Dienstag, 18. Dezember 2001 14:42 An: 'diy_efi@diy-efi.org' Betreff: RE: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? Boy, I would be REALLY interested in that list if you hear anything!!!! > -----Original Message----- > From: Obie Fayth [mailto:bibendum59@hotmail.com] > Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 1:15 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Introduction and "DIY turbo" list? > > > Hi Everyone, > I just signed up to the list a few days ago and wanted > to introduce myself. > I don't know much about electronics, but I am a computer > programmer by trade > and am eager to learn more about hardware. I can see there > are some very > knowledgable people on the list and I look forward to > learning more about > building an efi system for my car. I came across the list by > way of the > MegaSquirt site -- anyone on the list using that? > One off topic question: A couple of days after signing > up for this list I > got an email asking if I wanted to sign up for a DIY > turbocharging list. I > responded, but never got a confirmation and haven't heard > anything since. I > accidentally deleted the original email, but was wondering if > anyone out > there might know the list I am talking about or could recommend an > alternative list for someone interested in learning more > about turbocharging > a vehicle (turbo selection, exh. manifold construction, etc.). > > thanks, > -Obie > Tacoma, Wa. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From gbeard1@nycap.rr.com Wed Dec 19 12:34:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:43 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:43 -0300 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing ... (What I see) Richard Alan Evans wrote: > > I then realized it's not going to work exactly right unless the bulb > resistance matches the O2 heater resistance (~3.3 ohms cold). I was using a T1156 also and measure 1.0 ohms with a Fluke 87. I just found I have a spare 2057NA sitting here and measure 3.8 ohms. This should work great then when I hook it up tonight. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com Wed Dec 19 11:31:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:57 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 22:04:57 -0300 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Greg Hermann" To: Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 9:20 AM Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > At 9:34 AM 12/17/01, Mark S. Riley wrote: > >They were legal. Rollers never have been in the "CUP" series. Problem with > >mushroom lifter camshafts are that they don't last very long. If you put an > >aggressive grind that will need valve spring to maintain control, then > >lifter and lobe life is very much shortened over "Normal" flat tappet cam > >grinds. Also the bottom of the block "must" be spotfaced to prevent one > >point of the lifter touching a casting tit or bump which breaks the foot off > >the lifter. Perhaps lifter float cause you were trying to run the lightest > >springs to cut down on drag and wear. Then the driver does something bright > >like turn it 9600 on a restart. Also they have to be shimmed front to rear > >against cam walk cause the opposite lobe will lift the wrong valve with very > >little aft to fore movement. Used to see pallets of Crane, Competion Cams, > >Cam Dynamics, Reed, and Crower Cams mushrooms at some of the local "CUP" > >shops. They couldn't run a cam and lifter but once. Wouldn't make two races. > >I use to buy the used cams and lifters and run them in short track engines. > >Valve action with a mushroom can be more radical than a roller ever dreamed > >about. They just don't last long because of the loading. Oh, the lobes are > >thinner to help with the "crosslift problem" because of the big foot. The > >"CUP" stuff was cut for a 1" foot lifter. When Nascar outlawed the mushroom, > >they all went to the ford lifter size, .850" I think. Precisioneering in > >Asheville, NC does most of the lifter boring and registering for the teams. > >They have a factory type lifter boring machine. > >Duh, that's probably more than anyone would want to know about that "old" > >stuff. later, Mark > > My thought is that with a turbo engine, get the power with boost and don't > turn it all that fast. MUCH more durable that way, overall, so long as you > avoid any sign of the devil detonation. Thus, the valve springs can stay > more like normal "hi-po" valve springs, since spring requirements vary with > the square of the rpm. This ought to cure the wear problem. Another thought > is to run a "hi-rev" spring kit in the valley--thus allowing slightly > lighter valve springs, and keeping some of the necessary spring force off > of the valves and rockers, at least. with a "rev-kit" on a flat tappet, you force wiping of the lobes on start up because all the lifters are loaded. The reason for the recent usage of Mushroom cams in race cars, is that the lift per degree of rotation can be higher with the mushroom than a roller is capable of below .300" lift. Thus at the duration events they were running, they had more area under the curve than a roller is capable of. The bigger foot is required because the edge of the lobe wipes past the side of a normal lifter. This high lift per degree of rotation is where the need for high valve spring pressures comes from. Also the mushroom lifter weighs more than the regular flat tappet. Other wise it would be like a "drag stocker" camshaft and they just cut the top off of a really big lobe and toss the valve up with weak springs. Again not very reliable for any type of endurance. If you aren't taking advantage of the lift per degree of rotation then the mushroom lifter isn't worth putting in the engine. Something as simple as a bad lifter turns into a major bit of work with a mushroom. That's why the OEM's quit using them. Especially with a turbo motor, a "killer" camshaft is not needed to make obcene horsepower levels. > > No doubt, the thinner lobes contribute mightily to the wear problem, too. > > There are plenty of HD diesels which use mushroom lifters, stock, without > wear problems. So did the IHC "Red Diamond" engines. (404/450/501 I-6's). I wonder if perhaps the use of mushroom lifters is partly atributable to their use of a camshaft as big as a driveshaft and the other side is because that's the way we've always done it. Thinking about it, I don't work on diesel trucks, but I have several friends who do and they tell me that Mack is the only company that still uses mushrooms in the last 30 years or there abouts. > They all do it to improve BSFC under load. Of course, none of these are > high rev items, so the springs are reasonably mellow. > > Point is that the wear/durability problem comes from the spring force used > trying to squeeze out the last few rpm, not from the mushroom design > itself. I'm not aware of any HD diesels that turn over about 2100 rpm. Since the 40's, I don't think there has been a single engine released by anyone in a "passenger" car that wouldn't turn at least 4500 rpm and in most cases over 5000 rpm. Valve train requirements are drastically different for any engine if you double the operating rpm. If the cam profile doesn't require a mushroom foot, there would be no benefit to using one. They can create more problems than they fix. later, Mark > > In my particular case, 1.375" diameter lifter feet will fit without any > cross lift problems, even with stock width (about 5/8" wide) lobes, and the > cam is properly and precisely located fore and aft in its stock condition. > 5-3/8" bore centers on a V-8 and good basic design will do that sort of > thing for you !! :-) > > Greg > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca Wed Dec 19 18:11:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:39:41 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:39:41 -0300 From: Neil.Poersch@mts.mb.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WBO2 testing I added two 15 ohm resistors in parallel with the 1 ohm resistor on my unit. The current went from 1.2 to 1.4A and the warm-up time dropped from 4 minutes to 45 seconds. Perfect. Neil > Sounds like you need some of the 15 ohm resistors across R4. The current should be ~1.4A max. And yes the VR does run hot and needs a bit of heat sink. < ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From 96Hawk@RMarshall.com Wed Dec 19 18:45:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:39:45 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:39:45 -0300 From: "Todd Danielson" <96Hawk@RMarshall.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Sensor Connector Does Sumitomo have a distributor that could supply a smaller quantity for us? Todd ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Zublin" To: Cc: ; Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:23 PM Subject: WB O2 Sensor Connector > A list member was nice enough to email me photos of the mating connector > for the NGK wideband O2 sensor. From these images, I was able to find the > Sumitomo part numbers in the catalog that I have. They are sending me some > samples which I will forward to the list member to verify that it is the > correct connector. > > I also received a quote today from Sumitomo for the connector shell, > retainer, terminals, wire seals and dummy plugs. The total cost is about > $1.20 for all pieces required for the connector assembly. Unfortunately, > Sumitomo has minimum order quatities of 1000 shells, 7000 retainers, 25,000 > teminals, etc. I need to negotiate a lower order quantity, but the total > order amount will still be close to $2000 because of handling fees for > split lots, shipping charges from Japan, etc. > > I have odered from Sumitomo once in the past year so I have an account set > up. I can arrange a group buy if I can get at least 100 people to > participate. The cost would be about $20 per person, and for $20 you would > receive enough pieces to assemble at least 5 connectors. > > I will post updated pricing information once I have it. I have no > financial incentive for this group buy. My primary goal is to be able to > offer the new connector for current DIY members, and to have enough > connectors on hand for at least a couple years to support future > DIY'ers. Once my material costs are covered, the remaining connectors that > I have would be sold at cost plus shipping. Unfortunately, this means that > the first 100 people will pay more than the people after the first 100, but > this is the only way that I can think it can work. > > Regards, > Bryan Zublin > www.zublin.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From clayb@sbcglobal.net Wed Dec 19 14:11:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:39:49 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:39:49 -0300 From: clayb Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > From: "Shannen Durphey" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 1998 10:44 PM > Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) > I spoke to the place in Maryland today. He did not think that the mushroom > cam/lifters was an idea he would like to see in my car. He suggested that I > use a flat tappet cam. Guess he thought the $$$$ for a roller would not pay > very big dividends. Had some interesting ideas about many things, many of > them seemed directly apposed to what I have come to feel is the norm. One > thing for sure, I need to make things as sure as possible with this part of > my upgrade. Toooo many benches full of parts. Toooo many new changed and > untried systems on vehicle. > > Anyone have opinions of roller cams vs. flat tappet? > > Other than the dollar figure, I thought rollers had thing covered hands > down! Rollers are great, especially if you want high RPM and a broad powerband. Downsides are: high spring pressure, wear, and semi-regular replacement of the roller lifters. If you want the last ounce of power, and are willing to replace lifters every couple years, you'll get power out of them. For long life and good performance, a mechanical flat tappet is the way to go. Mushroom lifters aren't real practical in a block not designed for them. The .850" Ford lifter would be a reasonable try at improving lift rate, if you could get the machining done cheaply enough (not!) As you're doing a turbo engine, the flat tappets make even more sense. The more conservative cam timing dictated by a turbo will limit your RPM anyway. Turbo engines (at least non-VVT) make power with boost, not RPM. - Clay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rncfiles@hotmail.com Wed Dec 19 15:53:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:39:52 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:39:52 -0300 From: "rob files" Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Hi Dan, I think this would be a bad idea because of the reason you mentioned. Basically I think it would wear out the clutch very fast. This is basically because you are limiting boost by slipping the clutch. As an MR2SC owner myself I know that the clutches wear out during normal usage which is on above 10" of HG engine vacuum with about 10 seconds of minimum on time. The best way to limit boost is take another page from the Toyota SC setup; a bypas valve. You could pick a bypass valve (some random turbo BOV should work fine) that opens at 8psi say with just the pressure diff across the in and out ports. Then using a Vacuum Switching Valve (VSV in Toyota speak), you could pulse boost pressure to the vacuum port that keep it closed until the desire boost is achieved. Does that make sense? But the real quesiton is why would you want to control boost with an SC setup? The gas pedal does a real good job of it on it's own :). If you have any questions, feel free to email me directly. -Rob From: Daniel Houlton >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org (EFI ) >Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? >Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:25:13 -0700 (MST) > >Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being >PWM'd? > >I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged >MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 >installation just about completed and was toying with the >idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost >and/or have a 'valet' mode. > >In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed >to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure >how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch >would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not >really designed for modulation. > >Any thoughts? > > >thanks >--Dan >houlster@inficad.com > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Wed Dec 19 21:28:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:38 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:38 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing That heat sink might need to dissipate up to 5 watts in normal operation. However, that can be much higher during warmup. Thats OK for half a minute, but if you overload it with a huge lamp it could be tripple power continuously. The T906 lamp mentioned by Richard sounds like a perfect test load. It is large enough to test the current ramp up, but small enough to easily go to voltage (about 10.4V) regulation. Since it is about 1/2 the load of the sensor heater, running a T906 for a while should give you an idea if your heat sink is too small without immediate overheating. Once the circuit is working well, I would expect a 3 X 5 sheet of aluminum to do the job; the cover of a project box. But very thin (.025") metal will localize the heat; I would replace a thin cover with at least a .062" piece, 1/8" is pretty good. A few low profile fins can help too. Remember the regulator is electrically hot, so you must use mica washers & grease (or your favorite version) to insulate the regulator. This keeps exposed heat sinks from blowing fuses & circuits. Everybody is using a 5 amp fuse, right? 3 would be OK. Another approach (I used) was about a 2" X 3" heavy finned heat sink mounted INSIDE, but with plenty of air slots (see my pictures). The regulator then can be mounted without insulation, it runs cooler. The resistor will not need much, except a bit of air flow. A ceramic resistor will tolerate pretty high temperatures, but could damage parts very close to it. Running a fan works, but is a lot of complication over a hunk of metal. Bruce Roe On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:52:58 -0500 Stephen Andersen writes: > It is starting to appear that I have significantly > underestimated the amount of heat sink required for > the WBo2. I bought some small heat sinks from RS today > that are finned anodized aluminum guys about 1.5" x .75" > x .75" or so. I guess one of these isn't enough huh? > > If that is the case, I am going to have to completely > rethink the packaging of the WBo2 and LCD/RS232 display > boards. I definitely have not allowed for enough room in the > box with larger heat sink(s). > > Any guidance from those that have completed their WB's and > have them functioning? > > Can someone point me to a properly sized Digikey heat sink? > > How do you attach the heat sink to the power transistor (I think > that is what it is, right?) and the big resistor? > > Thanks, > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > > Behalf Of bcroe@juno.com > > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:35 AM > > Subject: WBO2 testing > > > > > > Measure the voltage across the lamp, and across the > > 1 ohm resistor. If the lamp has less than 10 volts (and > > the LED is out), you are probably running in the curent > > limiting warmup mode. The resistor will measure > > about 1.25 volt in that case. > > > > You probably are using too large a lamp. With a small > > voltage drop across the lamp and maximum current, you > > have a large voltage drop (at max current) across the > > LT1086. This heating it up, apparently to the point of > > thermal shutdown which dims the light. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bob@bobthecomputerguy.com Wed Dec 19 13:59:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:40 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:40 -0300 From: Robert Harris MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #950 Conventional or Dark Side???? On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:00:12 -0800, you wrote: > >Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:48:09 -0500 From: "Bruce" >Subject: Re: Home for an injector > >Water could be a good thing. >Bruce > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bzublin@zublin.com Wed Dec 19 14:57:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:40 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:40 -0300 From: Bryan Zublin Subject: RE: MAP Sensor The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html Bryan Zublin At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, not for controlling EFI... Steve ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Wed Dec 19 20:32:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:44 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:44 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: LPG Injection. >So what did you use for injectors? And did you need to circulate LPG through >the rails to keep it from boiling? I've heard that this can be a problem. As far as keeping gas phase out of the rails, you need to study how refrigeration (the industrial variety) piping is run so as to avoid trapping gas where you want only liquid. Well developed technology, just not familiar to lots of folks. Greg > >Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ccorbin@spinn.net Wed Dec 19 21:09:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:46 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:40:46 -0300 From: Clint Corbin Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? It wouldn't like it ONE bit! On or off is fine, but slipping WILL burn up that clutch faster than you can say "does anyone smell something burning???". In a lot of ways, it is exactly like a transistor. It doesn't draw much power off, it doesn't draw much power when it is on, but if you operate it in between (saturation), it uses a LOT of power. In short, nice theory, but reality will quickly bit you in the butt. Clint At 11:25 AM 12/18/2001 -0700, you wrote: >Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being >PWM'd? > >I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged >MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 >installation just about completed and was toying with the >idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost >and/or have a 'valet' mode. > >In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed >to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure >how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch >would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not >really designed for modulation. > >Any thoughts? > > >thanks >--Dan >houlster@inficad.com > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Wed Dec 19 20:54:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:41:05 -0300 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 23:41:05 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Slipping (modulating) that clutch will probably be about as healthy as slipping a regular trans clutch: a very short trip to destruction. Those A/C clutches get pretty beat up even in normal operation. Bruce Roe On Tue, 18 Dec 2001 11:25:13 -0700 (MST) Daniel Houlton writes: > Any thoughts on how an A/C type clutch would like being > PWM'd? > > I've been thinking about the clutch used on the supercharged > MR2. It's similar to an A/C clutch. I've got an Eaton M90 > installation just about completed and was toying with the > idea of using an electric clutch on the pulley to limit boost > and/or have a 'valet' mode. > > In theory, you could PWM the clutch to limit SC rotor speed > to get any boost level you want up to max boost. Not sure > how it would work in reality though. Seems the clutch > would maybe over-heat, or just wear out as they're not > really designed for modulation. > --Dan ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dricciardiello@qantas.com.au Wed Dec 19 20:23:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:20:34 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:20:34 -0300 From: "Don DRI05 Ricciardiello" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal The LM2917 perhaps? http://www.national.com/pf/LM/LM2917.html#Datasheet rgds Don From: Glen Beard @diy-efi.org on 18/12/2001 22:47 EST Please respond to diy_efi@diy-efi.org Sent by: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org cc: Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Is there an IC out there to use these triggers to build a nice 0-5V square wave for use as an input to the DAQ? -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From houlster@user1.inficad.com Wed Dec 19 19:50:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:24:22 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:24:22 -0300 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Bob Wooten wrote: > > I would think it to be much simpler to have two proms, one for fun & one for > the kid @ the Valet. > There's several problems with two proms. First, I don't have one, 2nd, there's nothing I can do with my ECM either. It's made by Hitachi. Biggest thing though, is that no prom will change the boost from a supercharger. It's controlled by the pulley ratio. But, if you could PWM a clutch on the SC pulley, you could contol slip to get, in effect, different ratios and lower boost. I'm not trying to get a valet mode here. I'm trying to see if I can lower boost on demand without changing pulleys. What I'm wondering is if anyone has any idea how the clutch would react. PWM'ing it would be kinda like controlled slip in the clutch. Just wondering if it would last very long, or if the coil would burn out or what. I thought maybe somebody's tried something similar before. --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jwallace@nist.gov Wed Dec 19 19:59:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:25:26 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:25:26 -0300 From: Jay Wallace Subject: Re: WBO2 testing ... (What I see) Glen, Be aware that the resistivity of a tungsten filament (and most pure metals) changes strongly with temperature. Literature values are 5.5 at 20 C and 65 at 2000 C (units: micro-ohm cm) whereas the resistivity of the heating element in the sensor probably doesn't change more than a few percent from room temperature to operating temperature. Bottom line: if you get a light bulb with the proper high temperature resistance you'll probably draw too much current at room temperature. HTH, Jay At 06:23 PM 12/18/2001 -0600, you wrote: >Glen: > >I've just finished testing my heater section for the first time and >here's what I found. My regulator is mounted to the ~0.040" aluminum >cover of the same Radio Shack box others are using. I first used a T906 >dome light bulb (~1.8 ohms cold). With that I saw a peak current of >~0.59 amps (had a nice soft ramp-up) and about 6 seconds for the LED to >come on. The regulator didn't heat much if any. > >Then I tried an 1156 bulb (~0.5 ohms cold). I got a soft ramp-up to >~1.27 amps and I shut it down after about 1.5 minutes without ever >getting the LED to light. The regulator did heat up markedly but not to >the point of being untouchable. > >I then realized it's not going to work exactly right unless the bulb >resistance matches the O2 heater resistance (~3.3 ohms cold). I gave up >looking for the perfect bulb and since it was exhibiting a soft current >ramp-up, I decided to just try the real thing. (Sometimes I'm >dangerous:) With the real heater, it ramped-up to ~1.27 amps and the LED >came on at 64 seconds. The current settled to ~1.18 after 3 minutes of >on-time in free air. The regulator was merely warm at that point. > >Try a bulb closer in cold resistance to the heater resistance the >circuit is designed for and see if it doesn't behave more like it >should. > > >Glen Beard wrote: > > > > OK, I've gotten everything soldered up, and I am testing the > > heater circuit using a tail lamp. The lamp turns on nice > > and bright building its current to 1.003 Amps. Is the LED > > supposed to turn on after a while? Is the LT1086 (VR) > > supposed to get sizzling hot even with a 2x3" Al heat sink? > > With the smaller heat sink I had on it, the bulb would light > > up and then start to dim again. If I blew across it and it > > got brighter. > > > > -- > > Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 > > 355, Vortech, heads, cam... > > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html > > http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 00:37:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:37:12 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:37:12 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) >The reason for the recent usage of Mushroom cams in race cars, is that the >lift per degree of rotation can be higher with the mushroom than a roller is >capable of below .300" lift. Thus at the duration events they were running, >they had more area under the curve than a roller is capable of. Precisely. The bigger >foot is required because the edge of the lobe wipes past the side of a >normal lifter. Yep. This high lift per degree of rotation is where the need for >high valve spring pressures comes from. Nope. Lift per degree of rotation equate to valve VELOCITY. The need for high spring pressure comes from valve ACCELERATION--and only as the lifter, valve, and everything else, goes "over the nose" of the cam. One can use MUCH higher accelerations coming off of the cam and back onto it so long as the valve gear is rigid enough to do the job. The springs have no serious limiting influence on the allowable off of and on to the cam acceleration rates. Something as >simple as a bad lifter turns into a major bit of work with a mushroom. But, is also a LOT less likely to happen. >That's why the OEM's quit using them. Especially with a turbo motor, a >"killer" camshaft is not needed to make obcene horsepower levels. I'm not wanting a "killer" camshaft. What I want is a LOT of area under a HIGH lift but SHORT duration cam profile. Mushrooms are the best, if not only, way to get there. Why?? because this is a GOOD profile for a turbo, and will also give good off-boost performance and BSFC. > >> >> No doubt, the thinner lobes contribute mightily to the wear problem, too. >> >> There are plenty of HD diesels which use mushroom lifters, stock, without >> wear problems. So did the IHC "Red Diamond" engines. (404/450/501 I-6's). > >I wonder if perhaps the use of mushroom lifters is partly atributable to >their use of a camshaft as big as a driveshaft and the other side is because >that's the way we've always done it. Thinking about it, I don't work on >diesel trucks, but I have several friends who do and they tell me that Mack >is the only company that still uses mushrooms in the last 30 years or there >abouts. Guess they don't know much about Hanomag diesels--- :-) > > >I'm not aware of any HD diesels that turn over about 2100 rpm. Try all of the Detroit 2 strokes--as MUCH as I hate the screamin' demons !! \ , I don't think there has been a single engine released by anyone in a >"passenger" car that wouldn't turn at least 4500 rpm and in most cases over >5000 rpm. I think you're a bit "high" with that number, but not much. Valve train requirements are drastically different for any engine >if you double the operating rpm. Yeah--the forces are multiplied by a factor of four (proportional to the square of the rpm, as I said before) If the cam profile doesn't require a >mushroom foot, there would be no benefit to using one. Of course not. BUT--for a short duration, high lift cam, you gotta have 'em. They can create more >problems than they fix. Doubtful. Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 00:37:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:37:30 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:37:30 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #950 Why "or", I just might try several things. Bruce Little guys been ranting toil and trouble, caldrin bubble, for years now.... From: "Robert Harris" Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #950 > Conventional or Dark Side???? > On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:00:12 -0800, you wrote: > >Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:48:09 -0500 > >From: "Bruce" > >Subject: Re: Home for an injector > >Water could be a good thing. > >Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 00:37:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:37:46 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:37:46 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector I've never heard that, but I'd imagine you need to be much more conservative with duty cycles. Bruce From: "Stephen Andersen" Subject: RE: Home for an injector > I remember some people setting up an injector flow bench > many years ago, and trying to test injectors with water. > I thought there were problems with the pintle locking > up rather quickly when used with water. > Any logic to this, or am I just remembering poorly? > Steve > > Behalf Of Bruce > > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > Water could be a good thing. > > Bruce > > From: "The Dupuis" > > > Like water, perhaps??? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 00:38:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:38:09 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:38:09 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? From: "Daniel Houlton" > Biggest thing though, is that no prom will change the boost from > a supercharger. It's controlled by the pulley ratio. But, if > you could PWM a clutch on the SC pulley, you could contol slip > to get, in effect, different ratios and lower boost. I'm not > trying to get a valet mode here. I'm trying to see if I can > lower boost on demand without changing pulleys. Try bleeding off the boost, ie large air bleed that is well dampened. Maybe set up one BOV for X amount of boost, and use several. How about a clue for how much boost your wanting to bleed off. > What I'm wondering is if anyone has any idea how the clutch > would react. PWM'ing it would be kinda like controlled slip > in the clutch. Just wondering if it would last very long, or > if the coil would burn out or what. I thought maybe somebody's > tried something similar before. > --Dan > houlster@inficad.com A/C is just a couple HP, and they eat clutchs. It would take a huge electro clutch, maybe just using filings for the engagement, but your looking at alot of R+D. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 00:52:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:38:26 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:38:26 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? I don't think she'd take the strain, captain. If you're going to pulse this thing, its going to run horribly hot. When the gap gets much past .030" the magnetic coil won't pull in the clutch disc--so you'd need to run a carbon fibre material that'd take the heat and give you any measure of longevity. You'd be better off running some kind of PWM waste gated system and keep the supercharger clutch on/off only. Lyndon. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 00:38:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:38:39 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:38:39 -0800 From: Phil Lamovie MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LPG Injection. The LPG injectors are commercially available in medium quantities i.e. 100 or so from Siemens in Italy. The fuel is indeed circulated through the fuel rail in order to stabilize the temps in the rail. phil ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 00:38:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:38:55 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:38:55 -0800 From: Chris Waltham Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? >Biggest thing though, is that no prom will change the boost from >a supercharger. It's controlled by the pulley ratio. But, if >you could PWM a clutch on the SC pulley, you could contol slip >to get, in effect, different ratios and lower boost. I'm not >trying to get a valet mode here. I'm trying to see if I can >lower boost on demand without changing pulleys. A company over here in Australia (can't remember the name, but I can find out if you're interested) did a sort of "boost controller" with a supercharger a while back. The engine was a 4.6L Ford Mustang V8 (I think you guys call them "modular" engines?), fitted into a two-door Ford Falcon Coupe (prototype). I think they used a Sprintex supercharger, together with their own engine management units. They had a throttle body with some sort of electronically-variable throttle, so that they could (in a bizarre sort of way) control boost over the rev range. Not sure if it would help you, but it made for interesting reading. Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 00:39:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:39:18 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:39:18 -0800 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EFI] Re: Yet another archive script. George Dickey wrote: > > Hi Dan > > Where is the script? > > Thanks > -- > George > > Daniel Houlton wrote: > > > > Anyways, I have a Perl script that I wrote to filter out > > the headers and footers of all my mail archives from the > > last several years. It's in the "incoming" folder on the ftp site: ftp://ftp.diy-efi.org/incoming/mailparse.pl --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 00:40:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:40:25 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 00:40:25 -0800 From: PorscheRcr@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 In a message dated 12/18/2001 1:37:10 AM Pacific Standard Time, DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@diy-efi.org writes: << The tires simply go up in smoke before anything's loaded much. >> I can confirm this, my V8 GT6 (basically a Spitfire with a roof and a straight 6 originally) will smoke the tires for probably 75yds or so with a 2V 302. Bigger tires and a full cage are in the plans though, more traction and rigidity. Bill J ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From phil@injec.com Thu Dec 20 00:31:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:55:56 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:55:56 -0300 From: Phil Lamovie MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LPG Injection. The LPG injectors are commercially available in medium quantities i.e. 100 or so from Siemens in Italy. The fuel is indeed circulated through the fuel rail in order to stabilize the temps in the rail. phil ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 20 00:07:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:02 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:02 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #950 Why "or", I just might try several things. Bruce Little guys been ranting toil and trouble, caldrin bubble, for years now.... From: "Robert Harris" Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #950 > Conventional or Dark Side???? > On Wed, 19 Dec 2001 01:00:12 -0800, you wrote: > >Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 19:48:09 -0500 > >From: "Bruce" > >Subject: Re: Home for an injector > >Water could be a good thing. > >Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 20 00:18:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:03 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:03 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home for an injector I've never heard that, but I'd imagine you need to be much more conservative with duty cycles. Bruce From: "Stephen Andersen" Subject: RE: Home for an injector > I remember some people setting up an injector flow bench > many years ago, and trying to test injectors with water. > I thought there were problems with the pintle locking > up rather quickly when used with water. > Any logic to this, or am I just remembering poorly? > Steve > > Behalf Of Bruce > > Subject: Re: Home for an injector > > Water could be a good thing. > > Bruce > > From: "The Dupuis" > > > Like water, perhaps??? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From houlster@user1.inficad.com Thu Dec 20 03:05:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:03 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:03 -0300 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EFI] Re: Yet another archive script. George Dickey wrote: > > Hi Dan > > Where is the script? > > Thanks > -- > George > > Daniel Houlton wrote: > > > > Anyways, I have a Perl script that I wrote to filter out > > the headers and footers of all my mail archives from the > > last several years. It's in the "incoming" folder on the ftp site: ftp://ftp.diy-efi.org/incoming/mailparse.pl --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Wed Dec 19 23:38:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:13 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:13 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) >The reason for the recent usage of Mushroom cams in race cars, is that the >lift per degree of rotation can be higher with the mushroom than a roller is >capable of below .300" lift. Thus at the duration events they were running, >they had more area under the curve than a roller is capable of. Precisely. The bigger >foot is required because the edge of the lobe wipes past the side of a >normal lifter. Yep. This high lift per degree of rotation is where the need for >high valve spring pressures comes from. Nope. Lift per degree of rotation equate to valve VELOCITY. The need for high spring pressure comes from valve ACCELERATION--and only as the lifter, valve, and everything else, goes "over the nose" of the cam. One can use MUCH higher accelerations coming off of the cam and back onto it so long as the valve gear is rigid enough to do the job. The springs have no serious limiting influence on the allowable off of and on to the cam acceleration rates. Something as >simple as a bad lifter turns into a major bit of work with a mushroom. But, is also a LOT less likely to happen. >That's why the OEM's quit using them. Especially with a turbo motor, a >"killer" camshaft is not needed to make obcene horsepower levels. I'm not wanting a "killer" camshaft. What I want is a LOT of area under a HIGH lift but SHORT duration cam profile. Mushrooms are the best, if not only, way to get there. Why?? because this is a GOOD profile for a turbo, and will also give good off-boost performance and BSFC. > >> >> No doubt, the thinner lobes contribute mightily to the wear problem, too. >> >> There are plenty of HD diesels which use mushroom lifters, stock, without >> wear problems. So did the IHC "Red Diamond" engines. (404/450/501 I-6's). > >I wonder if perhaps the use of mushroom lifters is partly atributable to >their use of a camshaft as big as a driveshaft and the other side is because >that's the way we've always done it. Thinking about it, I don't work on >diesel trucks, but I have several friends who do and they tell me that Mack >is the only company that still uses mushrooms in the last 30 years or there >abouts. Guess they don't know much about Hanomag diesels--- :-) > > >I'm not aware of any HD diesels that turn over about 2100 rpm. Try all of the Detroit 2 strokes--as MUCH as I hate the screamin' demons !! \ , I don't think there has been a single engine released by anyone in a >"passenger" car that wouldn't turn at least 4500 rpm and in most cases over >5000 rpm. I think you're a bit "high" with that number, but not much. Valve train requirements are drastically different for any engine >if you double the operating rpm. Yeah--the forces are multiplied by a factor of four (proportional to the square of the rpm, as I said before) If the cam profile doesn't require a >mushroom foot, there would be no benefit to using one. Of course not. BUT--for a short duration, high lift cam, you gotta have 'em. They can create more >problems than they fix. Doubtful. Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chris@harvestroad.com Thu Dec 20 00:33:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:26 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:26 -0300 From: Chris Waltham Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? >Biggest thing though, is that no prom will change the boost from >a supercharger. It's controlled by the pulley ratio. But, if >you could PWM a clutch on the SC pulley, you could contol slip >to get, in effect, different ratios and lower boost. I'm not >trying to get a valet mode here. I'm trying to see if I can >lower boost on demand without changing pulleys. A company over here in Australia (can't remember the name, but I can find out if you're interested) did a sort of "boost controller" with a supercharger a while back. The engine was a 4.6L Ford Mustang V8 (I think you guys call them "modular" engines?), fitted into a two-door Ford Falcon Coupe (prototype). I think they used a Sprintex supercharger, together with their own engine management units. They had a throttle body with some sort of electronically-variable throttle, so that they could (in a bizarre sort of way) control boost over the rev range. Not sure if it would help you, but it made for interesting reading. Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 20 00:24:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:56 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:56:56 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? From: "Daniel Houlton" > Biggest thing though, is that no prom will change the boost from > a supercharger. It's controlled by the pulley ratio. But, if > you could PWM a clutch on the SC pulley, you could contol slip > to get, in effect, different ratios and lower boost. I'm not > trying to get a valet mode here. I'm trying to see if I can > lower boost on demand without changing pulleys. Try bleeding off the boost, ie large air bleed that is well dampened. Maybe set up one BOV for X amount of boost, and use several. How about a clue for how much boost your wanting to bleed off. > What I'm wondering is if anyone has any idea how the clutch > would react. PWM'ing it would be kinda like controlled slip > in the clutch. Just wondering if it would last very long, or > if the coil would burn out or what. I thought maybe somebody's > tried something similar before. > --Dan > houlster@inficad.com A/C is just a couple HP, and they eat clutchs. It would take a huge electro clutch, maybe just using filings for the engagement, but your looking at alot of R+D. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From PorscheRcr@aol.com Thu Dec 20 03:49:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:57:24 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 05:57:24 -0300 From: PorscheRcr@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #944 In a message dated 12/18/2001 1:37:10 AM Pacific Standard Time, DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@diy-efi.org writes: << The tires simply go up in smoke before anything's loaded much. >> I can confirm this, my V8 GT6 (basically a Spitfire with a roof and a straight 6 originally) will smoke the tires for probably 75yds or so with a 2V 302. Bigger tires and a full cage are in the plans though, more traction and rigidity. Bill J ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Thu Dec 20 01:13:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 06:08:19 -0300 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 06:08:19 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? I don't think she'd take the strain, captain. If you're going to pulse this thing, its going to run horribly hot. When the gap gets much past .030" the magnetic coil won't pull in the clutch disc--so you'd need to run a carbon fibre material that'd take the heat and give you any measure of longevity. You'd be better off running some kind of PWM waste gated system and keep the supercharger clutch on/off only. Lyndon. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 22:59:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:59:46 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 22:59:46 -0800 From: "Nic van der Walt" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing >It is starting to appear that I have significantly >underestimated the amount of heat sink required for You could try to mount the resistor and the power transistor to the aluminium case, instead of on the PCB. The box can be a great heatsink. Use three wires to the PCB, and a silicon isolation washer and some heatsink compound between the case and the tranny's tab. Use a panel mount power resistor. Take a look at: Resistors: http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/551.pdf (89 type) Heat sink pads: http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/347.pdf Heat sink compound: http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/342.pdf N. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 23:00:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:00:16 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:00:16 -0800 From: "Jim Yeagley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen Andersen To: Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 8:03 AM Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? > How about PWM a bypass valve instead? I have been considering > this as an option for my project once I get the basics > worked out. Sounds a lot like the Saab APC. It uses a PWM solenoid to bleed off boost when it hears knock. Jim Yeagley ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 23:00:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:00:34 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:00:34 -0800 From: "Ron Schroeder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Houlton" To: "EFI " Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 5:50 PM Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? > What I'm wondering is if anyone has any idea how the clutch > would react. PWM'ing it would be kinda like controlled slip > in the clutch. Just wondering if it would last very long, or > if the coil would burn out or what. I thought maybe somebody's > tried something similar before. > > --Dan Hi Dan, I know that a loose, intermittant connection to an A/C compressor clutch will burn it out fairly quickly. They really want to be full on or full off. Ron Schroeder WD8CDH day 631 344-4561 nite 631 286-5677 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 23:00:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:00:57 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:00:57 -0800 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: LPG Injection. If you got it to work very successfully, you should consider marketing to industrial engine companies, because you're the only one i've ever heard of who got it to work. > -----Original Message----- > From: Phil Lamovie [mailto:phil@injec.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:47 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: LPG Injection. > > > > > The point to LPG injection is both the vastly improved accuracy > of the control system and the free super charging that comes > with the absorption of heat from the air charge. > > The average increase in torque with LPG injection over > Petrol is approx. 15%. > > Higher compression ratio is also a freely available side effect > and so is the higher than normal boost that takes > advantage of the very high octane ratings. > > By the way we tried it at work and were very successful. > > Phil > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 23:01:53 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:01:53 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:01:53 -0800 From: Richie Austin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DIY turbo type list This is a very informative turbo group. Hope this link will help you. jyturbo@yahoogroups.com that list is great for DIY types like all of us. Richie __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 23:02:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:02:22 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:02:22 -0800 From: Andrew Theurer MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that is a reasonable price? -Andrew Bryan Zublin wrote: > > The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from > Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar > sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: > http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html > > Bryan Zublin > > At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > not for controlling EFI... > > Steve > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 23:02:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:02:55 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:02:55 -0800 From: Bryan Zublin Subject: Re: WB O2 Sensor Connector >Does Sumitomo have a distributor that could supply >a smaller quantity for us? As far as I know, the connectors must be ordered direct from Sumitomo. For those people interested in the group buy, please send me private email at: bzublin@zublin.com and I will include you on the distribution list for the update on the pricing. Bryan Zublin ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 23:03:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:03:17 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:03:17 -0800 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Glen Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And how is the drag from wind added to the equation. How about the actual vs corrected values on the web site, what is used to calculate them? I would love to see some of the formulas being used. I am sure its all basic physics, but I am not sure where those books are anymore. Think there in a box at my parents place? Steve -----Original Message----- From: Glen Beard [mailto:gbeard1@nycap.rr.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:47 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal "Porter, Bill" wrote: > > Follow instructions at this link > http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/homedyno/homedyno.htm#inst to make an > inductive pick up. The link uses the pick up to drive the MIC input on your > laptop. From here I'm unsure of how to configure to time sync with the wide > band and the DataQ software. I haven't used the DataQ yet to see if it will > accept outside signals. Don't know what type of voltage you will get off of > pick up to drive DataQ directly As a matter of fact, I bought that thing from him and made up my own pickup just like he described about 3 years ago. (His software works pretty well as long as the info you feed it isn't too far off.) I haven't measured the output spikes, but they are easily viewable on the waveform editor. It also shows quite a bit of noise. Is there an IC out there to use these triggers to build a nice 0-5V square wave for use as an input to the DAQ? -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 23:04:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:04:57 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:04:57 -0800 From: Tom Sharpe MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts I just had to jump in. It's good to get the last 5% from a combination, but if you only want a 50% increase in power, here is an example: 350 sbc, Accel kit, T04B, 650 Holley, 2 bolt block, stock cast crank, rods, and pistons, 450+ ft lbs from 2500-4500, all done by 5000 (T04B too small), 50K miles - 2 years w/o touching it. 10-11 lbs boost w/ muffler and 13+ w/o muffler. The boost needle was chipped by banging against the limit pit @ 15 lbs. (it did, however, take two other $100 engines to sort it out). No intercooler. It had a 10lb propane water tank presurized by boost w/ a 0.080 jet pointed directly at the center of the compressor. Not good for life expectancy, but turbo cores are cheap. I never had a problem with it, bought it user and sold it the same way. Upstream water gets "evaporated" by the compressor, cools the charge, and allows the compressor to pump more air to keep the boost up making even more power... and aggravating the small size of the compressor. Keep it simple. You guys that are on the ragged edge, disregard this.. Tom S ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 20 23:06:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:06:02 -0800 Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 23:06:02 -0800 From: Tom Sharpe MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Andris Skulte wrote: > > I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? > > So far the plan is to build a bulletproof 350ish engine. what it the target Hp/ Torque/ RPM range?? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bzublin@zublin.com Thu Dec 20 19:10:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:14:35 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:14:35 -0300 From: Bryan Zublin Subject: Re: WB O2 Sensor Connector >Does Sumitomo have a distributor that could supply >a smaller quantity for us? As far as I know, the connectors must be ordered direct from Sumitomo. For those people interested in the group buy, please send me private email at: bzublin@zublin.com and I will include you on the distribution list for the update on the pricing. Bryan Zublin ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From habanero@us.ibm.com Thu Dec 20 13:45:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:14:46 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:14:46 -0300 From: Andrew Theurer MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that is a reasonable price? -Andrew Bryan Zublin wrote: > > The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from > Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar > sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: > http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html > > Bryan Zublin > > At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > not for controlling EFI... > > Steve > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com Thu Dec 20 20:05:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:17:28 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:17:28 -0300 From: Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal Glen Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And how is the drag from wind added to the equation. How about the actual vs corrected values on the web site, what is used to calculate them? I would love to see some of the formulas being used. I am sure its all basic physics, but I am not sure where those books are anymore. Think there in a box at my parents place? Steve -----Original Message----- From: Glen Beard [mailto:gbeard1@nycap.rr.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:47 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal "Porter, Bill" wrote: > > Follow instructions at this link > http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/homedyno/homedyno.htm#inst to make an > inductive pick up. The link uses the pick up to drive the MIC input on your > laptop. From here I'm unsure of how to configure to time sync with the wide > band and the DataQ software. I haven't used the DataQ yet to see if it will > accept outside signals. Don't know what type of voltage you will get off of > pick up to drive DataQ directly As a matter of fact, I bought that thing from him and made up my own pickup just like he described about 3 years ago. (His software works pretty well as long as the info you feed it isn't too far off.) I haven't measured the output spikes, but they are easily viewable on the waveform editor. It also shows quite a bit of noise. Is there an IC out there to use these triggers to build a nice 0-5V square wave for use as an input to the DAQ? -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rca90gsx@yahoo.com Thu Dec 20 12:51:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:18:11 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:18:11 -0300 From: Richie Austin MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: DIY turbo type list This is a very informative turbo group. Hope this link will help you. jyturbo@yahoogroups.com that list is great for DIY types like all of us. Richie __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From twsharpe@mtco.com Thu Dec 20 22:53:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:18:36 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:18:36 -0300 From: Tom Sharpe MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Turbo Chubby parts I just had to jump in. It's good to get the last 5% from a combination, but if you only want a 50% increase in power, here is an example: 350 sbc, Accel kit, T04B, 650 Holley, 2 bolt block, stock cast crank, rods, and pistons, 450+ ft lbs from 2500-4500, all done by 5000 (T04B too small), 50K miles - 2 years w/o touching it. 10-11 lbs boost w/ muffler and 13+ w/o muffler. The boost needle was chipped by banging against the limit pit @ 15 lbs. (it did, however, take two other $100 engines to sort it out). No intercooler. It had a 10lb propane water tank presurized by boost w/ a 0.080 jet pointed directly at the center of the compressor. Not good for life expectancy, but turbo cores are cheap. I never had a problem with it, bought it user and sold it the same way. Upstream water gets "evaporated" by the compressor, cools the charge, and allows the compressor to pump more air to keep the boost up making even more power... and aggravating the small size of the compressor. Keep it simple. You guys that are on the ragged edge, disregard this.. Tom S ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jyeag@core.com Thu Dec 20 10:12:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:19:14 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:19:14 -0300 From: "Jim Yeagley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen Andersen To: Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 8:03 AM Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? > How about PWM a bypass valve instead? I have been considering > this as an option for my project once I get the basics > worked out. Sounds a lot like the Saab APC. It uses a PWM solenoid to bleed off boost when it hears knock. Jim Yeagley ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rschroeder@bnl.gov Thu Dec 20 11:03:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:19:18 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:19:18 -0300 From: "Ron Schroeder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daniel Houlton" To: "EFI " Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 5:50 PM Subject: Re: [EFI] RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? > What I'm wondering is if anyone has any idea how the clutch > would react. PWM'ing it would be kinda like controlled slip > in the clutch. Just wondering if it would last very long, or > if the coil would burn out or what. I thought maybe somebody's > tried something similar before. > > --Dan Hi Dan, I know that a loose, intermittant connection to an A/C compressor clutch will burn it out fairly quickly. They really want to be full on or full off. Ron Schroeder WD8CDH day 631 344-4561 nite 631 286-5677 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From twsharpe@mtco.com Thu Dec 20 23:30:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:19:30 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:19:30 -0300 From: Tom Sharpe MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: turbo SBC's... was RE: Thanks for the EFI! (off topic) Andris Skulte wrote: > > I'd be interested in what you are doing with your engine. Any details? > > So far the plan is to build a bulletproof 350ish engine. what it the target Hp/ Torque/ RPM range?? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nvdw@ifoni.com Thu Dec 20 07:37:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:56:51 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:56:51 -0300 From: "Nic van der Walt" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing >It is starting to appear that I have significantly >underestimated the amount of heat sink required for You could try to mount the resistor and the power transistor to the aluminium case, instead of on the PCB. The box can be a great heatsink. Use three wires to the PCB, and a silicon isolation washer and some heatsink compound between the case and the tranny's tab. Use a panel mount power resistor. Take a look at: Resistors: http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/551.pdf (89 type) Heat sink pads: http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/347.pdf Heat sink compound: http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/342.pdf N. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From MarkRShirley@eaton.com Thu Dec 20 11:39:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:56:57 -0300 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 04:56:57 -0300 From: "Shirley, Mark R" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: LPG Injection. If you got it to work very successfully, you should consider marketing to industrial engine companies, because you're the only one i've ever heard of who got it to work. > -----Original Message----- > From: Phil Lamovie [mailto:phil@injec.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:47 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: LPG Injection. > > > > > The point to LPG injection is both the vastly improved accuracy > of the control system and the free super charging that comes > with the absorption of heat from the air charge. > > The average increase in torque with LPG injection over > Petrol is approx. 15%. > > Higher compression ratio is also a freely available side effect > and so is the higher than normal boost that takes > advantage of the very high octane ratings. > > By the way we tried it at work and were very successful. > > Phil > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------- > -------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 21 19:58:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:58:56 -0800 Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 19:58:56 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Jim Yeagley tapped away at the keyboard with: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Stephen Andersen > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 8:03 AM > Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? > > > > How about PWM a bypass valve instead? I have been considering > > this as an option for my project once I get the basics > > worked out. > > Sounds a lot like the Saab APC. It uses a PWM solenoid to bleed > off boost when it hears knock. Ditto with Volkswagen's supercharged G60 engines from around 1990. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Fri Dec 21 04:59:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 22 Dec 2001 01:09:20 -0300 Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2001 01:09:20 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Jim Yeagley tapped away at the keyboard with: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Stephen Andersen > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 8:03 AM > Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? > > > > How about PWM a bypass valve instead? I have been considering > > this as an option for my project once I get the basics > > worked out. > > Sounds a lot like the Saab APC. It uses a PWM solenoid to bleed > off boost when it hears knock. Ditto with Volkswagen's supercharged G60 engines from around 1990. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:23:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:23:43 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:23:43 -0800 From: "The Punisher" Subject: RE: LPG Injection. Sorry I came in late on this one, but what happens if you try to use a 'conventional' electronic fuel injector with LPG ? I know LPG has some things going for it. I had this 76 dodge pickup with a 440 that was on propane since almost new (had 140 gallons total capacity!) fuel system always worked good (emco on holley baseplate) only trouble it had was the chrysler ignition system(installed GM HEI module and cured it). At about 350,000 miles or so it suddenly wouldnt hardly run so I tore the engine down. The interior was quite clean and had VERY little sludge, bearings looked good, and the cylinders had almost no ridge and good looking bores. The problem was that the valve seats finaly CRUMBLED. Some were totaly GONE and most were spider-webbed and falling apart. When the valves were removed most of the seats were removed by hand. I've seen valve seats fail in gas engines(petrol for some) but nothing like this, it was downright STRANGE. Ever seen this?? Marvin Fugate (always looking for more power) >From: "Shirley, Mark R" >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: "'diy_efi@diy-efi.org'" >Subject: RE: LPG Injection. >Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:39:20 -0500 > >If you got it to work very successfully, you should consider marketing >to industrial engine companies, because you're the only >one i've ever heard of who got it to work. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Phil Lamovie [mailto:phil@injec.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:47 AM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: LPG Injection. > > > > > > > > > > The point to LPG injection is both the vastly improved accuracy > > of the control system and the free super charging that comes > > with the absorption of heat from the air charge. > > > > The average increase in torque with LPG injection over > > Petrol is approx. 15%. > > > > Higher compression ratio is also a freely available side effect > > and so is the higher than normal boost that takes > > advantage of the very high octane ratings. > > > > By the way we tried it at work and were very successful. > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > > (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:23:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:23:56 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:23:56 -0800 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And how is the drag > from wind added to the equation. For what it's worth, Hugh MacInnes talks about the "road dyno" method in his _Turbochargers_ book. Basically, you need: 1. Weight of car + occupants 2. Tachometer 3. Speedometer 4. Accelerometer Note that these should all be calibrated if possible. I think all but the accelerometer are pretty easy to find/calibrate. I know you can buy simple rugged accelerometers these days pretty cheap. I also know of a method to use a two-filament automotive incandescent light bulb as an accelerometer. (See end of post for details.) You might be able to get a rough idea of acceleration by taking the first derivative of the speedometer signal, but it would not be as accurate as a real accelerometer. You can then get a torque / HP value for any RPM while on the road. The idea is to note the accelerometer reading at the desired RPM, presumably while at WOT. You then coast in neutral back past that same RPM and note the deceleration reading; this corrects for wind, friction, road incline, etc. You add the two magnitudes to get the total acceleration. Repeat this for several different values of RPM to get a curve. Presumably you would also repeat each point many times so that your numbers are averages. Then the physics: Force = Mass * Acceleration (and) Power = Force * Velocity In English units (for non-US folks, please forgive me): HP = Weight * Accel * Speed / 375 Weight is in pounds, Accel is in "G"s, Speed is in MPH. The 375 comes from converting all the units. MacInnes gives the following example: Weight of car + occupants: 3650 lbs Road speed: 60 mph Engine speed: 2800 rpm WOT acceleration: 0.12G Neutral decelration: 0.06G (total acceleration = 0.18G) Hence HP = 105.1 @ 2800 rpm. And of course you can convert to torque with the familiar: Torque = HP * 5250 / rpm ----- Light bulb accelerometer: I can't remember all the details, but it goes something like this: one filament is run at a constant voltage/temperature. This causes a convection current to be set up in gasses present in the bulb. The other filament is used in the same way as in a MAF: this convection current inside the bulb causes a certain rate of cooling of the second filament. This is measured by maintaining a constant current and measuring voltage (and hence resistance, which is proportional to temperature), or maybe the reverse, I can't remember. Anyway, the really neat thing is that if the bulb is accelerated in the right direction relative to the orientation of the filaments, the path of the convention currents changes, and the rate of cooling of the second filament changes, and you can sense this change. I will go back and see if I can find the details if anyone's interested. It wouldn't be the most accrate thing in the world, but you could calibrate it with gravity since it's only sensitive to acceleration in a particular axis. My source of this info was a lecture in a graduate level MEMS class by a professor at UC Berkeley. He mentioned it because you can use the same concept except on a micron-scale to make accelerometers, as an alternative to the standard cantilever-beam-flexture with capacitive sensing. But he actually demonstrated this with a 99 cent light bulb and some instrumentation, specifically a frequency generator such that the change in resistance would manifest as a changing pitch so the whole class could hear. Sure enough when he waved it around you could hear it respond to acceleration. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:24:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:24:08 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:24:08 -0800 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Andrew Theurer wrote: > When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 > bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a > search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that > is a reasonable price? Newark (www.newark.com) has the motorola MPX4250AP in stock for $22.58 USD. This is a 250 kPa (2.5 bar) absolute pressure sensor, which would be good for up to approx 21.6 psi of boost. Output is 0-5V. I don't know if this sufficient for your application or not, but someone might find it helpful. Are there any cars that run up to 3 bar manifold pressure from the factory anyway? Seems like a lot for oem. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:24:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:24:34 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:24:34 -0800 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts Hello diy_efi, It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under knocking on that website (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as well, why is that? BW> According to the people who make some money from it, BW> (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where BW> you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's BW> no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for BW> vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler BW> (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:24:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:24:56 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:24:56 -0800 From: "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Hi, I'm writing an opensource program to plot HP curves and monitor/log engine RPMs. I'm using a voltage divider to pick the 12V signal from the coil input. The input is recorded with my soundcard using the Line input. I'm having troubles with trying to figure out how to count the spikes, because the signal I get is VERY far from a square wave :). And with my ignition, when the RPM goes up, the signal amplitude goes DOWN ....so no static treshold for counting spikes :/. The input for the HP measurement I'm using is the tire diameter, gearbox ratio, differencial ratio, vehicle weight, nr. of cylinders (for calculating each 360 deg. engine turn) The formulas I'm working with are based on converting the engine rotations in distance traveled. Then I apply the basic motion formulas to calculate speed, acceleration, force, work and power. I'm calculating the drag from the desacceleration... I know this isn't completely right, but I don't know the Cd of my truck, so I wanted to have a rough estimate. My program is in it's very beggining stages, anyone wants to participate in such project?. It's being programmed under Linux with KDE gui. Tomas Sokorai. On Thursday 20 December 2001 20:05, Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Glen > > Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. > > What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And how is the drag > from wind added to the equation. > > How about the actual vs corrected values on the web site, what is used to > calculate them? > > I would love to see some of the formulas being used. I am sure its all > basic physics, but I am not sure where those books are anymore. Think > there in a box at my parents place? > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Glen Beard [mailto:gbeard1@nycap.rr.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:47 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal > > "Porter, Bill" wrote: > > Follow instructions at this link > > http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/homedyno/homedyno.htm#inst to make an > > inductive pick up. The link uses the pick up to drive the MIC input on > > your > > > laptop. From here I'm unsure of how to configure to time sync with the > > wide > > > band and the DataQ software. I haven't used the DataQ yet to see if it > > will > > > accept outside signals. Don't know what type of voltage you will get off > > of > > > pick up to drive DataQ directly > > As a matter of fact, I bought that thing from him and made > up my own pickup just like he described about 3 years ago. > (His software works pretty well as long as the info you feed > it isn't too far off.) I haven't measured the output > spikes, but they are easily viewable on the waveform > editor. It also shows quite a bit of noise. > > Is there an IC out there to use these triggers to build a > nice 0-5V square wave for use as an input to the DAQ? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:25:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:25:37 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:25:37 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_000_01C18A21.F183DFF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Nic, Problem is that I was planning on using the plastic RadioShack box, while Bill was going to use the metal Hammond box, so that we could give people two alternatives. I may just try to buy the next size larger RS box (8x6x3) and then set the voltage reg. and resistor aside on a bigass heat sink. The box will be a bit clunky this way though... Anyone have any other ideas/suggestions? Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Nic van der Walt > Subject: RE: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing > > >It is starting to appear that I have significantly > >underestimated the amount of heat sink required for > > You could try to mount the resistor and the power transistor > to the aluminium case, instead of on the PCB. The box > can be a great heatsink. > > Use three wires to the PCB, and a silicon isolation washer > and some heatsink compound between the case and the tranny's > tab. > > Use a panel mount power resistor. > > Take a look at: > > Resistors: > http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/551.pdf (89 type) > > Heat sink pads: > http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/347.pdf > > Heat sink compound: > http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/342.pdf > > N. ------_=_NextPart_000_01C18A21.F183DFF0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+Ig8NAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQWAAwAOAAAA0QcMABUACAASAA0ABQAlAQEggAMADgAAANEHDAAV AAgAEgANAAUAJQEBCYABACEAAAA4QjUwNERBQTAxRjNENTExQjdCMTAwOTAyNzg1QkU3QQAYBwEE gAEAKwAAAFJFOiBIZWF0IFNpbmtzIGZvciBXQiB3YXMgUkU6IFdCTzIgdGVzdGluZwBvDQENgAQA AgAAAAIAAgABA5AGAIQLAAAzAAAAAwA2AAAAAAADAB6ACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAABShQAA J2oBAB4AH4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFSFAAABAAAABAAAADkuMAALACCACCAGAAAAAADA AAAAAAAARgAAAAAGhQAAAAAAAAMAD4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAGFAAAAAAAACwABgAgg BgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAA4UAAAAAAAALACSACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAOhQAAAAAA AAMAA4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAABCFAAAAAAAAAwAlgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAA EYUAAAAAAAADACeACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAYhQAAAAAAAB4ANoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAA AABGAAAAADaFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAeADeACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAA3hQAAAQAAAAEA AAAAAAAAHgA4gAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAOIUAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAAIBCRABAAAALAQA ACgEAADLBgAATFpGdZ2WERYDAAoAcmNwZzEyNeIyA0N0ZXgFQQEDAff/CoACpAPkBxMCgA/zAFAE Vj8IVQeyESUOUQMBAgBjaOEKwHNldDIGAAbDESX2MwRGE7cwEiwRMwjvCfe2OxgfDjA1ESIMYGMA UPMLCQFkMzYWUAumB7AN4G4sCqIKhAqAUANgAmBlZG0gBAAgdBPgBUBJWCB3YQQgC1FuAwBu5Gcg AiAgdQCQH7EeoHJlH0JzdA3gCuMKgFIgYWRpb1MT4GNr0iAG4HgsHwBoAxAgkE5CAxADIB8SZ28g M29/IAEgkCByB4ABkBgAHUNIpGFtBGBuZCI0cyPwTR6jdyCQBaB1bCWgZ2RpdiCRZW8LUCQxdz8j 8AdADrAEoB7AJzFzLscdOh7wAMB5IGogEAVAzHRyKfAj4WJ1KoEggTZuDsIAkHogkAtgcmcNEoFS BfAiQSAoOHjwNngzKSElAHAloCBxdwOgFBEgY3YG8AGQLCAg+RggZy4oECWRGCAAkCDgWwWxHyBp AQAf0mEhJWJ8aWcfIAQgIIAewSAha/cvcCElHTRUIIEskgPwIxHeYiCQMPAxcAVAYwpAMlAfKvIe cR8QKvIIYGdoLuM2IB06QW55AiAgkBPg9ydBAHAp8G8gcQXAMIEfIDwvczXwLCAg4QIgcz8dHTpT DrAnQB06PiAtvTuCTwUQJyAocAMgTQeQrnMvATuDOwZGA2E6H9CSdytQci0hsHlfARDUaUA+YS0+ oS4FsB/AblsAwAMQI+A6Pg8/Fl0mTwuQOxVCZRPgbGZ8IE9CsBzxLrADkQSBIIZXKCE7BlN1YmoF kFJ0PeBSRT3gSDHyU+8yQQQgAhBDoUIfA0USRkB+TxRADrAg4R+wOwU7Bj5+SQVAHnEg4ArAR3Ij 0mG+cCdwCsEepTeDAJBnAwDlPrBjAHB0bCnwSCc04P8EgTkSAMAOsC3TKBAEYDTgHQVAb0KwMecv MXF1ae8YIUXzOwY7BlkIYCa1KmX/TbQgci/YLcQfQEAgEoEqYL8AcjASOwYj4U1jCkBtC4DuaVWA JrAfIGUicAuAIOAfMfAloE4RH+EgclBDQv8vcDNlOwZLcTQkCcEewTHi+zIzT75VJCMJ0TPRL9FU 5t9XgSJwLbIw8ACQbA3gH+H/BAAG8CiBH+EfETgxOwYtsu8mEAeAWacmsW1TcExxNCF/J+AJ4SBj VgJS51PSNyAn/nNUdwGgWj9bQjDwCrArUB8DIE20U3Qv1mPfVGFrWzRCF7BvIiAewDpPvlIVL+Vz aNdoAkBwOi92LwuAAhAuIbAnIGgQeQIuYIEvVDAxMy8IVjUvGmAxLnBkq0KwLNA5HpB5J3ApT753 RVNOkwqwZGpva39shjP8NDdtMm4fTldghm//cQ+tchcycr87UU4o5X15oB4AcAABAAAAJwAAAEhl YXQgU2lua3MgZm9yIFdCIHdhcyBSRTogV0JPMiB0ZXN0aW5nAAACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABwYok8zDq tUwE9eoR1anaAFAEW+IcAAADACYAAAAAAAMALgAAAAAACwACAAEAAAACATEAAQAAAEoBAABQQ0RG RUIwOQABAAIAjgAAAAAAAAA4obsQBeUQGqG7CAArKlbCAABFTVNNREIuRExMAAAAAAAAAAAbVfog qmYRzZvIAKoAL8RaDAAAAEFEVkFOVEVLRVhDSDAxAC9vPUFkdmFudGVrT3JnYW5pemF0aW9uL291 PUFEVkFOVEVLU0lURS9jbj1SZWNpcGllbnRzL2NuPVNBbmRlcnNlbgAuAAAAAAAAAHqPJebZStUR t5IAkCeFvnoBAHlvQ/0+P9URt4wAkCeFvnoAAAAAUx4AAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAHqPJebZStURt5IA kCeFvnoBAHlvQ/0+P9URt4wAkCeFvnoAAAAAUx8AABAAAACLUE2qAfPVEbexAJAnhb56KwAAAFJF OiBIZWF0IFNpbmtzIGZvciBXQiB3YXMgUkU6IFdCTzIgdGVzdGluZwAAAAMACVkBAAAAHgBCEAEA AAA4AAAAPDc5NkY0M0ZEM0UzRkQ1MTFCNzhDMDA5MDI3ODVCRTdBMTI2RDE1QEFEVkFOVEVLRVhD SDAxPgADAN4/r28AAEAAOQDw34PxIYrBAQMA8T8JBAAAHgAxQAEAAAAKAAAAU0FOREVSU0VOAAAA AwAaQAAAAAAeADBAAQAAAAoAAABTQU5ERVJTRU4AAAADABlAAAAAAAMA/T/kBAAAAwCAEP////8C AUcAAQAAAD8AAABjPVVTO2E9IDtwPUFkdmFudGVrT3JnYW5pemE7bD1BRFZBTlRFS0VYQ0gwMS0w MTEyMjExMzE4MTNaLTI2NQAAAgH5PwEAAABfAAAAAAAAANynQMjAQhAatLkIACsv4YIBAAAAAAAA AC9PPUFEVkFOVEVLT1JHQU5JWkFUSU9OL09VPUFEVkFOVEVLU0lURS9DTj1SRUNJUElFTlRTL0NO PVNBTkRFUlNFTgAAHgD4PwEAAAARAAAAU3RlcGhlbiBBbmRlcnNlbgAAAAAeADhAAQAAAAoAAABT QU5ERVJTRU4AAAACAfs/AQAAAF8AAAAAAAAA3KdAyMBCEBq0uQgAKy/hggEAAAAAAAAAL089QURW QU5URUtPUkdBTklaQVRJT04vT1U9QURWQU5URUtTSVRFL0NOPVJFQ0lQSUVOVFMvQ049U0FOREVS U0VOAAAeAPo/AQAAABEAAABTdGVwaGVuIEFuZGVyc2VuAAAAAB4AOUABAAAACgAAAFNBTkRFUlNF TgAAAEAABzDUAnjxIYrBAUAACDBmAZfxIYrBAR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAHgAdDgEAAAAn AAAASGVhdCBTaW5rcyBmb3IgV0Igd2FzIFJFOiBXQk8yIHRlc3RpbmcAAB4ANRABAAAAOAAAADw3 OTZGNDNGRDNFM0ZENTExQjc4QzAwOTAyNzg1QkU3QTBEQTMyRkBBRFZBTlRFS0VYQ0gwMT4ACwAp AAEAAAALACMAAAAAAAMABhCqG5HxAwAHEL4DAAADABAQAAAAAAMAERABAAAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAA TklDLFBST0JMRU1JU1RIQVRJV0FTUExBTk5JTkdPTlVTSU5HVEhFUExBU1RJQ1JBRElPU0hBQ0tC T1gsV0hJTEVCSUxMV0FTR09JTkdUT1VTRVRIRU1FVEFMSEFNTU9OREJPWAAAAAACAX8AAQAAADgA AAA8Nzk2RjQzRkQzRTNGRDUxMUI3OEMwMDkwMjc4NUJFN0EwREEzMkZAQURWQU5URUtFWENIMDE+ ACrN ------_=_NextPart_000_01C18A21.F183DFF0-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:25:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:25:48 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:25:48 -0800 From: abnengineering@cs.com Subject: fuel filter particle size What is the max allowable particle size for an EFI motor? I've been considering going over to one of the Racor style (used to be Oberg)reusable filters...the smallest screen they have is a 20 micron without going to a paper element. As an aside they are marketed as lubrication filters...But I have heard that engines require filtration down to ten microns. What's the max allowable particle size for a standard plain bearing Automobile engine oil system? I'm considering using a Racor filter for oil as well in tandem with a paper element spin on to extend the useful life of the filter. IIRC one of the on line oil filter comparos stated that some filters start bypassing oil in as little as 18 minutes running time. I figure if I could trap some of the big stuff that the paper element could do the fine particle management and work longer. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:26:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:26:01 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:26:01 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Home Dyno was RE: Datalogging RPM signal Home Dyno uses the acceleration rate of the vehicle, and the vehicle mass to determine the horsepower based on simple linear acceleration equations that you will find in any basic 1st year college Physics text. You need to know accurately the weight of the vehicle, as well as the gear ratios and tire size. This will allow the program to correlate engine rpm with road speed fairly accurately. The power to accelerate the car in a vacuum is calculated based on the above info. Then the software ADDS in the power required to overcome aero drag vs. speed. This is based on the following equation: DRAG = 1/2 * Rho * V^2 * Cd * A Where Rho is the density of the air V is the velocity Cd is the drag coefficient for the vehicle A is the frontal area of the vehicle. Also, the software then does an air density correction where it takes you current temperature and humidity conditions, calculates the air density, and then factors the results relative to STP conditions. I have found Home Dyno to work quite well. It is extremely consistent, and overall, matches quite closely to actual chassis dyno numbers... Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com > Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal > > > Glen > > Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. > > What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And > how is the drag > from wind added to the equation. > > How about the actual vs corrected values on the web site, > what is used to > calculate them? > > I would love to see some of the formulas being used. I am > sure its all > basic physics, but I am not sure where those books are > anymore. Think there > in a box at my parents place? > > Steve > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:26:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:26:34 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:26:34 -0800 From: "Jurgen Hartwig" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Sensor Connector > As far as I know, the connectors must be ordered direct from Sumitomo. > > For those people interested in the group buy, please send me private email at: > bzublin@zublin.com > and I will include you on the distribution list for the update on the pricing. Hi, please put me down on your list. jhartwig@midsouth.rr.com I would be interested in buying 3 connectors. Regards, jay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:27:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:27:08 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:27:08 -0800 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Home Dyno (was) Datalogging RPM signal Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > > Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. > What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And how is the drag > from wind added to the equation. Here is a list of the required inputs: Engine type: 2/4 stoke Total vehicle weight A/M transmission and stall speed (if app) Axle gear ratio Trans gear ratio Tire width, aspect ratio, and diameter Drag coefficient Frontal Area Drivetrain loss (%) Ambient Temp Relative Humidity Barometric Pressure Elevation above sea level > I would love to see some of the formulas being used. I don't know what the formulas are, but I know I have seen them scattered on the web. The only ones that ever really gave me trouble were drag coefficient, frontal area, drivetrain loss, and tire diameter (because it grows from 15 mph to 70 mph and is not accounted for). It only takes being off by a little to really throw your curves off. Other than that... If you don't look at the output numbers themselves, but instead keep everything constant and look at the trends, it's a fairly repeatable tool for tuning. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:27:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:27:43 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:27:43 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor 89 Turbo Trans Am, 3.8L, vin7 (oem 3 bar application) lockitup@bright.net he'll (dale?) know what your talking about Bruce From: "Andrew Theurer" Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 > bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a > search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that > is a reasonable price? > -Andrew ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:37:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:27:55 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:27:55 -0800 From: Barry Tisdale Subject: Re: MAP Sensor # bar MAP: 1989 Turbo Trans Am (Pontiac), GM# 1604-0749 At 10:45 AM 12/20/01 -0600, Andrew Theurer wrote: >When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 >bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that >applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a >search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that >is a reasonable price? > >-Andrew ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:58:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:29:13 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:29:13 -0800 From: Andrew Theurer MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Found the GM car that came with the 3 bar map from the factory. It's the 1989 Pontiac Trans Am with the Buick 3.8 turbo V6. Can the maintainer of the list below update it? It's $75 through Napa. Autozone's computer reports "replacement not required". I was lucky, some GM dealers stock it. Thanks, Andrew Andrew Theurer wrote: > > When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 > bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a > search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that > is a reasonable price? > > -Andrew > > Bryan Zublin wrote: > > > > The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from > > Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar > > sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: > > http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html > > > > Bryan Zublin > > > > At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: > > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > > not for controlling EFI... > > > > Steve > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:52:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:29:32 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:29:32 -0800 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Chris Waltham wrote: > > > together with their own engine management units. They had > a throttle body with some sort of electronically-variable > throttle, so that they could (in a bizarre sort of way) > control boost over the rev range. Not sure if it would help > you, but it made for interesting reading. > Sounds like they did their own throttle-by-wire type of thing? Where the throttle plate was controlled not by the foot, but only opened engough to give certain amounts of boost? Sounds like that would work, although it sounds like it'd be pretty complicated to develop. I don't think I'd ever want to trust the throttle to some electronics that I come up with anyways. Or was this a 2nd butterfly, so that you still had direct control with your foot? That, at least, would be pretty fail-safe. --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 14:48:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:29:49 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 14:29:49 -0800 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Bruce wrote: > > Try bleeding off the boost, ie large air bleed that is well dampened. > Maybe set up one BOV for X amount of boost, and use several. > How about a clue for how much boost your wanting to bleed off. Thought about that too, and it does sound like a better alternative. I had a turbo on previously and the donor was an Isuzu Impulse. I'm not entirely sure how they controlled boost on that, but they had a stepper motor hooked to the wastegate via a cable, and they also used a BOV with the vacuum line running to it coming from a VSV. I'm assuming so they could modulate and control the bypass pressure. BTW, I'm looking to bypass maybe 5 - 6 psi short term. Long term is to have correctly sized pulleys made once that's been determined. thanks --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:55:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:55:24 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:55:24 -0800 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Stephen Andersen wrote: > > How about PWM a bypass valve instead? I have been considering Yes, it sounds like that's what I'll be doing instead. I think it unanimous the clutches won't like being PWM'd, and I'm not even sure how hard it would be to adapt to my SC. --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:55:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:55:39 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:55:39 -0800 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? rob files wrote: > > But the real quesiton is why would you want to control boost with an SC > setup? The gas pedal does a real good job of it on it's own :). Well, it does if you get the pulley sizes right the first time :) This is all a DIY thing, and I just used strait math to come up with pulley sizes, then found junkyard pulleys as close as possible to adapt. But, I won't really know how much boost I'll have for sure until I fire it up. I was just looking for a safety type device that I could gradually remove to find what my max boost is going to be. The goal is to try these out, find out how much boost I'm really getting, then adjust accordingly with (hopefully, just one) new pulley. thanks --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:55:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:55:59 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:55:59 -0800 From: Eric Fahlgren MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > > Glen > > Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. Off the top of my head, the aero force is Fa = 0.5 Rho Cd A V^2 where Rho = air density, use something like 1.225 kg/m^3 Cd = drag coefficient, probably 0.3-0.5, take a guess... A = "frontal area" of the vehicle, take a guess... V = velocity of the vehicle Good old F = ma is the other part m = mass of vehicle a = acceleration of the vehicle To get V, measure the delta between subsequent ignition pulses or VSS pulses or whatever, use the gear ratios and tire diameter to get the units into something useful. Differentiate a series of these V numbers to get a. Crudely (and maybe good enough, although I'd tend to think this would have a lot of noise): a = (Vn+1 - Vn) / dt dt = pulse length between the two V measurements So, crank it all out and you have one big F number, which turns out to be thrust at the contact patch. Turn this into T (engine torque delivered to the drive wheels) by dividing by the tire radius and multiplying by the rear end and transmission ratios, use the usual T*rpm/5252 to get RWHP. Note that this last exercise (computing RWT and RWHP) is pretty useless, in that even if you have a good grasp of Cd and A, you still need to contend with rolling and frictional losses to get "true" T and HP. Since rolling losses are proportional to velocity, you will see "lower" HP numbers as you shift through the gears; possibly the same thing happens in the gear box, but other than an automatic locking up, I can't judge which way the effect might go). To use such a setup, I'd say you'll need to pay very close attention to minimizing the change in external factors (road grade, wind speed, gear ratio and so on). On the other hand, just plotting the computed acceleration versus RPM might prove to be a good tuning aid, you can see where changes in tune are affecting acceleration without introducing a bunch of fudge factors. -- Eric Fahlgren Mechanical Dynamics, Inc efahl@adams.com Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:56:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:56:25 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:56:25 -0800 From: Xin Subject: wbo2 testing question I just got everything soldered. Applied 14 volts and I am getting 2.5 volt at J8. I am suspecting that I got iso1 in back wards. Here is my question, how do I tell which way the iso1 chip is up? There is a dot on a corner. Is that pin 1? If I do have it backwards, what is the best way of getting it out? Drill? thanks, Xin ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:56:59 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:56:59 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:56:59 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed That's were I got hooked on this type of set up. Talking to Speedomotive about the bottem end. August over there want's to keep the stroke the same. I'm paying so, We're doing it my way. My AFR heads and roller cam should flow well under 14PSI of boost! Projecting 600-700 HP... ----- Original Message ----- From: "The Dupuis" To: Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 7:31 PM Subject: RE: Maximum Piston Speed > Brutal Snippage... > > > I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 > > inch rods. > > And then supercharging the set up. > > Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air > > flow appeals to me as well. > > Have a look at Hot Rod June '97: 400 block bored .030, 307/327 crank, Ford > 300 I-6 rods (6.209"), JE pistons, Air Flow Research 305- style heads, > 215/215 @.050" Comp camshaft, 11:1 C/R, 87 octane fuel, 412.3 hp @5700 and > 435.0 ft-lbs @3800, with 390 ft-lbs from 2400 to 5400 rpm. 350 cubes, very > little side loading, incredible torque curve (?, seems pretty flat to me)... > This could be my favourite engine, if only I were a chev guy. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:57:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:57:14 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:57:14 -0800 From: "Spencer Cox" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor How do you determine how many bars a sensor has? Spencer -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Theurer Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 10:46 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: MAP Sensor When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that is a reasonable price? -Andrew Bryan Zublin wrote: > > The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from > Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar > sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: > http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html > > Bryan Zublin > > At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > not for controlling EFI... > > Steve > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:57:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:57:49 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:57:49 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: SBC Turbo Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). Bruce http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:58:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:58:20 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:58:20 -0800 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Increasing fuel pressure Tim, did you ever find anything of the supplier of the flow devices? Really like the idea and wish I had thought of it. Really would like to do it to a couple of toys. Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 8:24 AM Subject: RE: Increasing fuel pressure > We found them in a "Machine Design" magazine. They have different > trip points at specific flow. They have a switched output that is either on > or off. What happens is when the flow decreases to a specific trip point, > the output switches. > > I think we went with anything less than about 6 oz / min flow = > trip. Price wasn't that bad either. I don't remember what we paid, sorry. > > I'll try and see if I can find the paperwork.......Tim. > > > > > Interesting, is this fuel flow monitor expensive? can you buy or make one? > > > > Steve > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:58:41 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:58:41 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:58:41 -0800 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Re: LPG Injection. >The LPG injectors are commercially available in medium >quantities i.e. 100 or so from Siemens in Italy. > >The fuel is indeed circulated through the fuel rail in order to >stabilize >the temps in the rail. > >phil > > You wouldn't know of a source for a few would you? I think 100 is about 10 times as many as I need! Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:58:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:58:52 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:58:52 -0800 From: Michael Kosarev MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #955 Hello DIY_EFI, Can anyone recommend a good schematic of Digital Distributorless Ignition System? -- Best regards, Michael mailto:steppper21@betline.ru ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 17:59:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:59:19 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:59:19 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: eDIST, or ignition the final answer In case you haven't heard FAST has a neat little deal called eDIST that allows you to run the Coil Near Plug set up found on LS1 cars on other applications. In case you haven't been under the hood of a LS1, they have one ignition coil pwer cylinder. The one little gotcha in interfacing it is that to be sure you have a full time EST signal. On GM ecms they may not be a full time EST signal from the ECM. ie on the GNs it looks like there is a 250 rpm min threshold for the timing calculation. What I did was use a 1K pull up resistor, and then the coil triggers tied together as *point* signal, that inverted the signal, but the eDIST has a selector switch for correcting that. I just got mine running on my GN yesterday, so testing for the moment is scetchy. But, there does seem to be a noticable change in the way the car runs. If one ign coil is good, 3 must be better, and 6 is just enough More notes as things progress I can say the idle seems cleaner, my normal cruise TPS, is about .84v at 65, with the eDIST it's now at .8, thou the average might be closer to .78.. I doubt anyone has a lower throttle opening then I do for cruise, and to improve on it would take some doing, and, installing the eDIST did. I passed some cars in a 55 zone during the first test drive, and well, I was caught off guard with the way it responded. If you want to test a coil out by it's self just get one, and test fire it. But, be warned, it's high voltage, and stand well clear of it. The CNP stuff is impressive, deep dark blue spark. Bruce Now where is that new manifold . Yes, Dr., I'll be OK, you see the GN is running well. Oh a GN is a Buick with a Turbooo, ugh, yes, I understand.... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 18:08:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:59:53 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:59:53 -0800 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > When you went to Autozone, did you specify a > particular car for the 2 bar sensor? I need a 3 > bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require > a car to do a search. Does anyone know where the 3 > bar sensor is sold (online?) that is a reasonable > price? '89 Turbo Trans Am, 3.8L Additional info in recent archives, such as "hot stamp" numbers and colors to look for when scrounging, etc. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 18:28:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:00:27 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:00:27 -0800 From: "Kris Weldy" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed Use the 350 block with the 400 crank(383 ci)-theres a low budget killer there.---Your friend, Kris Weldy Arlington Texas 88supra turbo auto 9.1 1/8th aim :volvofam3 -- yahoo:supratheonlywaytofly www.turboboss.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "yahoo" To: ; Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:59 PM Subject: Maximum Piston Speed > > Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block > Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 > cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a > 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to > limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't > very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. > > I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Since I'm interested in stroker > engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes, I think that piston speed is > a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been > stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other > things being equal that is a HUGE increase. > > However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the > square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be > more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main > journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It > seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high > transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my > case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would > consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but > need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't > consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of > completeness. > > Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum > piston speeds that are associated with long life? > > Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the > rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of > high power that kills the rings? > > Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Do they hurt? Is the offset > different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and > ignore the long term effects? > > I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because > most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. > I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket > heads (and a thick head gasket) to attain the piston offset. The target > compression ratio is 8.0:1 > > Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? > I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually > seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? > > Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? > > dh > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 18:18:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:01:07 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:01:07 -0800 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: More wb_lcd pics I put up some more wb_lcd pictures. They're available at http://www.home.att.net/~w.shawsr/wb_lcd/wb_lcd21.jpg, wb_lcd22.jpg, wb_lcd23.jpg, wb_lcd24.jpg. wb_lcd21.jpg - open view showing wb-o2 regulator, power resistor & harness strain relief wb_lcd22.jpg - closed view showing harness entry wb_lcd23.jpg - top view of board stack wb_lcd24.jpg - side view of board stack Bill ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 18:27:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:01:24 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:01:24 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." wrote: Sounds like a great project Tom. > My program is in it's very beggining stages, anyone wants to participate in > such project?. I'd suggest you provide an option where you can read a nice RPM signal via the games port (my generation of PCs still has the DB15). Most, if not all EFI vehicles, provide a square wave signal somewhere (that may need to be divided down in software). That nice signal should be easily read by a multitude of inputs, including a games port, a parallel port, a modem status line on a serial port, or, as a last resort, the kludge where the sound card is used. Contact me directly mailto:peter@techedge.com.au for any code fragments you may want for this project, or any help with a simple/low-cost hardware interface/buffer for any of these inputs. Sound card - yuk! (and I do appreciate that the sound card approach does work, but it's still a kludge, and mostly unnecessary). Peter. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sun Dec 23 18:24:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:01:41 -0800 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 18:01:41 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home Dyno (was) Datalogging RPM signal Glen Beard tapped away at the keyboard with: > I don't know what the formulas are, but I know I have seen > them scattered on the web. The only ones that ever really > gave me trouble were drag coefficient, frontal area, > drivetrain loss, and tire diameter (because it grows from 15 > mph to 70 mph and is not accounted for). It only takes > being off by a little to really throw your curves off. Drag (Cd * A) can be measured by a high-speed coast-down and rolling resistance by low-speed coast-down tests. Procedure is described in the Bosch Automotive Handbook. Not just useful for engine tuning, but also selection of tyres and body mods. > Other than that... If you don't look at the output numbers > themselves, but instead keep everything constant and look at > the trends, it's a fairly repeatable tool for tuning. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From abnengineering@cs.com Fri Dec 21 10:39:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:37:11 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:37:11 -0300 From: abnengineering@cs.com Subject: fuel filter particle size What is the max allowable particle size for an EFI motor? I've been considering going over to one of the Racor style (used to be Oberg)reusable filters...the smallest screen they have is a 20 micron without going to a paper element. As an aside they are marketed as lubrication filters...But I have heard that engines require filtration down to ten microns. What's the max allowable particle size for a standard plain bearing Automobile engine oil system? I'm considering using a Racor filter for oil as well in tandem with a paper element spin on to extend the useful life of the filter. IIRC one of the on line oil filter comparos stated that some filters start bypassing oil in as little as 18 minutes running time. I figure if I could trap some of the big stuff that the paper element could do the fine particle management and work longer. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jhartwig@midsouth.rr.com Fri Dec 21 11:34:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:37:45 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:37:45 -0300 From: "Jurgen Hartwig" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: WB O2 Sensor Connector > As far as I know, the connectors must be ordered direct from Sumitomo. > > For those people interested in the group buy, please send me private email at: > bzublin@zublin.com > and I will include you on the distribution list for the update on the pricing. Hi, please put me down on your list. jhartwig@midsouth.rr.com I would be interested in buying 3 connectors. Regards, jay ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From tsokorai@xperts.cl Fri Dec 21 10:20:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:37:56 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:37:56 -0300 From: "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Hi, I'm writing an opensource program to plot HP curves and monitor/log engine RPMs. I'm using a voltage divider to pick the 12V signal from the coil input. The input is recorded with my soundcard using the Line input. I'm having troubles with trying to figure out how to count the spikes, because the signal I get is VERY far from a square wave :). And with my ignition, when the RPM goes up, the signal amplitude goes DOWN ....so no static treshold for counting spikes :/. The input for the HP measurement I'm using is the tire diameter, gearbox ratio, differencial ratio, vehicle weight, nr. of cylinders (for calculating each 360 deg. engine turn) The formulas I'm working with are based on converting the engine rotations in distance traveled. Then I apply the basic motion formulas to calculate speed, acceleration, force, work and power. I'm calculating the drag from the desacceleration... I know this isn't completely right, but I don't know the Cd of my truck, so I wanted to have a rough estimate. My program is in it's very beggining stages, anyone wants to participate in such project?. It's being programmed under Linux with KDE gui. Tomas Sokorai. On Thursday 20 December 2001 20:05, Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > Glen > > Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. > > What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And how is the drag > from wind added to the equation. > > How about the actual vs corrected values on the web site, what is used to > calculate them? > > I would love to see some of the formulas being used. I am sure its all > basic physics, but I am not sure where those books are anymore. Think > there in a box at my parents place? > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Glen Beard [mailto:gbeard1@nycap.rr.com] > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 10:47 PM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal > > "Porter, Bill" wrote: > > Follow instructions at this link > > http://www.charm.net/~mchaney/homedyno/homedyno.htm#inst to make an > > inductive pick up. The link uses the pick up to drive the MIC input on > > your > > > laptop. From here I'm unsure of how to configure to time sync with the > > wide > > > band and the DataQ software. I haven't used the DataQ yet to see if it > > will > > > accept outside signals. Don't know what type of voltage you will get off > > of > > > pick up to drive DataQ directly > > As a matter of fact, I bought that thing from him and made > up my own pickup just like he described about 3 years ago. > (His software works pretty well as long as the info you feed > it isn't too far off.) I haven't measured the output > spikes, but they are easily viewable on the waveform > editor. It also shows quite a bit of noise. > > Is there an IC out there to use these triggers to build a > nice 0-5V square wave for use as an input to the DAQ? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From punisher454@hotmail.com Fri Dec 21 06:13:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:37:59 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:37:59 -0300 From: "The Punisher" Subject: RE: LPG Injection. Sorry I came in late on this one, but what happens if you try to use a 'conventional' electronic fuel injector with LPG ? I know LPG has some things going for it. I had this 76 dodge pickup with a 440 that was on propane since almost new (had 140 gallons total capacity!) fuel system always worked good (emco on holley baseplate) only trouble it had was the chrysler ignition system(installed GM HEI module and cured it). At about 350,000 miles or so it suddenly wouldnt hardly run so I tore the engine down. The interior was quite clean and had VERY little sludge, bearings looked good, and the cylinders had almost no ridge and good looking bores. The problem was that the valve seats finaly CRUMBLED. Some were totaly GONE and most were spider-webbed and falling apart. When the valves were removed most of the seats were removed by hand. I've seen valve seats fail in gas engines(petrol for some) but nothing like this, it was downright STRANGE. Ever seen this?? Marvin Fugate (always looking for more power) >From: "Shirley, Mark R" >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: "'diy_efi@diy-efi.org'" >Subject: RE: LPG Injection. >Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 09:39:20 -0500 > >If you got it to work very successfully, you should consider marketing >to industrial engine companies, because you're the only >one i've ever heard of who got it to work. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Phil Lamovie [mailto:phil@injec.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 1:47 AM > > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > > Subject: Re: LPG Injection. > > > > > > > > > > The point to LPG injection is both the vastly improved accuracy > > of the control system and the free super charging that comes > > with the absorption of heat from the air charge. > > > > The average increase in torque with LPG injection over > > Petrol is approx. 15%. > > > > Higher compression ratio is also a freely available side effect > > and so is the higher than normal boost that takes > > advantage of the very high octane ratings. > > > > By the way we tried it at work and were very successful. > > > > Phil > > > > > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" > > (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Fri Dec 21 10:25:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:38:10 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:38:10 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Home Dyno was RE: Datalogging RPM signal Home Dyno uses the acceleration rate of the vehicle, and the vehicle mass to determine the horsepower based on simple linear acceleration equations that you will find in any basic 1st year college Physics text. You need to know accurately the weight of the vehicle, as well as the gear ratios and tire size. This will allow the program to correlate engine rpm with road speed fairly accurately. The power to accelerate the car in a vacuum is calculated based on the above info. Then the software ADDS in the power required to overcome aero drag vs. speed. This is based on the following equation: DRAG = 1/2 * Rho * V^2 * Cd * A Where Rho is the density of the air V is the velocity Cd is the drag coefficient for the vehicle A is the frontal area of the vehicle. Also, the software then does an air density correction where it takes you current temperature and humidity conditions, calculates the air density, and then factors the results relative to STP conditions. I have found Home Dyno to work quite well. It is extremely consistent, and overall, matches quite closely to actual chassis dyno numbers... Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com > Subject: RE: Datalogging RPM signal > > > Glen > > Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. > > What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And > how is the drag > from wind added to the equation. > > How about the actual vs corrected values on the web site, > what is used to > calculate them? > > I would love to see some of the formulas being used. I am > sure its all > basic physics, but I am not sure where those books are > anymore. Think there > in a box at my parents place? > > Steve > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Fri Dec 21 11:49:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:38:30 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:38:30 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor 89 Turbo Trans Am, 3.8L, vin7 (oem 3 bar application) lockitup@bright.net he'll (dale?) know what your talking about Bruce From: "Andrew Theurer" Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 > bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a > search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that > is a reasonable price? > -Andrew ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rcs07@uow.edu.au Wed Dec 12 23:22:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:38:44 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:38:44 -0300 From: Bob - Uni MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts Hello diy_efi, It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under knocking on that website (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as well, why is that? BW> According to the people who make some money from it, BW> (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where BW> you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's BW> no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for BW> vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler BW> (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. -- Best regards, Bob mailto:rcs07@uow.edu.au ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From brian@dessent.net Fri Dec 21 08:06:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:39:15 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:39:15 -0300 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Andrew Theurer wrote: > When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 > bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a > search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that > is a reasonable price? Newark (www.newark.com) has the motorola MPX4250AP in stock for $22.58 USD. This is a 250 kPa (2.5 bar) absolute pressure sensor, which would be good for up to approx 21.6 psi of boost. Output is 0-5V. I don't know if this sufficient for your application or not, but someone might find it helpful. Are there any cars that run up to 3 bar manifold pressure from the factory anyway? Seems like a lot for oem. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From gbeard1@nycap.rr.com Fri Dec 21 11:30:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:40:05 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:40:05 -0300 From: Glen Beard MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Home Dyno (was) Datalogging RPM signal Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > > Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. > What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And how is the drag > from wind added to the equation. Here is a list of the required inputs: Engine type: 2/4 stoke Total vehicle weight A/M transmission and stall speed (if app) Axle gear ratio Trans gear ratio Tire width, aspect ratio, and diameter Drag coefficient Frontal Area Drivetrain loss (%) Ambient Temp Relative Humidity Barometric Pressure Elevation above sea level > I would love to see some of the formulas being used. I don't know what the formulas are, but I know I have seen them scattered on the web. The only ones that ever really gave me trouble were drag coefficient, frontal area, drivetrain loss, and tire diameter (because it grows from 15 mph to 70 mph and is not accounted for). It only takes being off by a little to really throw your curves off. Other than that... If you don't look at the output numbers themselves, but instead keep everything constant and look at the trends, it's a fairly repeatable tool for tuning. -- Glen Beard 95 T/A conv M6 355, Vortech, heads, cam... http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/TransAm.html http://home.nycap.rr.com/gbeard1/Impala/Impala.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From brian@dessent.net Fri Dec 21 07:52:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:40:07 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:40:07 -0300 From: Brian Dessent MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Steve.Flanagan@VerizonWireless.com wrote: > What inputs are used to calculate the HP / TQ numbers? And how is the drag > from wind added to the equation. For what it's worth, Hugh MacInnes talks about the "road dyno" method in his _Turbochargers_ book. Basically, you need: 1. Weight of car + occupants 2. Tachometer 3. Speedometer 4. Accelerometer Note that these should all be calibrated if possible. I think all but the accelerometer are pretty easy to find/calibrate. I know you can buy simple rugged accelerometers these days pretty cheap. I also know of a method to use a two-filament automotive incandescent light bulb as an accelerometer. (See end of post for details.) You might be able to get a rough idea of acceleration by taking the first derivative of the speedometer signal, but it would not be as accurate as a real accelerometer. You can then get a torque / HP value for any RPM while on the road. The idea is to note the accelerometer reading at the desired RPM, presumably while at WOT. You then coast in neutral back past that same RPM and note the deceleration reading; this corrects for wind, friction, road incline, etc. You add the two magnitudes to get the total acceleration. Repeat this for several different values of RPM to get a curve. Presumably you would also repeat each point many times so that your numbers are averages. Then the physics: Force = Mass * Acceleration (and) Power = Force * Velocity In English units (for non-US folks, please forgive me): HP = Weight * Accel * Speed / 375 Weight is in pounds, Accel is in "G"s, Speed is in MPH. The 375 comes from converting all the units. MacInnes gives the following example: Weight of car + occupants: 3650 lbs Road speed: 60 mph Engine speed: 2800 rpm WOT acceleration: 0.12G Neutral decelration: 0.06G (total acceleration = 0.18G) Hence HP = 105.1 @ 2800 rpm. And of course you can convert to torque with the familiar: Torque = HP * 5250 / rpm ----- Light bulb accelerometer: I can't remember all the details, but it goes something like this: one filament is run at a constant voltage/temperature. This causes a convection current to be set up in gasses present in the bulb. The other filament is used in the same way as in a MAF: this convection current inside the bulb causes a certain rate of cooling of the second filament. This is measured by maintaining a constant current and measuring voltage (and hence resistance, which is proportional to temperature), or maybe the reverse, I can't remember. Anyway, the really neat thing is that if the bulb is accelerated in the right direction relative to the orientation of the filaments, the path of the convention currents changes, and the rate of cooling of the second filament changes, and you can sense this change. I will go back and see if I can find the details if anyone's interested. It wouldn't be the most accrate thing in the world, but you could calibrate it with gravity since it's only sensitive to acceleration in a particular axis. My source of this info was a lecture in a graduate level MEMS class by a professor at UC Berkeley. He mentioned it because you can use the same concept except on a micron-scale to make accelerometers, as an alternative to the standard cantilever-beam-flexture with capacitive sensing. But he actually demonstrated this with a 99 cent light bulb and some instrumentation, specifically a frequency generator such that the change in resistance would manifest as a changing pitch so the whole class could hear. Sure enough when he waved it around you could hear it respond to acceleration. Brian ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Fri Dec 21 10:18:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:40:13 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:40:13 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_000_01C18A21.F183DFF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Nic, Problem is that I was planning on using the plastic RadioShack box, while Bill was going to use the metal Hammond box, so that we could give people two alternatives. I may just try to buy the next size larger RS box (8x6x3) and then set the voltage reg. and resistor aside on a bigass heat sink. The box will be a bit clunky this way though... Anyone have any other ideas/suggestions? Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of Nic van der Walt > Subject: RE: Heat Sinks for WB was RE: WBO2 testing > > >It is starting to appear that I have significantly > >underestimated the amount of heat sink required for > > You could try to mount the resistor and the power transistor > to the aluminium case, instead of on the PCB. The box > can be a great heatsink. > > Use three wires to the PCB, and a silicon isolation washer > and some heatsink compound between the case and the tranny's > tab. > > Use a panel mount power resistor. > > Take a look at: > > Resistors: > http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/551.pdf (89 type) > > Heat sink pads: > http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/347.pdf > > Heat sink compound: > http://info.digikey.com/T013/V5/342.pdf > > N. ------_=_NextPart_000_01C18A21.F183DFF0 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+Ig8NAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQWAAwAOAAAA0QcMABUACAASAA0ABQAlAQEggAMADgAAANEHDAAV AAgAEgANAAUAJQEBCYABACEAAAA4QjUwNERBQTAxRjNENTExQjdCMTAwOTAyNzg1QkU3QQAYBwEE gAEAKwAAAFJFOiBIZWF0IFNpbmtzIGZvciBXQiB3YXMgUkU6IFdCTzIgdGVzdGluZwBvDQENgAQA AgAAAAIAAgABA5AGAIQLAAAzAAAAAwA2AAAAAAADAB6ACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAABShQAA J2oBAB4AH4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAFSFAAABAAAABAAAADkuMAALACCACCAGAAAAAADA AAAAAAAARgAAAAAGhQAAAAAAAAMAD4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAAAGFAAAAAAAACwABgAgg BgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAA4UAAAAAAAALACSACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAOhQAAAAAA AAMAA4AIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAAAABGAAAAABCFAAAAAAAAAwAlgAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAA EYUAAAAAAAADACeACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAAYhQAAAAAAAB4ANoAIIAYAAAAAAMAAAAAA AABGAAAAADaFAAABAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAeADeACCAGAAAAAADAAAAAAAAARgAAAAA3hQAAAQAAAAEA AAAAAAAAHgA4gAggBgAAAAAAwAAAAAAAAEYAAAAAOIUAAAEAAAABAAAAAAAAAAIBCRABAAAALAQA ACgEAADLBgAATFpGdZ2WERYDAAoAcmNwZzEyNeIyA0N0ZXgFQQEDAff/CoACpAPkBxMCgA/zAFAE Vj8IVQeyESUOUQMBAgBjaOEKwHNldDIGAAbDESX2MwRGE7cwEiwRMwjvCfe2OxgfDjA1ESIMYGMA UPMLCQFkMzYWUAumB7AN4G4sCqIKhAqAUANgAmBlZG0gBAAgdBPgBUBJWCB3YQQgC1FuAwBu5Gcg AiAgdQCQH7EeoHJlH0JzdA3gCuMKgFIgYWRpb1MT4GNr0iAG4HgsHwBoAxAgkE5CAxADIB8SZ28g M29/IAEgkCByB4ABkBgAHUNIpGFtBGBuZCI0cyPwTR6jdyCQBaB1bCWgZ2RpdiCRZW8LUCQxdz8j 8AdADrAEoB7AJzFzLscdOh7wAMB5IGogEAVAzHRyKfAj4WJ1KoEggTZuDsIAkHogkAtgcmcNEoFS BfAiQSAoOHjwNngzKSElAHAloCBxdwOgFBEgY3YG8AGQLCAg+RggZy4oECWRGCAAkCDgWwWxHyBp AQAf0mEhJWJ8aWcfIAQgIIAewSAha/cvcCElHTRUIIEskgPwIxHeYiCQMPAxcAVAYwpAMlAfKvIe cR8QKvIIYGdoLuM2IB06QW55AiAgkBPg9ydBAHAp8G8gcQXAMIEfIDwvczXwLCAg4QIgcz8dHTpT DrAnQB06PiAtvTuCTwUQJyAocAMgTQeQrnMvATuDOwZGA2E6H9CSdytQci0hsHlfARDUaUA+YS0+ oS4FsB/AblsAwAMQI+A6Pg8/Fl0mTwuQOxVCZRPgbGZ8IE9CsBzxLrADkQSBIIZXKCE7BlN1YmoF kFJ0PeBSRT3gSDHyU+8yQQQgAhBDoUIfA0USRkB+TxRADrAg4R+wOwU7Bj5+SQVAHnEg4ArAR3Ij 0mG+cCdwCsEepTeDAJBnAwDlPrBjAHB0bCnwSCc04P8EgTkSAMAOsC3TKBAEYDTgHQVAb0KwMecv MXF1ae8YIUXzOwY7BlkIYCa1KmX/TbQgci/YLcQfQEAgEoEqYL8AcjASOwYj4U1jCkBtC4DuaVWA JrAfIGUicAuAIOAfMfAloE4RH+EgclBDQv8vcDNlOwZLcTQkCcEewTHi+zIzT75VJCMJ0TPRL9FU 5t9XgSJwLbIw8ACQbA3gH+H/BAAG8CiBH+EfETgxOwYtsu8mEAeAWacmsW1TcExxNCF/J+AJ4SBj VgJS51PSNyAn/nNUdwGgWj9bQjDwCrArUB8DIE20U3Qv1mPfVGFrWzRCF7BvIiAewDpPvlIVL+Vz aNdoAkBwOi92LwuAAhAuIbAnIGgQeQIuYIEvVDAxMy8IVjUvGmAxLnBkq0KwLNA5HpB5J3ApT753 RVNOkwqwZGpva39shjP8NDdtMm4fTldghm//cQ+tchcycr87UU4o5X15oB4AcAABAAAAJwAAAEhl YXQgU2lua3MgZm9yIFdCIHdhcyBSRTogV0JPMiB0ZXN0aW5nAAACAXEAAQAAABYAAAABwYok8zDq tUwE9eoR1anaAFAEW+IcAAADACYAAAAAAAMALgAAAAAACwACAAEAAAACATEAAQAAAEoBAABQQ0RG RUIwOQABAAIAjgAAAAAAAAA4obsQBeUQGqG7CAArKlbCAABFTVNNREIuRExMAAAAAAAAAAAbVfog qmYRzZvIAKoAL8RaDAAAAEFEVkFOVEVLRVhDSDAxAC9vPUFkdmFudGVrT3JnYW5pemF0aW9uL291 PUFEVkFOVEVLU0lURS9jbj1SZWNpcGllbnRzL2NuPVNBbmRlcnNlbgAuAAAAAAAAAHqPJebZStUR t5IAkCeFvnoBAHlvQ/0+P9URt4wAkCeFvnoAAAAAUx4AAAAAAAAuAAAAAAAAAHqPJebZStURt5IA kCeFvnoBAHlvQ/0+P9URt4wAkCeFvnoAAAAAUx8AABAAAACLUE2qAfPVEbexAJAnhb56KwAAAFJF OiBIZWF0IFNpbmtzIGZvciBXQiB3YXMgUkU6IFdCTzIgdGVzdGluZwAAAAMACVkBAAAAHgBCEAEA AAA4AAAAPDc5NkY0M0ZEM0UzRkQ1MTFCNzhDMDA5MDI3ODVCRTdBMTI2RDE1QEFEVkFOVEVLRVhD SDAxPgADAN4/r28AAEAAOQDw34PxIYrBAQMA8T8JBAAAHgAxQAEAAAAKAAAAU0FOREVSU0VOAAAA AwAaQAAAAAAeADBAAQAAAAoAAABTQU5ERVJTRU4AAAADABlAAAAAAAMA/T/kBAAAAwCAEP////8C AUcAAQAAAD8AAABjPVVTO2E9IDtwPUFkdmFudGVrT3JnYW5pemE7bD1BRFZBTlRFS0VYQ0gwMS0w MTEyMjExMzE4MTNaLTI2NQAAAgH5PwEAAABfAAAAAAAAANynQMjAQhAatLkIACsv4YIBAAAAAAAA AC9PPUFEVkFOVEVLT1JHQU5JWkFUSU9OL09VPUFEVkFOVEVLU0lURS9DTj1SRUNJUElFTlRTL0NO PVNBTkRFUlNFTgAAHgD4PwEAAAARAAAAU3RlcGhlbiBBbmRlcnNlbgAAAAAeADhAAQAAAAoAAABT QU5ERVJTRU4AAAACAfs/AQAAAF8AAAAAAAAA3KdAyMBCEBq0uQgAKy/hggEAAAAAAAAAL089QURW QU5URUtPUkdBTklaQVRJT04vT1U9QURWQU5URUtTSVRFL0NOPVJFQ0lQSUVOVFMvQ049U0FOREVS U0VOAAAeAPo/AQAAABEAAABTdGVwaGVuIEFuZGVyc2VuAAAAAB4AOUABAAAACgAAAFNBTkRFUlNF TgAAAEAABzDUAnjxIYrBAUAACDBmAZfxIYrBAR4APQABAAAABQAAAFJFOiAAAAAAHgAdDgEAAAAn AAAASGVhdCBTaW5rcyBmb3IgV0Igd2FzIFJFOiBXQk8yIHRlc3RpbmcAAB4ANRABAAAAOAAAADw3 OTZGNDNGRDNFM0ZENTExQjc4QzAwOTAyNzg1QkU3QTBEQTMyRkBBRFZBTlRFS0VYQ0gwMT4ACwAp AAEAAAALACMAAAAAAAMABhCqG5HxAwAHEL4DAAADABAQAAAAAAMAERABAAAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAA TklDLFBST0JMRU1JU1RIQVRJV0FTUExBTk5JTkdPTlVTSU5HVEhFUExBU1RJQ1JBRElPU0hBQ0tC T1gsV0hJTEVCSUxMV0FTR09JTkdUT1VTRVRIRU1FVEFMSEFNTU9OREJPWAAAAAACAX8AAQAAADgA AAA8Nzk2RjQzRkQzRTNGRDUxMUI3OEMwMDkwMjc4NUJFN0EwREEzMkZAQURWQU5URUtFWENIMDE+ ACrN ------_=_NextPart_000_01C18A21.F183DFF0-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From btisdale@cybersol.com Fri Dec 21 12:28:34 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:45:43 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:45:43 -0300 From: Barry Tisdale Subject: Re: MAP Sensor # bar MAP: 1989 Turbo Trans Am (Pontiac), GM# 1604-0749 At 10:45 AM 12/20/01 -0600, Andrew Theurer wrote: >When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 >bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that >applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a >search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that >is a reasonable price? > >-Andrew ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From houlster@user1.inficad.com Fri Dec 21 13:24:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:53:50 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:53:50 -0300 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Bruce wrote: > > Try bleeding off the boost, ie large air bleed that is well dampened. > Maybe set up one BOV for X amount of boost, and use several. > How about a clue for how much boost your wanting to bleed off. Thought about that too, and it does sound like a better alternative. I had a turbo on previously and the donor was an Isuzu Impulse. I'm not entirely sure how they controlled boost on that, but they had a stepper motor hooked to the wastegate via a cable, and they also used a BOV with the vacuum line running to it coming from a VSV. I'm assuming so they could modulate and control the bypass pressure. BTW, I'm looking to bypass maybe 5 - 6 psi short term. Long term is to have correctly sized pulleys made once that's been determined. thanks --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From houlster@user1.inficad.com Fri Dec 21 13:17:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:57:18 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 19:57:18 -0300 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Chris Waltham wrote: > > > together with their own engine management units. They had > a throttle body with some sort of electronically-variable > throttle, so that they could (in a bizarre sort of way) > control boost over the rev range. Not sure if it would help > you, but it made for interesting reading. > Sounds like they did their own throttle-by-wire type of thing? Where the throttle plate was controlled not by the foot, but only opened engough to give certain amounts of boost? Sounds like that would work, although it sounds like it'd be pretty complicated to develop. I don't think I'd ever want to trust the throttle to some electronics that I come up with anyways. Or was this a 2nd butterfly, so that you still had direct control with your foot? That, at least, would be pretty fail-safe. --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From habanero@us.ibm.com Fri Dec 21 13:11:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 20:02:21 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 20:02:21 -0300 From: Andrew Theurer MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Found the GM car that came with the 3 bar map from the factory. It's the 1989 Pontiac Trans Am with the Buick 3.8 turbo V6. Can the maintainer of the list below update it? It's $75 through Napa. Autozone's computer reports "replacement not required". I was lucky, some GM dealers stock it. Thanks, Andrew Andrew Theurer wrote: > > When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 > bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a > search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that > is a reasonable price? > > -Andrew > > Bryan Zublin wrote: > > > > The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from > > Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar > > sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: > > http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html > > > > Bryan Zublin > > > > At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: > > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > > not for controlling EFI... > > > > Steve > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From spencerc@knology.net Sat Dec 22 01:08:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:09:45 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:09:45 -0300 From: "Spencer Cox" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor How do you determine how many bars a sensor has? Spencer -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Theurer Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 10:46 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: MAP Sensor When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that is a reasonable price? -Andrew Bryan Zublin wrote: > > The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one from > Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 bar > sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: > http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html > > Bryan Zublin > > At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > not for controlling EFI... > > Steve > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From houlster@user1.inficad.com Fri Dec 21 13:40:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:09:45 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:09:45 -0300 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? rob files wrote: > > But the real quesiton is why would you want to control boost with an SC > setup? The gas pedal does a real good job of it on it's own :). Well, it does if you get the pulley sizes right the first time :) This is all a DIY thing, and I just used strait math to come up with pulley sizes, then found junkyard pulleys as close as possible to adapt. But, I won't really know how much boost I'll have for sure until I fire it up. I was just looking for a safety type device that I could gradually remove to find what my max boost is going to be. The goal is to try these out, find out how much boost I'm really getting, then adjust accordingly with (hopefully, just one) new pulley. thanks --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From xinjin@pacbell.net Fri Dec 21 17:23:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:10:31 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:10:31 -0300 From: Xin Subject: wbo2 testing question I just got everything soldered. Applied 14 volts and I am getting 2.5 volt at J8. I am suspecting that I got iso1 in back wards. Here is my question, how do I tell which way the iso1 chip is up? There is a dot on a corner. Is that pin 1? If I do have it backwards, what is the best way of getting it out? Drill? thanks, Xin ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From steppper21@betline.ru Sat Dec 22 09:31:03 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:10:51 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:10:51 -0300 From: Michael Kosarev MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #955 Hello DIY_EFI, Can anyone recommend a good schematic of Digital Distributorless Ignition System? -- Best regards, Michael mailto:steppper21@betline.ru ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 22 11:37:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:11:08 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:11:08 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: eDIST, or ignition the final answer In case you haven't heard FAST has a neat little deal called eDIST that allows you to run the Coil Near Plug set up found on LS1 cars on other applications. In case you haven't been under the hood of a LS1, they have one ignition coil pwer cylinder. The one little gotcha in interfacing it is that to be sure you have a full time EST signal. On GM ecms they may not be a full time EST signal from the ECM. ie on the GNs it looks like there is a 250 rpm min threshold for the timing calculation. What I did was use a 1K pull up resistor, and then the coil triggers tied together as *point* signal, that inverted the signal, but the eDIST has a selector switch for correcting that. I just got mine running on my GN yesterday, so testing for the moment is scetchy. But, there does seem to be a noticable change in the way the car runs. If one ign coil is good, 3 must be better, and 6 is just enough More notes as things progress I can say the idle seems cleaner, my normal cruise TPS, is about .84v at 65, with the eDIST it's now at .8, thou the average might be closer to .78.. I doubt anyone has a lower throttle opening then I do for cruise, and to improve on it would take some doing, and, installing the eDIST did. I passed some cars in a 55 zone during the first test drive, and well, I was caught off guard with the way it responded. If you want to test a coil out by it's self just get one, and test fire it. But, be warned, it's high voltage, and stand well clear of it. The CNP stuff is impressive, deep dark blue spark. Bruce Now where is that new manifold . Yes, Dr., I'll be OK, you see the GN is running well. Oh a GN is a Buick with a Turbooo, ugh, yes, I understand.... ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Fri Dec 21 21:59:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:11:45 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:11:45 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed That's were I got hooked on this type of set up. Talking to Speedomotive about the bottem end. August over there want's to keep the stroke the same. I'm paying so, We're doing it my way. My AFR heads and roller cam should flow well under 14PSI of boost! Projecting 600-700 HP... ----- Original Message ----- From: "The Dupuis" To: Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 7:31 PM Subject: RE: Maximum Piston Speed > Brutal Snippage... > > > I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 > > inch rods. > > And then supercharging the set up. > > Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air > > flow appeals to me as well. > > Have a look at Hot Rod June '97: 400 block bored .030, 307/327 crank, Ford > 300 I-6 rods (6.209"), JE pistons, Air Flow Research 305- style heads, > 215/215 @.050" Comp camshaft, 11:1 C/R, 87 octane fuel, 412.3 hp @5700 and > 435.0 ft-lbs @3800, with 390 ft-lbs from 2400 to 5400 rpm. 350 cubes, very > little side loading, incredible torque curve (?, seems pretty flat to me)... > This could be my favourite engine, if only I were a chev guy. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From houlster@user1.inficad.com Fri Dec 21 13:28:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:12:12 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:12:12 -0300 From: Daniel Houlton MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: PWM an electromagnetic (A/C) clutch? Stephen Andersen wrote: > > How about PWM a bypass valve instead? I have been considering Yes, it sounds like that's what I'll be doing instead. I think it unanimous the clutches won't like being PWM'd, and I'm not even sure how hard it would be to adapt to my SC. --Dan houlster@inficad.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chrism@cnx.net Sat Dec 22 05:50:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:12:19 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:12:19 -0300 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: Re: LPG Injection. >The LPG injectors are commercially available in medium >quantities i.e. 100 or so from Siemens in Italy. > >The fuel is indeed circulated through the fuel rail in order to >stabilize >the temps in the rail. > >phil > > You wouldn't know of a source for a few would you? I think 100 is about 10 times as many as I need! Chris ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Sat Dec 22 02:00:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:13:01 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:13:01 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: SBC Turbo Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). Bruce http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From turbotuneusltd@triad.rr.com Sat Dec 22 02:22:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:13:23 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:13:23 -0300 From: "Mark S. Riley" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Increasing fuel pressure Tim, did you ever find anything of the supplier of the flow devices? Really like the idea and wish I had thought of it. Really would like to do it to a couple of toys. Mark ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2001 8:24 AM Subject: RE: Increasing fuel pressure > We found them in a "Machine Design" magazine. They have different > trip points at specific flow. They have a switched output that is either on > or off. What happens is when the flow decreases to a specific trip point, > the output switches. > > I think we went with anything less than about 6 oz / min flow = > trip. Price wasn't that bad either. I don't remember what we paid, sorry. > > I'll try and see if I can find the paperwork.......Tim. > > > > > Interesting, is this fuel flow monitor expensive? can you buy or make one? > > > > Steve > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ilphayunterhay@yahoo.com Sat Dec 22 12:00:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:18:35 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:18:35 -0300 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > When you went to Autozone, did you specify a > particular car for the 2 bar sensor? I need a 3 > bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require > a car to do a search. Does anyone know where the 3 > bar sensor is sold (online?) that is a reasonable > price? '89 Turbo Trans Am, 3.8L Additional info in recent archives, such as "hot stamp" numbers and colors to look for when scrounging, etc. regards, phil (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From w.shawsr@att.net Sun Dec 23 17:17:31 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:21:43 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:21:43 -0300 From: Bill Shaw MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: More wb_lcd pics I put up some more wb_lcd pictures. They're available at http://www.home.att.net/~w.shawsr/wb_lcd/wb_lcd21.jpg, wb_lcd22.jpg, wb_lcd23.jpg, wb_lcd24.jpg. wb_lcd21.jpg - open view showing wb-o2 regulator, power resistor & harness strain relief wb_lcd22.jpg - closed view showing harness entry wb_lcd23.jpg - top view of board stack wb_lcd24.jpg - side view of board stack Bill ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efahl@adams.com Fri Dec 21 12:48:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:24:27 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:24:27 -0300 From: Eric Fahlgren MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal Steve.Flanagan@verizonwireless.com wrote: > > Glen > > Do you have any incite as to the physics being used with that device. Off the top of my head, the aero force is Fa = 0.5 Rho Cd A V^2 where Rho = air density, use something like 1.225 kg/m^3 Cd = drag coefficient, probably 0.3-0.5, take a guess... A = "frontal area" of the vehicle, take a guess... V = velocity of the vehicle Good old F = ma is the other part m = mass of vehicle a = acceleration of the vehicle To get V, measure the delta between subsequent ignition pulses or VSS pulses or whatever, use the gear ratios and tire diameter to get the units into something useful. Differentiate a series of these V numbers to get a. Crudely (and maybe good enough, although I'd tend to think this would have a lot of noise): a = (Vn+1 - Vn) / dt dt = pulse length between the two V measurements So, crank it all out and you have one big F number, which turns out to be thrust at the contact patch. Turn this into T (engine torque delivered to the drive wheels) by dividing by the tire radius and multiplying by the rear end and transmission ratios, use the usual T*rpm/5252 to get RWHP. Note that this last exercise (computing RWT and RWHP) is pretty useless, in that even if you have a good grasp of Cd and A, you still need to contend with rolling and frictional losses to get "true" T and HP. Since rolling losses are proportional to velocity, you will see "lower" HP numbers as you shift through the gears; possibly the same thing happens in the gear box, but other than an automatic locking up, I can't judge which way the effect might go). To use such a setup, I'd say you'll need to pay very close attention to minimizing the change in external factors (road grade, wind speed, gear ratio and so on). On the other hand, just plotting the computed acceleration versus RPM might prove to be a good tuning aid, you can see where changes in tune are affecting acceleration without introducing a bunch of fudge factors. -- Eric Fahlgren Mechanical Dynamics, Inc efahl@adams.com Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From volvo4life@attbi.com Sat Dec 22 22:39:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:31:45 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:31:45 -0300 From: "Kris Weldy" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed Use the 350 block with the 400 crank(383 ci)-theres a low budget killer there.---Your friend, Kris Weldy Arlington Texas 88supra turbo auto 9.1 1/8th aim :volvofam3 -- yahoo:supratheonlywaytofly www.turboboss.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "yahoo" To: ; Sent: Monday, December 17, 2001 5:59 PM Subject: Maximum Piston Speed > > Maybe someone can help. I'm looking at turbocharging a small block > Chevrolet. The problem is which block do I use? I considered using a 400 > cu. in. small block, but am having second thoughts. The 400 cu. in. has a > 3.75" stroke and the 350 has a 3.5" (more or less) stroke. I had planed to > limit RPM to about 6500 RPM. But now I'm wondering if that number isn't > very much too high for the 400 small block with a turbo. > > I've tried to find some material on piston ring sealing, as I think that is > the primary problem with high piston speed on US designed engines. As it > turns out the maximum piston speed is at the same point that maximum torque > is being transferred to the crankshaft. Since I'm interested in stroker > engines that will have 100,000 mile lifetimes, I think that piston speed is > a particular problem. For example, a 3.5" stroke engine that has been > stroked to 3.75" has a maximum piston speed increase of 7%. All other > things being equal that is a HUGE increase. > > However the moment of inertia for the engine has been increased by the > square of the ratios (3.75^/3.5^2) which is 13%. Actually, there should be > more metal in the larger crankshaft since there is less overlap from main > journal to rod journal which exacerbates the moment of inertia effect. It > seems that with a high ratio rearend (so that the primary load at high > transmission ratios is engine inertia) will be adversely affected. In my > case, I'm more interested in a stump puller (boat actually) and would > consider the high ratio first gear a pain in the !@#$ most of the time, but > need it when pulling up the boat ramp. Since I'm not a racer, I don't > consider this important, but included it in the discussion for the sake of > completeness. > > Here's the question. Under high loads (turbocharged) what are the maximum > piston speeds that are associated with long life? > > Is there a need to provide extra fuel when under high load to 'save' the > rings? Maybe the real question is whether detonation is the only effect of > high power that kills the rings? > > Does a long rod help with piston skirt wear? Do they hurt? Is the offset > different with a long rod piston or does all pistons assume the 5.7" rod and > ignore the long term effects? > > I've heard that all pistons for 6" rods are built with NO offset because > most folks don't want the performance hit, and don't care about longevity. > I'm considering using a long rod and a 400 cu. in. piston with big pocket > heads (and a thick head gasket) to attain the piston offset. The target > compression ratio is 8.0:1 > > Are there bigger fish to fry? That is - ring speed the least of my trouble? > I once heard that because of gas action behind the ring, the ring actually > seals better under higher load. Does anyone know with certainty? > > Can I save the rings on a stroker by giving more fuel? > > dh > > > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Sun Dec 23 20:50:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:31:49 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:31:49 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." wrote: Sounds like a great project Tom. > My program is in it's very beggining stages, anyone wants to participate in > such project?. I'd suggest you provide an option where you can read a nice RPM signal via the games port (my generation of PCs still has the DB15). Most, if not all EFI vehicles, provide a square wave signal somewhere (that may need to be divided down in software). That nice signal should be easily read by a multitude of inputs, including a games port, a parallel port, a modem status line on a serial port, or, as a last resort, the kludge where the sound card is used. Contact me directly mailto:peter@techedge.com.au for any code fragments you may want for this project, or any help with a simple/low-cost hardware interface/buffer for any of these inputs. Sound card - yuk! (and I do appreciate that the sound card approach does work, but it's still a kludge, and mostly unnecessary). Peter. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Sun Dec 23 22:38:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:44:28 -0300 Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 23:44:28 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Home Dyno (was) Datalogging RPM signal Glen Beard tapped away at the keyboard with: > I don't know what the formulas are, but I know I have seen > them scattered on the web. The only ones that ever really > gave me trouble were drag coefficient, frontal area, > drivetrain loss, and tire diameter (because it grows from 15 > mph to 70 mph and is not accounted for). It only takes > being off by a little to really throw your curves off. Drag (Cd * A) can be measured by a high-speed coast-down and rolling resistance by low-speed coast-down tests. Procedure is described in the Bosch Automotive Handbook. Not just useful for engine tuning, but also selection of tyres and body mods. > Other than that... If you don't look at the output numbers > themselves, but instead keep everything constant and look at > the trends, it's a fairly repeatable tool for tuning. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 13:46:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:46:30 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:46:30 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: More wb_lcd pics The URL works better without the www. See modified URL below... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bill Shaw Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 12:18 PM To: diy-efi Subject: More wb_lcd pics I put up some more wb_lcd pictures. They're available at http://home.att.net/~w.shawsr/wb_lcd/wb_lcd21.jpg, wb_lcd22.jpg, wb_lcd23.jpg, wb_lcd24.jpg. wb_lcd21.jpg - open view showing wb-o2 regulator, power resistor & harness strain relief wb_lcd22.jpg - closed view showing harness entry wb_lcd23.jpg - top view of board stack wb_lcd24.jpg - side view of board stack Bill ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 13:46:50 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:46:50 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:46:50 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SBC Turbo Mind sending just the pics? I can't seem to load the page. Shannen Bruce wrote: > > Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. > Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). > Bruce > > http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 13:47:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:47:06 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:47:06 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost above atmospheric. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: Spencer Cox To: Sent: December 21, 2001 9:08 PM Subject: RE: MAP Sensor > How do you determine how many bars a sensor has? > > Spencer > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Andrew Theurer > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 10:46 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > > When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 > bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a > search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that > is a reasonable price? > > -Andrew > > Bryan Zublin wrote: > > > > The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one > from > > Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 > bar > > sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: > > http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html > > > > Bryan Zublin > > > > At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: > > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > > not for controlling EFI... > > > > Steve > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 13:47:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:47:30 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:47:30 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: fuel filter particle size Use a fuel / water seperator. They generally use a large volume, and that allows the silt just gravitate to the bottom. Any filter that does a real good job with fuel plugs up quickly. Depending on the condition of your tank, and fuel you buy, you'll be amazed with the silt they accumulate. Bruce From: Subject: fuel filter particle size > What is the max allowable particle size for an EFI motor? I've been considering going over to one of the Racor style (used to be Oberg)reusable filters...the smallest screen they have is a 20 micron without going to a paper element. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 13:48:07 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:48:07 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:48:07 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: SBC Turbo Now that is a guy with total dis-regard for aesthetics, & both eyes firmly focused on ET's, LOL. Gotta love it!!! thanks for sharing BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 9:00 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: SBC Turbo Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). Bruce http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 13:48:23 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:48:23 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:48:23 -0800 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Maximum Piston Speed Brutal Snippage... > I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 > inch rods. > And then supercharging the set up. > Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air > flow appeals to me as well. Have a look at Hot Rod June '97: 400 block bored .030, 307/327 crank, Ford 300 I-6 rods (6.209"), JE pistons, Air Flow Research 305- style heads, 215/215 @.050" Comp camshaft, 11:1 C/R, 87 octane fuel, 412.3 hp @5700 and 435.0 ft-lbs @3800, with 390 ft-lbs from 2400 to 5400 rpm. 350 cubes, very little side loading, incredible torque curve (?, seems pretty flat to me)... This could be my favourite engine, if only I were a chev guy. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 13:48:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:48:44 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:48:44 -0800 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: RE: LPG Injection. I've heard that they self-destruct due to the lack of lubrication provided by LPG, plus the fact that the fuel rail pressure will need to be at least 300 PSI. I'm looking for a couple of cheap injectors to try though. No luck yet unfortunately :( As for valve seats, for LPG hardened valve seats are a MUST. I've been told LPG is very hard on old, non hardened, valve seats for leaded gas. Chris >Sorry I came in late on this one, but what happens if you try to use a >'conventional' electronic fuel injector with LPG ? > >I know LPG has some things going for it. I had this 76 dodge pickup with a >440 that was on propane since almost new (had 140 gallons total capacity!) >fuel system always worked good (emco on holley baseplate) only trouble it >had was the chrysler ignition system(installed GM HEI module and cured it). >At about 350,000 miles or so it suddenly wouldnt hardly run so I tore the >engine down. The interior was quite clean and had VERY little sludge, >bearings looked good, and the cylinders had almost no ridge and good looking >bores. > >The problem was that the valve seats finaly CRUMBLED. Some were totaly GONE >and most were spider-webbed and falling apart. When the valves were removed >most of the seats were removed by hand. >I've seen valve seats fail in gas engines(petrol for some) but nothing like >this, it was downright STRANGE. Ever seen this?? > >Marvin Fugate (always looking for more power) > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 13:49:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:49:37 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:49:37 -0800 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RS232 interface for the Fuel Mixture Display (KC-5300 kit) I promised to describe the simple changes to the KC-5300 Fuel Mixture Display kit that gives it RS232 output capability at 19,200 baud, at a repeat rate of 220 mSec/value. If you have the kit already, you just need three extra resistors, and the version 1.1 PIC software (the kit already comes with the transistor)! Fairly brief, but complete details here: http://www.techedge.com.au/vehicle/wbo2/fmdrs232.htm I'm still playing with the PC software to log the values, more details soon. Remember, the FMD and PC software is free for non-commercial users. Merry Xmas! Peter. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 14:07:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:50:00 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:50:00 -0800 From: Phil Lamovie MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LPG Injection. Trying to set up the system is a lot more complicated than you would at first imagine. It may even be illegal in your State/Country. You need to deal with all the fuel system issues and calculate the peak mass flow of LPG that you require. The injectors are available in 6 varying flow rates. For those interested there are a few patented versions worth a look at. Try google and "Liquiphase" or the US patent gifs are free phil ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 14:13:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:50:29 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:50:29 -0800 From: "Ron Schroeder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts > Hello diy_efi, > > It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under > knocking on that website > (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock > the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as > well, why is that? Probably ringing and reverberation Ron Schroeder WD8CDH day 631 344-4561 nite 631 286-5677 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 14:08:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:50:54 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:50:54 -0800 From: Phil Lamovie MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LPG Injection.with conventional injector The short answer is on a hot day it won't open. The system pressure is always somewhere between 0 & 350 psi. That's about 10 times higher than a normal petrol system. Our first systems used 12 ohm injectors with 60 volt S/M power supplies. That was not a lot of fun and the voltages were illegal in Oz. Your valve seats were missing the lead or the replacement for it. They were also subjected to greater heat stress than they would expect with petrol. The very high temps in the combustion can also manufacture some quite corrosive gases. Material selection is the key for good valve and seat life. Some taxis get 900,000 kms or about 500,000 miles on a set. phil ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Mon Dec 24 13:58:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:51:16 -0800 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 13:51:16 -0800 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: wbo2 testing question Yes, the dot is pin 1 on iso1. Without a sensor hooked up the heater ready LED should come on within 10 seconds. Then J8 will move from 2.5 V. BobR. Xin wrote: > I just got everything soldered. Applied 14 volts and I am getting 2.5 > volt at J8. > > I am suspecting that I got iso1 in back wards. Here is my question, how > do I tell > which way the iso1 chip is up? There is a dot on a corner. Is that pin > 1? > > If I do have it backwards, what is the best way of getting it out? > Drill? > > thanks, > > Xin > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From chrism@cnx.net Mon Dec 24 07:40:06 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:17 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:17 -0300 From: Chris McKinnon Subject: RE: LPG Injection. I've heard that they self-destruct due to the lack of lubrication provided by LPG, plus the fact that the fuel rail pressure will need to be at least 300 PSI. I'm looking for a couple of cheap injectors to try though. No luck yet unfortunately :( As for valve seats, for LPG hardened valve seats are a MUST. I've been told LPG is very hard on old, non hardened, valve seats for leaded gas. Chris >Sorry I came in late on this one, but what happens if you try to use a >'conventional' electronic fuel injector with LPG ? > >I know LPG has some things going for it. I had this 76 dodge pickup with a >440 that was on propane since almost new (had 140 gallons total capacity!) >fuel system always worked good (emco on holley baseplate) only trouble it >had was the chrysler ignition system(installed GM HEI module and cured it). >At about 350,000 miles or so it suddenly wouldnt hardly run so I tore the >engine down. The interior was quite clean and had VERY little sludge, >bearings looked good, and the cylinders had almost no ridge and good looking >bores. > >The problem was that the valve seats finaly CRUMBLED. Some were totaly GONE >and most were spider-webbed and falling apart. When the valves were removed >most of the seats were removed by hand. >I've seen valve seats fail in gas engines(petrol for some) but nothing like >this, it was downright STRANGE. Ever seen this?? > >Marvin Fugate (always looking for more power) > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From dupuis10@telusplanet.net Thu Dec 20 21:54:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:17 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:17 -0300 From: "The Dupuis" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Maximum Piston Speed Brutal Snippage... > I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 > inch rods. > And then supercharging the set up. > Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air > flow appeals to me as well. Have a look at Hot Rod June '97: 400 block bored .030, 307/327 crank, Ford 300 I-6 rods (6.209"), JE pistons, Air Flow Research 305- style heads, 215/215 @.050" Comp camshaft, 11:1 C/R, 87 octane fuel, 412.3 hp @5700 and 435.0 ft-lbs @3800, with 390 ft-lbs from 2400 to 5400 rpm. 350 cubes, very little side loading, incredible torque curve (?, seems pretty flat to me)... This could be my favourite engine, if only I were a chev guy. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Mon Dec 24 02:51:02 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:17 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:17 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: SBC Turbo Now that is a guy with total dis-regard for aesthetics, & both eyes firmly focused on ET's, LOL. Gotta love it!!! thanks for sharing BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Friday, December 21, 2001 9:00 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: SBC Turbo Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). Bruce http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Mon Dec 24 16:21:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:27 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:27 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost above atmospheric. Lyndon ----- Original Message ----- From: Spencer Cox To: Sent: December 21, 2001 9:08 PM Subject: RE: MAP Sensor > How do you determine how many bars a sensor has? > > Spencer > > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On > Behalf Of Andrew Theurer > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 10:46 AM > To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > > When you went to Autozone, did you specificy a particular car for the 2 > bar sensor? I need a 3 bar and noticed there is no factory car that > applies, and the drones at every parts store require a car to do a > search. Does anyone know where the 3 bar sensor is sold (online?) that > is a reasonable price? > > -Andrew > > Bryan Zublin wrote: > > > > The GM MAP sensors are probably the cheapest. I purchased a new one > from > > Autozone for $30. It was made by Wells, part number SU-129 for the 2 > bar > > sensor (good for 1 bar of boost). Part numbers listed at: > > http://www.diy-efi.org/gmecm/component_info/sensors.html > > > > Bryan Zublin > > > > At 09:47 PM 12/10/2001 -0500, you wrote: > > Got any recommendations for a nice 5V MAP sensor for 1bar boost > > applications, either wrecker or new? I found one at Omega for > > like $5, but I wanted to know if there is something else > > available. In my case it is just for logging vacuum/boost, > > not for controlling EFI... > > > > Steve > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > ---- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the > quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 24 01:53:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:39 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 18:57:39 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: fuel filter particle size Use a fuel / water seperator. They generally use a large volume, and that allows the silt just gravitate to the bottom. Any filter that does a real good job with fuel plugs up quickly. Depending on the condition of your tank, and fuel you buy, you'll be amazed with the silt they accumulate. Bruce From: Subject: fuel filter particle size > What is the max allowable particle size for an EFI motor? I've been considering going over to one of the Racor style (used to be Oberg)reusable filters...the smallest screen they have is a 20 micron without going to a paper element. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Mon Dec 24 00:44:48 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:00:30 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:00:30 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SBC Turbo Mind sending just the pics? I can't seem to load the page. Shannen Bruce wrote: > > Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. > Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). > Bruce > > http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From peter@techedge.com.au Mon Dec 24 08:10:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:00:37 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:00:37 -0300 From: Peter Gargano MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RS232 interface for the Fuel Mixture Display (KC-5300 kit) I promised to describe the simple changes to the KC-5300 Fuel Mixture Display kit that gives it RS232 output capability at 19,200 baud, at a repeat rate of 220 mSec/value. If you have the kit already, you just need three extra resistors, and the version 1.1 PIC software (the kit already comes with the transistor)! Fairly brief, but complete details here: http://www.techedge.com.au/vehicle/wbo2/fmdrs232.htm I'm still playing with the PC software to log the values, more details soon. Remember, the FMD and PC software is free for non-commercial users. Merry Xmas! Peter. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Mon Dec 24 00:13:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:01:15 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:01:15 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: More wb_lcd pics The URL works better without the www. See modified URL below... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bill Shaw Sent: Sunday, December 23, 2001 12:18 PM To: diy-efi Subject: More wb_lcd pics I put up some more wb_lcd pictures. They're available at http://home.att.net/~w.shawsr/wb_lcd/wb_lcd21.jpg, wb_lcd22.jpg, wb_lcd23.jpg, wb_lcd24.jpg. wb_lcd21.jpg - open view showing wb-o2 regulator, power resistor & harness strain relief wb_lcd22.jpg - closed view showing harness entry wb_lcd23.jpg - top view of board stack wb_lcd24.jpg - side view of board stack Bill ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From RRauscher@nni.com Mon Dec 24 14:05:33 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:01:39 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:01:39 -0300 From: rr MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: wbo2 testing question Yes, the dot is pin 1 on iso1. Without a sensor hooked up the heater ready LED should come on within 10 seconds. Then J8 will move from 2.5 V. BobR. Xin wrote: > I just got everything soldered. Applied 14 volts and I am getting 2.5 > volt at J8. > > I am suspecting that I got iso1 in back wards. Here is my question, how > do I tell > which way the iso1 chip is up? There is a dot on a corner. Is that pin > 1? > > If I do have it backwards, what is the best way of getting it out? > Drill? > > thanks, > > Xin > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From phil@injec.com Mon Dec 24 10:09:55 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:09:33 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:09:33 -0300 From: Phil Lamovie MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LPG Injection. Trying to set up the system is a lot more complicated than you would at first imagine. It may even be illegal in your State/Country. You need to deal with all the fuel system issues and calculate the peak mass flow of LPG that you require. The injectors are available in 6 varying flow rates. For those interested there are a few patented versions worth a look at. Try google and "Liquiphase" or the US patent gifs are free phil ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From phil@injec.com Mon Dec 24 10:27:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:09:55 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:09:55 -0300 From: Phil Lamovie MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: LPG Injection.with conventional injector The short answer is on a hot day it won't open. The system pressure is always somewhere between 0 & 350 psi. That's about 10 times higher than a normal petrol system. Our first systems used 12 ohm injectors with 60 volt S/M power supplies. That was not a lot of fun and the voltages were illegal in Oz. Your valve seats were missing the lead or the replacement for it. They were also subjected to greater heat stress than they would expect with petrol. The very high temps in the combustion can also manufacture some quite corrosive gases. Material selection is the key for good valve and seat life. Some taxis get 900,000 kms or about 500,000 miles on a set. phil ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From rjs@bnl.gov Mon Dec 24 10:22:12 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:21:34 -0300 Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 19:21:34 -0300 From: "Ron Schroeder" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts > Hello diy_efi, > > It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under > knocking on that website > (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock > the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as > well, why is that? Probably ringing and reverberation Ron Schroeder WD8CDH day 631 344-4561 nite 631 286-5677 ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:41:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:41:39 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:41:39 -0800 From: Moofaloof@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDIST, or ignition the final answer --part1_45.111b5eaf.29590330_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've been wanting to try the eDist for a while now. How did you mount the LS1 coil packs Bruce ? Any interference problems with between coil and/or plug wires and headers? In a message dated 12/23/01 9:02:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes: > In case you haven't heard FAST has a neat little deal called eDIST that > allows you to run the Coil Near Plug set up found on LS1 cars on other > applications. In case you haven't been under the hood of a LS1, they have > one ignition coil pwer cylinder. > The one little gotcha in interfacing it is that to be sure you have a > full > time EST signal. On GM ecms they may not be a full time EST signal from > the > ECM. ie on the GNs it looks like there is a 250 rpm min threshold for the > timing calculation. What I did was use a 1K pull up resistor, and then > the > coil triggers tied together as *point* signal, that inverted the signal, > but > the eDIST has a selector switch for correcting that. > I just got mine running on my GN yesterday, so testing for the moment is > scetchy. But, there does seem to be a noticable change in the way the car > runs. > If one ign coil is good, 3 must be better, and 6 is just enough > More notes as things progress > I can say the idle seems cleaner, my normal cruise TPS, is about .84v at > 65, with the eDIST it's now at .8, thou the average might be closer to > .78.. > I doubt anyone has a lower throttle opening then I do for cruise, and to > improve on it would take some doing, and, installing the eDIST did. I > passed some cars in a 55 zone during the first test drive, and well, I was > caught off guard with the way it responded --part1_45.111b5eaf.29590330_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've been wanting to try the eDist for a while now.  How did you mount the LS1 coil packs Bruce ?  Any interference problems with between coil and/or plug wires and headers?



In a message dated 12/23/01 9:02:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes:


  In case you haven't heard FAST has a neat little deal called eDIST that
allows you to run the Coil Near Plug set up found on LS1 cars on other
applications.  In case you haven't been under the hood of a LS1, they have
one ignition coil pwer cylinder.
  The one little gotcha in interfacing it is that to be sure you have a full
time EST signal.  On GM ecms they may not be a full time EST signal from the
ECM.  ie on the GNs it looks like there is a 250 rpm min threshold for the
timing calculation.   What I did was use a 1K pull up resistor, and then the
coil triggers tied together as *point* signal, that inverted the signal, but
the eDIST has a selector switch for correcting that.
  I just got mine running on my GN yesterday, so testing for the moment is
scetchy.  But, there does seem to be a noticable change in the way the car
runs.
  If one ign coil is good,  3 must be better,  and 6 is just enough <g>
More notes as things progress
  I can say the idle seems cleaner, my normal cruise TPS, is about .84v at
65, with the eDIST it's now at .8, thou the average might be closer to .78..
I doubt anyone has a lower throttle opening then I do for cruise, and to
improve on it would take some doing, and, installing the eDIST did.   I
passed some cars in a 55 zone during the first test drive, and well, I was
caught off guard with the way it responded


 --part1_45.111b5eaf.29590330_boundary-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:42:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:42:18 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:42:18 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Maximum Piston Speed At 5:54 PM 12/20/01, The Dupuis wrote: >Brutal Snippage... > >> I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 >> inch rods. >> And then supercharging the set up. >> Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air >> flow appeals to me as well. > >Have a look at Hot Rod June '97: 400 block bored .030, 307/327 crank, Same bore and stroke (4-1/8" x 3-1/4") as the old Chubby 348 fat blocks had. Hmmmmm. Greg >This could be my favourite engine, if only I were a chev guy. > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:42:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:42:30 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:42:30 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts I'd just like to see a graph of what *their* version of detonation looks like. I'm just leery of most advertiseing *engineering graphs*. Bruce From: "Ron Schroeder" Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts > > It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under > > knocking on that website > > (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock > > the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as > > well, why is that? > Probably ringing and reverberation > Ron Schroeder ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:44:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:44:08 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:44:08 -0800 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Arnie qualifies with: For reference let it be known that 1 bar is NOT equal to 1 atmosphere. I bar is equal to 14.5 psi. Care should be taken when comparing apples to oranges. Programmer wrote: 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost above atmospheric. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:44:44 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:44:44 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:44:44 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob - Uni" Subject: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts > It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under > knocking on that website > (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock > the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as > well, why is that? > BW> According to the people who make some money from it, > BW> (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where > BW> you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's > BW> no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for > BW> vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler > BW> (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. Up stream of the intercooler can lead to excessive corrosion of the intercooler. Not all are meant to deal with really high water temps, or stream. The erosive, and corrosive effects of steam shouldn't be ignored. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:46:08 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:46:08 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:46:08 -0800 From: "The Punisher" Subject: RE: LPG Injection. very interesting. Anybody try a constant flow type injector?? of course this would end up being similar to the servo controlled K-Jetronic I was thinking about earlier this year(still want to try it if I get time). A high speed servoconnected to a small barrel valve feeding a fuel block, that the constant flow injectors are connected to. Unfortunatly this setup may be prone to inject gas instead of liquid at low flow rates. >From: Chris McKinnon >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: RE: LPG Injection. >Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 03:40:06 -0700 (MST) > >I've heard that they self-destruct due to the lack of lubrication provided >by LPG, plus the fact that the fuel rail pressure will need to be at least >300 PSI. I'm looking for a couple of cheap injectors to try though. No luck >yet unfortunately :( > >As for valve seats, for LPG hardened valve seats are a MUST. I've been told >LPG is very hard on old, non hardened, valve seats for leaded gas. > > >Chris > > >Sorry I came in late on this one, but what happens if you try to use a > >'conventional' electronic fuel injector with LPG ? > > > >I know LPG has some things going for it. I had this 76 dodge pickup with >a > >440 that was on propane since almost new (had 140 gallons total >capacity!) > >fuel system always worked good (emco on holley baseplate) only trouble it > >had was the chrysler ignition system(installed GM HEI module and cured >it). > >At about 350,000 miles or so it suddenly wouldnt hardly run so I tore the > >engine down. The interior was quite clean and had VERY little sludge, > >bearings looked good, and the cylinders had almost no ridge and good >looking > >bores. > > > >The problem was that the valve seats finaly CRUMBLED. Some were totaly >GONE > >and most were spider-webbed and falling apart. When the valves were >removed > >most of the seats were removed by hand. > >I've seen valve seats fail in gas engines(petrol for some) but nothing >like > >this, it was downright STRANGE. Ever seen this?? > > > >Marvin Fugate (always looking for more power) > > > > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:46:28 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:46:28 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:46:28 -0800 From: SteveL Subject: Re: SBC Turbo At 12:00 AM 22-12-01 -0500, you wrote: > >Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. >Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). >Bruce > > http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html For the Ford fans out there; http://members.tripod.com/~Red_Header/rrttm.html Merry merry, Happy happy... Steve L ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:46:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:46:45 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Adding a gas tank return In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. The fuel tank has 3 lines, one out to pump charcoal canister fuel return The fuel out is fine. The pump needs a return line to the tank we need a fuel return and a vent line The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below the fuel level. Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the sender is the only answer. TIA Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:47:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:47:20 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:47:20 -0800 From: Dylan Johnson MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Bosch bins I'm looking for the bin from a 87-88 Peugeot 505 V6 NA. Awhile back one of the list members was working on a collection of Bosch bins but I can't find the URL to his site. Does anyone have it? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Wed Dec 26 13:47:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:47:36 -0800 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 13:47:36 -0800 From: Erik Quackenbush Subject: Re: Air/Fuel Monitor When I put an A/F meter in my TR6 I started with a bar graph LED display like you but I later switched to an analog gauge from Westach (http://www.westach.com) which I find MUCH easier to read in bright sunlight. The other problem I had with the LED display is that it changed so quickly that I spent too much time looking at it and not enough looking at the road. The needle on my analog gauge moves slowly and give me a much better idea of my average A/F ratio at idle and cruise. I suppose you could put a low pass filter on the input to the LED display for the same effect but the needle gauge looks right at home under my dash. For a much more accurate A/F meter you might want to look into the DIY-wideband O2 sensor project from the DIY-EFI (http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/) mailing list. Standard O2 sensors are only accurate for a small range around stoichiometric and thus are only useful to indicate rich or lean. A wideband sensor (found on Honda ultra low emission engines) is accurate enough to tell you precisely HOW rich or lean you are but you need a special signal conditioning circuit to use one. I haven't built mine yet so I can't report any results. The 5-wire wideband sensors are expensive ($120 and up) but some generous individuals on the DIY-EFI mailing list have arranged for group purchases of printed circuit boards and component kits for around $20 and they may have some left. -Erik At 07:08 AM 12/26/2001 -0500, Nelson Riedel wrote: >I've spent much December playing with an homemade Air/Fuel Monitor. There was >some interest when mentioned on the 6PACK list last week so passing it on >here. Some of you in the north might find it a good winter project. Details >are on Buckeye Triumphs website for anyone interested. The link below goes to >the Buckeye Triumphs Technical page. Scroll down to the area on TR250/TR6 >carbs then click on "Air/Fuel Monitor" or "Using Air/Fuel Monitor" > > http://www.buckeyetriumphs.org/index_technical.htm > >Have fun -- Erik Quackenbush, Midwest Filter Corporation 1-847-680-0566 http://www.midwestfilter.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From canzus@seanet.com Tue Dec 25 12:44:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:05:46 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:05:46 -0300 From: SteveL Subject: Re: SBC Turbo At 12:00 AM 22-12-01 -0500, you wrote: > >Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. >Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). >Bruce > > http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html For the Ford fans out there; http://members.tripod.com/~Red_Header/rrttm.html Merry merry, Happy happy... Steve L ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Moofaloof@aol.com Mon Dec 24 19:16:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:05:47 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:05:47 -0300 From: Moofaloof@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDIST, or ignition the final answer --part1_45.111b5eaf.29590330_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've been wanting to try the eDist for a while now. How did you mount the LS1 coil packs Bruce ? Any interference problems with between coil and/or plug wires and headers? In a message dated 12/23/01 9:02:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes: > In case you haven't heard FAST has a neat little deal called eDIST that > allows you to run the Coil Near Plug set up found on LS1 cars on other > applications. In case you haven't been under the hood of a LS1, they have > one ignition coil pwer cylinder. > The one little gotcha in interfacing it is that to be sure you have a > full > time EST signal. On GM ecms they may not be a full time EST signal from > the > ECM. ie on the GNs it looks like there is a 250 rpm min threshold for the > timing calculation. What I did was use a 1K pull up resistor, and then > the > coil triggers tied together as *point* signal, that inverted the signal, > but > the eDIST has a selector switch for correcting that. > I just got mine running on my GN yesterday, so testing for the moment is > scetchy. But, there does seem to be a noticable change in the way the car > runs. > If one ign coil is good, 3 must be better, and 6 is just enough > More notes as things progress > I can say the idle seems cleaner, my normal cruise TPS, is about .84v at > 65, with the eDIST it's now at .8, thou the average might be closer to > .78.. > I doubt anyone has a lower throttle opening then I do for cruise, and to > improve on it would take some doing, and, installing the eDIST did. I > passed some cars in a 55 zone during the first test drive, and well, I was > caught off guard with the way it responded --part1_45.111b5eaf.29590330_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've been wanting to try the eDist for a while now.  How did you mount the LS1 coil packs Bruce ?  Any interference problems with between coil and/or plug wires and headers?



In a message dated 12/23/01 9:02:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes:


  In case you haven't heard FAST has a neat little deal called eDIST that
allows you to run the Coil Near Plug set up found on LS1 cars on other
applications.  In case you haven't been under the hood of a LS1, they have
one ignition coil pwer cylinder.
  The one little gotcha in interfacing it is that to be sure you have a full
time EST signal.  On GM ecms they may not be a full time EST signal from the
ECM.  ie on the GNs it looks like there is a 250 rpm min threshold for the
timing calculation.   What I did was use a 1K pull up resistor, and then the
coil triggers tied together as *point* signal, that inverted the signal, but
the eDIST has a selector switch for correcting that.
  I just got mine running on my GN yesterday, so testing for the moment is
scetchy.  But, there does seem to be a noticable change in the way the car
runs.
  If one ign coil is good,  3 must be better,  and 6 is just enough <g>
More notes as things progress
  I can say the idle seems cleaner, my normal cruise TPS, is about .84v at
65, with the eDIST it's now at .8, thou the average might be closer to .78..
I doubt anyone has a lower throttle opening then I do for cruise, and to
improve on it would take some doing, and, installing the eDIST did.   I
passed some cars in a 55 zone during the first test drive, and well, I was
caught off guard with the way it responded


 --part1_45.111b5eaf.29590330_boundary-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Tue Dec 25 22:21:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:06:02 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:06:02 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Adding a gas tank return In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. The fuel tank has 3 lines, one out to pump charcoal canister fuel return The fuel out is fine. The pump needs a return line to the tank we need a fuel return and a vent line The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below the fuel level. Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the sender is the only answer. TIA Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From punisher454@hotmail.com Tue Dec 25 06:56:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:06:14 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:06:14 -0300 From: "The Punisher" Subject: RE: LPG Injection. very interesting. Anybody try a constant flow type injector?? of course this would end up being similar to the servo controlled K-Jetronic I was thinking about earlier this year(still want to try it if I get time). A high speed servoconnected to a small barrel valve feeding a fuel block, that the constant flow injectors are connected to. Unfortunatly this setup may be prone to inject gas instead of liquid at low flow rates. From: Chris McKinnon >Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: RE: LPG Injection. >Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 03:40:06 -0700 (MST) > >I've heard that they self-destruct due to the lack of lubrication provided >by LPG, plus the fact that the fuel rail pressure will need to be at least >300 PSI. I'm looking for a couple of cheap injectors to try though. No luck >yet unfortunately :( > >As for valve seats, for LPG hardened valve seats are a MUST. I've been told >LPG is very hard on old, non hardened, valve seats for leaded gas. > > >Chris > > >Sorry I came in late on this one, but what happens if you try to use a > >'conventional' electronic fuel injector with LPG ? > > > >I know LPG has some things going for it. I had this 76 dodge pickup with >a > >440 that was on propane since almost new (had 140 gallons total >capacity!) > >fuel system always worked good (emco on holley baseplate) only trouble it > >had was the chrysler ignition system(installed GM HEI module and cured >it). > >At about 350,000 miles or so it suddenly wouldnt hardly run so I tore the > >engine down. The interior was quite clean and had VERY little sludge, > >bearings looked good, and the cylinders had almost no ridge and good >looking > >bores. > > > >The problem was that the valve seats finaly CRUMBLED. Some were totaly >GONE > >and most were spider-webbed and falling apart. When the valves were >removed > >most of the seats were removed by hand. > >I've seen valve seats fail in gas engines(petrol for some) but nothing >like > >this, it was downright STRANGE. Ever seen this?? > > > >Marvin Fugate (always looking for more power) > > > > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From arnie@nconnect.net Mon Dec 24 22:38:42 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:06:15 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:06:15 -0300 From: Gary Schaumberg MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Arnie qualifies with: For reference let it be known that 1 bar is NOT equal to 1 atmosphere. I bar is equal to 14.5 psi. Care should be taken when comparing apples to oranges. Programmer wrote: 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost above atmospheric. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 24 23:16:46 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:06:40 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:06:40 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts From: "Bob - Uni" Subject: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts > It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under > knocking on that website > (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock > the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as > well, why is that? > BW> According to the people who make some money from it, > BW> (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where > BW> you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's > BW> no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for > BW> vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler > BW> (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. Up stream of the intercooler can lead to excessive corrosion of the intercooler. Not all are meant to deal with really high water temps, or stream. The erosive, and corrosive effects of steam shouldn't be ignored. Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From DJohnson@cancorpam.com Wed Dec 26 10:26:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:07:38 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:07:38 -0300 From: Dylan Johnson MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Bosch bins I'm looking for the bin from a 87-88 Peugeot 505 V6 NA. Awhile back one of the list members was working on a collection of Bosch bins but I can't find the URL to his site. Does anyone have it? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Mon Dec 24 19:33:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:08:00 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:08:00 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: Maximum Piston Speed At 5:54 PM 12/20/01, The Dupuis wrote: >Brutal Snippage... > >> I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 >> inch rods. >> And then supercharging the set up. >> Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air >> flow appeals to me as well. > >Have a look at Hot Rod June '97: 400 block bored .030, 307/327 crank, Same bore and stroke (4-1/8" x 3-1/4") as the old Chubby 348 fat blocks had. Hmmmmm. Greg >This could be my favourite engine, if only I were a chev guy. > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Mon Dec 24 21:15:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:08:01 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:08:01 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts I'd just like to see a graph of what *their* version of detonation looks like. I'm just leery of most advertiseing *engineering graphs*. Bruce From: "Ron Schroeder" Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts > > It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under > > knocking on that website > > (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock > > the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as > > well, why is that? > Probably ringing and reverberation > Ron Schroeder ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From erik@midwestfilter.com Wed Dec 26 12:49:38 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:09:04 -0300 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 19:09:04 -0300 From: Erik Quackenbush Subject: Re: Air/Fuel Monitor When I put an A/F meter in my TR6 I started with a bar graph LED display like you but I later switched to an analog gauge from Westach (http://www.westach.com) which I find MUCH easier to read in bright sunlight. The other problem I had with the LED display is that it changed so quickly that I spent too much time looking at it and not enough looking at the road. The needle on my analog gauge moves slowly and give me a much better idea of my average A/F ratio at idle and cruise. I suppose you could put a low pass filter on the input to the LED display for the same effect but the needle gauge looks right at home under my dash. For a much more accurate A/F meter you might want to look into the DIY-wideband O2 sensor project from the DIY-EFI (http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/) mailing list. Standard O2 sensors are only accurate for a small range around stoichiometric and thus are only useful to indicate rich or lean. A wideband sensor (found on Honda ultra low emission engines) is accurate enough to tell you precisely HOW rich or lean you are but you need a special signal conditioning circuit to use one. I haven't built mine yet so I can't report any results. The 5-wire wideband sensors are expensive ($120 and up) but some generous individuals on the DIY-EFI mailing list have arranged for group purchases of printed circuit boards and component kits for around $20 and they may have some left. -Erik At 07:08 AM 12/26/2001 -0500, Nelson Riedel wrote: >I've spent much December playing with an homemade Air/Fuel Monitor. There was >some interest when mentioned on the 6PACK list last week so passing it on >here. Some of you in the north might find it a good winter project. Details >are on Buckeye Triumphs website for anyone interested. The link below goes to >the Buckeye Triumphs Technical page. Scroll down to the area on TR250/TR6 >carbs then click on "Air/Fuel Monitor" or "Using Air/Fuel Monitor" > > http://www.buckeyetriumphs.org/index_technical.htm > >Have fun -- Erik Quackenbush, Midwest Filter Corporation 1-847-680-0566 http://www.midwestfilter.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:06:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:06:29 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:06:29 -0800 From: ECMnut@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return Hey Bruce, why does the return line have to be above the fuel level? Thanks, Mike V In a message dated 12/26/2001 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes: > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below > the fuel level. > > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > > Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the > sender is the only answer. > TIA > Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:06:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:06:45 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:06:45 -0800 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Bosch bins I'm also looking for a .bin for my Bosch LH Jetronic 2.4 ECU in my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. So far, no luck. I was told to look at the archive files on the DIY-EFI website but I have not been able to access the site. Any help is much appreciated! -----Original Message----- From: Dylan Johnson [SMTP:DJohnson@cancorpam.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 8:27 AM To: 'diy_efi@diy-efi.org' Subject: Bosch bins I'm looking for the bin from a 87-88 Peugeot 505 V6 NA. Awhile back one of the list members was working on a collection of Bosch bins but I can't find the URL to his site. Does anyone have it? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:07:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:07:04 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:07:04 -0800 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor I stand corrected 1 atmosphere (1kgf/cm) is 14.22 pound per square in. 1 Bar is 100 kPa 100 kPa is 14.5 PSI 1 Bar is 0.98692 of an Atmosphere Close enough ? Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Schaumberg" To: Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 6:38 PM Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > Arnie qualifies with: > > For reference let it be known that 1 bar is NOT equal to 1 atmosphere. > I bar is equal to 14.5 psi. Care should be taken when comparing apples > to oranges. > > > Programmer wrote: > > 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). > So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost > above atmospheric. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:07:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:07:25 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:07:25 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts At 9:16 PM 12/24/01, Bruce wrote: >From: "Bob - Uni" >Subject: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts >> It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under >> knocking on that website >> (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock >> the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as >> well, why is that? >> BW> According to the people who make some money from it, >> BW> (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where >> BW> you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's >> BW> no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for >> BW> vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler >> BW> (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. > >Up stream of the intercooler can lead to excessive corrosion of the >intercooler. Not all are meant to deal with really high water temps, or >stream. The erosive, and corrosive effects of steam shouldn't be ignored. >Bruce For those with a serious concern about corrosion of IC's, there is a coating called "Heresite" which is used on aluminium finned HVAC coils which are going to see unusually corrosive environments. It is not as good as copper fins, which of course is a lot more $$$, but it works pretty well, and doesn't screw up the heat transfer excessively. Don't know for sure, but it can probably only be applied to the outside (ambient air) surfaces of an IC coil. BUT--there are some big (huge might be a more appropriate word) gains in IC efficiency which can be had by spraying a water mist on the ambient air side, so----- Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:07:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:07:49 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:07:49 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts At 7:15 PM 12/24/01, Bruce wrote: >I'd just like to see a graph of what *their* version of detonation looks >like. I'm just leery of most advertiseing *engineering graphs*. >Bruce I've seen similar graphs showing the (very) pronounced pressure oscillations during detonation events in Obert's book, among others. Obert is hardly an "advertiser", in fact he's pretty doggone rigorous. Greg > > > >From: "Ron Schroeder" >Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts >> > It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under >> > knocking on that website >> > (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock >> > the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as >> > well, why is that? > >> Probably ringing and reverberation >> Ron Schroeder ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:08:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:08:01 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:08:01 -0800 From: Antti Lehtonen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AMF & efi.. Hi, newbie to group, some odd infos needed.. Anyone know how does bosch air flow meter talk to motronic ecu? I mean the heated platinium wire thing, are those bosch books sold in amazon.com telling this info? Don't want use big 'euros' to book I don't need. Another one, is there any completed carb to efi conversion to 4cyl vag type engines? You have pulse width meter project, could it be used adjust injector to maintain lamba sensor reading to near-rich, simplest carburator replacement I could figure out, just too simple to work? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:08:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:08:32 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:08:32 -0800 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return > >The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is >below >the fuel level. CCP? charcoal canister purge? just a guess... also, how much resistance is normal for a return line? On most pulsed rail injection systems are they free flowing? (mine you can't blow through, but if you blow pressurized air through it, some will go through)... Should it be above fuel level? thanks Camden Lindsay _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:08:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:08:51 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:08:51 -0800 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: LPG Injection. At 2:56 AM 12/25/01, The Punisher wrote: >very interesting. Anybody try a constant flow type injector?? of course this >would end up being similar to the servo controlled K-Jetronic I was thinking >about earlier this year(still want to try it if I get time). A high speed >servoconnected to a small barrel valve feeding a fuel block, that the >constant flow injectors are connected to. >Unfortunatly this setup may be prone to inject gas instead of liquid at low >flow rates. If you _know_ what you are doing with "piping" design for two phase (liquid and gas) situations, this would not be a problem at all. BUT--it takes proper pipe layout to avoid such problems. A reference book on industrial refrigeration piping design would be a good place to look for information on how to do such things properly. In fact--propane and butane are rather common (and _very_ good) refrigerants, and commonly used in applications where their flammability is a non-factor (refineries). Greg > > >>From: Chris McKinnon >>Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >>To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >>Subject: RE: LPG Injection. >>Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 03:40:06 -0700 (MST) >> >>I've heard that they self-destruct due to the lack of lubrication provided >>by LPG, plus the fact that the fuel rail pressure will need to be at least >>300 PSI. I'm looking for a couple of cheap injectors to try though. No luck >>yet unfortunately :( >> >>As for valve seats, for LPG hardened valve seats are a MUST. I've been told >>LPG is very hard on old, non hardened, valve seats for leaded gas. >> >> >>Chris >> >> >Sorry I came in late on this one, but what happens if you try to use a >> >'conventional' electronic fuel injector with LPG ? >> > >> >I know LPG has some things going for it. I had this 76 dodge pickup with >>a >> >440 that was on propane since almost new (had 140 gallons total >>capacity!) >> >fuel system always worked good (emco on holley baseplate) only trouble it >> >had was the chrysler ignition system(installed GM HEI module and cured >>it). >> >At about 350,000 miles or so it suddenly wouldnt hardly run so I tore the >> >engine down. The interior was quite clean and had VERY little sludge, >> >bearings looked good, and the cylinders had almost no ridge and good >>looking >> >bores. >> > >> >The problem was that the valve seats finaly CRUMBLED. Some were totaly >>GONE >> >and most were spider-webbed and falling apart. When the valves were >>removed >> >most of the seats were removed by hand. >> >I've seen valve seats fail in gas engines(petrol for some) but nothing >>like >> >this, it was downright STRANGE. Ever seen this?? >> > >> >Marvin Fugate (always looking for more power) >> > >> > >> >>----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >>---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >>quotes) >>in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> > > >_________________________________________________________________ >MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: >http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:09:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:09:11 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:09:11 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Adding a gas tank return I have pulled a lot of GM tank units. Once on the bench (away from that explosive bomb) they are not hard to work on. I wrapped the fuel pump in a wet wrag. One trick is to just weld/braze on another return/vent pipe. Another is to get a unit with the needed pipes, and modify it to fit where the old one was. If not arranged the same physically, the float could hit a tank baffle or make your gas gauge pretty inaccurate. Bruce Roe On Tue, 25 Dec 2001 20:21:29 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. > The fuel tank has 3 lines, > one out to pump > charcoal canister > fuel return > > The fuel out is fine. > The pump needs a return line to the tank > we need a fuel return and a vent line > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, > and the oem return is below the fuel level. > > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and > what was your answers. > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk > head AN stuff around the sender is the only answer. > TIA > Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:09:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:09:29 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:09:29 -0800 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Air/Fuel Monitor Nothing wrong with a meter with a needle for a readout. The main problem is finding a large one that is economical and available in quantity. Maybe a DC to pulse circuit would allow use of a standard Tach meter, with a new scale of course. It is possible to double the brightness of the DIY bar graph with a corresponding increase in power. Even this is probably not enough in direct sunlight; a shade might be needed. Trying to get a specific reading from a narrow band OX sensor is difficult; they are usually used in the switching (never stable) mode. With a Wide Band a typical response is some flashing between 3 LEDs out of 20 covering 14.7:1 to 10:1 A/F. It certainly is possible to slow down the response speed of a bar graph to that of a mechanical meter or even more (a mechanical can be slowed more too). I'm working on a simple filter to do this now. With the high input impedance of the LED display, it just requires the right capacitors/resistors. I'll suggest some specifics after testing, snow may get in the way. Bruce Roe On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 09:49:38 -0600 Erik Quackenbush writes: > When I put an A/F meter in my TR6 I started with a bar graph LED > display > like you but I later switched to an analog gauge from Westach > (http://www.westach.com) which I find MUCH easier to read in bright > sunlight. The other problem I had with the LED display is that it > changed > so quickly that I spent too much time looking at it and not enough > looking > at the road. The needle on my analog gauge moves slowly and give me > a much > better idea of my average A/F ratio at idle and cruise. I suppose > you could > put a low pass filter on the input to the LED display for the same > effect > but the needle gauge looks right at home under my dash. > > For a much more accurate A/F meter you might want to look into the > DIY-wideband O2 sensor project from the DIY-EFI > (http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/) mailing list. > Standard O2 > sensors are only accurate for a small range around stoichiometric > -Erik ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:09:56 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:09:56 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:09:56 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return Bruce wrote: > In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. > The fuel tank has 3 lines, > one out to pump > charcoal canister > fuel return > The fuel out is fine. The pump needs a return line to the tank we > need a fuel return and a vent line > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem > return is below the fuel level. Why is it a problem to have the return below fuel level? > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > > Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff > around the sender is the only answer. Have you considered tee-ing the fuel return to the pump suction side? Although this won't give you the benefit of cooling some of the return fuel because it's not mixing with the main fuel volume, it should work OK. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:10:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:10:21 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:10:21 -0800 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > Arnie qualifies with: > > For reference let it be known that 1 bar is NOT equal to 1 atmosphere. > I bar is equal to 14.5 psi. Care should be taken when comparing apples > to oranges. > 1 Bar is 100kPa, which is near enough to 1 atmosphere (101.3 kPa standard pressure, but varies between 99 kPa and 103 kPa) > Programmer wrote: > > 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). > So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost > above atmospheric. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:10:37 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:10:37 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:10:37 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed Greg Hermann wrote: > > At 5:54 PM 12/20/01, The Dupuis wrote: > >Brutal Snippage... > > > >> I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 > >> inch rods. > >> And then supercharging the set up. > >> Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air > >> flow appeals to me as well. > > > >Have a look at Hot Rod June '97: 400 block bored .030, 307/327 crank, > > Same bore and stroke (4-1/8" x 3-1/4") as the old Chubby 348 fat blocks > had. Hmmmmm. > > Greg > Yeah, but without those funky combustion chambers, and low-flow heads. Shannen >From tech support site: Your use of the driver is at your own risk, we do not guarantee the abnormal operation of system after installation. What a strange way to say their program might actually fix things. ; ) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:11:20 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:11:20 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:11:20 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SBC Turbo From: "SteveL" > >Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. > >Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). > >Bruce > > http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html > For the Ford fans out there; > http://members.tripod.com/~Red_Header/rrttm.html > Steve L In taking a close look at things, guess which one will have the better distribution. Point was the plenum size in the original posting, not a *brand* thing Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Thu Dec 27 11:11:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:11:26 -0800 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:11:26 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDIST, or ignition the final answer From: Moofaloof@aol.com Subject: Re: eDIST, or ignition the final answer I've been wanting to try the eDist for a while now. How did you mount the LS1 coil packs Bruce ? Any interference problems with between coil and/or plug wires and headers? I mounted the coils up on the valve covers. Used a long bolt from the inside of the cover, outwards, and then some threaded stand offs that were about a 1/2 wide. Then used the stock LS1 plug wires. In an effort to keep this as easy to work on as possible I elected to just use the GM wires, so that any one would have them. The LS1 wires all have 45d ends on them, you might have to shop and match to get bits to do things in a custom manner. This set up for me, has the coil wires away from every thing as much as possible Bruce In a message dated 12/23/01 9:02:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes: In case you haven't heard FAST has a neat little deal called eDIST that allows you to run the Coil Near Plug set up found on LS1 cars on other applications. In case you haven't been under the hood of a LS1, they have one ignition coil pwer cylinder. The one little gotcha in interfacing it is that to be sure you have a full time EST signal. On GM ecms they may not be a full time EST signal from the ECM. ie on the GNs it looks like there is a 250 rpm min threshold for the timing calculation. What I did was use a 1K pull up resistor, and then the coil triggers tied together as *point* signal, that inverted the signal, but the eDIST has a selector switch for correcting that. I just got mine running on my GN yesterday, so testing for the moment is scetchy. But, there does seem to be a noticable change in the way the car runs. If one ign coil is good, 3 must be better, and 6 is just enough More notes as things progress I can say the idle seems cleaner, my normal cruise TPS, is about .84v at 65, with the eDIST it's now at .8, thou the average might be closer to .78.. I doubt anyone has a lower throttle opening then I do for cruise, and to improve on it would take some doing, and, installing the eDIST did. I passed some cars in a 55 zone during the first test drive, and well, I was caught off guard with the way it responded ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ECMnut@aol.com Wed Dec 26 19:10:09 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:20:53 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:20:53 -0300 From: ECMnut@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return Hey Bruce, why does the return line have to be above the fuel level? Thanks, Mike V In a message dated 12/26/2001 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes: > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below > the fuel level. > > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > > Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the > sender is the only answer. > TIA > Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Wed Dec 26 20:51:00 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:20:57 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:20:57 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Air/Fuel Monitor Nothing wrong with a meter with a needle for a readout. The main problem is finding a large one that is economical and available in quantity. Maybe a DC to pulse circuit would allow use of a standard Tach meter, with a new scale of course. It is possible to double the brightness of the DIY bar graph with a corresponding increase in power. Even this is probably not enough in direct sunlight; a shade might be needed. Trying to get a specific reading from a narrow band OX sensor is difficult; they are usually used in the switching (never stable) mode. With a Wide Band a typical response is some flashing between 3 LEDs out of 20 covering 14.7:1 to 10:1 A/F. It certainly is possible to slow down the response speed of a bar graph to that of a mechanical meter or even more (a mechanical can be slowed more too). I'm working on a simple filter to do this now. With the high input impedance of the LED display, it just requires the right capacitors/resistors. I'll suggest some specifics after testing, snow may get in the way. Bruce Roe On Wed, 26 Dec 2001 09:49:38 -0600 Erik Quackenbush writes: > When I put an A/F meter in my TR6 I started with a bar graph LED > display > like you but I later switched to an analog gauge from Westach > (http://www.westach.com) which I find MUCH easier to read in bright > sunlight. The other problem I had with the LED display is that it > changed > so quickly that I spent too much time looking at it and not enough > looking > at the road. The needle on my analog gauge moves slowly and give me > a much > better idea of my average A/F ratio at idle and cruise. I suppose > you could > put a low pass filter on the input to the LED display for the same > effect > but the needle gauge looks right at home under my dash. > > For a much more accurate A/F meter you might want to look into the > DIY-wideband O2 sensor project from the DIY-EFI > (http://www.diy-efi.org/diy_efi/projects/diy_wb/) mailing list. > Standard O2 > sensors are only accurate for a small range around stoichiometric > -Erik ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bcroe@juno.com Wed Dec 26 21:09:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:20:57 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:20:57 -0300 From: bcroe@juno.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Adding a gas tank return I have pulled a lot of GM tank units. Once on the bench (away from that explosive bomb) they are not hard to work on. I wrapped the fuel pump in a wet wrag. One trick is to just weld/braze on another return/vent pipe. Another is to get a unit with the needed pipes, and modify it to fit where the old one was. If not arranged the same physically, the float could hit a tank baffle or make your gas gauge pretty inaccurate. Bruce Roe On Tue, 25 Dec 2001 20:21:29 -0500 "Bruce" writes: > > In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. > The fuel tank has 3 lines, > one out to pump > charcoal canister > fuel return > > The fuel out is fine. > The pump needs a return line to the tank > we need a fuel return and a vent line > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, > and the oem return is below the fuel level. > > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and > what was your answers. > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk > head AN stuff around the sender is the only answer. > TIA > Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From cjl169@hotmail.com Wed Dec 26 20:14:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:03 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:03 -0300 From: "Camden Lindsay" Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return > >The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is >below >the fuel level. CCP? charcoal canister purge? just a guess... also, how much resistance is normal for a return line? On most pulsed rail injection systems are they free flowing? (mine you can't blow through, but if you blow pressurized air through it, some will go through)... Should it be above fuel level? thanks Camden Lindsay _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Wed Dec 26 20:15:40 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:05 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:05 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts At 7:15 PM 12/24/01, Bruce wrote: >I'd just like to see a graph of what *their* version of detonation looks >like. I'm just leery of most advertiseing *engineering graphs*. >Bruce I've seen similar graphs showing the (very) pronounced pressure oscillations during detonation events in Obert's book, among others. Obert is hardly an "advertiser", in fact he's pretty doggone rigorous. Greg > > > From: "Ron Schroeder" >Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts >> > It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under >> > knocking on that website >> > (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock >> > the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as >> > well, why is that? > >> Probably ringing and reverberation >> Ron Schroeder ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Dec 26 22:48:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:20 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:20 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor Gary Schaumberg tapped away at the keyboard with: > Arnie qualifies with: > > For reference let it be known that 1 bar is NOT equal to 1 atmosphere. > I bar is equal to 14.5 psi. Care should be taken when comparing apples > to oranges. > 1 Bar is 100kPa, which is near enough to 1 atmosphere (101.3 kPa standard pressure, but varies between 99 kPa and 103 kPa) > Programmer wrote: > > 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). > So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost > above atmospheric. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Wed Dec 26 20:23:36 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:23 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:23 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: LPG Injection. At 2:56 AM 12/25/01, The Punisher wrote: >very interesting. Anybody try a constant flow type injector?? of course this >would end up being similar to the servo controlled K-Jetronic I was thinking >about earlier this year(still want to try it if I get time). A high speed >servoconnected to a small barrel valve feeding a fuel block, that the >constant flow injectors are connected to. >Unfortunatly this setup may be prone to inject gas instead of liquid at low >flow rates. If you _know_ what you are doing with "piping" design for two phase (liquid and gas) situations, this would not be a problem at all. BUT--it takes proper pipe layout to avoid such problems. A reference book on industrial refrigeration piping design would be a good place to look for information on how to do such things properly. In fact--propane and butane are rather common (and _very_ good) refrigerants, and commonly used in applications where their flammability is a non-factor (refineries). Greg > > >>From: Chris McKinnon >>Reply-To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >>To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >>Subject: RE: LPG Injection. >>Date: Mon, 24 Dec 2001 03:40:06 -0700 (MST) >> >>I've heard that they self-destruct due to the lack of lubrication provided >>by LPG, plus the fact that the fuel rail pressure will need to be at least >>300 PSI. I'm looking for a couple of cheap injectors to try though. No luck >>yet unfortunately :( >> >>As for valve seats, for LPG hardened valve seats are a MUST. I've been told >>LPG is very hard on old, non hardened, valve seats for leaded gas. >> >> >>Chris >> >> >Sorry I came in late on this one, but what happens if you try to use a >> >'conventional' electronic fuel injector with LPG ? >> > >> >I know LPG has some things going for it. I had this 76 dodge pickup with >>a >> >440 that was on propane since almost new (had 140 gallons total >>capacity!) >> >fuel system always worked good (emco on holley baseplate) only trouble it >> >had was the chrysler ignition system(installed GM HEI module and cured >>it). >> >At about 350,000 miles or so it suddenly wouldnt hardly run so I tore the >> >engine down. The interior was quite clean and had VERY little sludge, >> >bearings looked good, and the cylinders had almost no ridge and good >>looking >> >bores. >> > >> >The problem was that the valve seats finaly CRUMBLED. Some were totaly >>GONE >> >and most were spider-webbed and falling apart. When the valves were >>removed >> >most of the seats were removed by hand. >> >I've seen valve seats fail in gas engines(petrol for some) but nothing >>like >> >this, it was downright STRANGE. Ever seen this?? >> > >> >Marvin Fugate (always looking for more power) >> > >> > >> >>----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >>---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the >>quotes) >>in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org >> > > >_________________________________________________________________ >MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: >http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nwester@eidnet.org Wed Dec 26 20:52:54 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:24 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:24 -0300 From: "Programmer" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: MAP Sensor I stand corrected 1 atmosphere (1kgf/cm) is 14.22 pound per square in. 1 Bar is 100 kPa 100 kPa is 14.5 PSI 1 Bar is 0.98692 of an Atmosphere Close enough ? Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Schaumberg" To: Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 6:38 PM Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > Arnie qualifies with: > > For reference let it be known that 1 bar is NOT equal to 1 atmosphere. > I bar is equal to 14.5 psi. Care should be taken when comparing apples > to oranges. > > > Programmer wrote: > > 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). > So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost > above atmospheric. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au Wed Dec 26 22:30:01 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:26 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:26 -0300 From: Bernd Felsche MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return Bruce wrote: > In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. > The fuel tank has 3 lines, > one out to pump > charcoal canister > fuel return > The fuel out is fine. The pump needs a return line to the tank we > need a fuel return and a vent line > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem > return is below the fuel level. Why is it a problem to have the return below fuel level? > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > > Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff > around the sender is the only answer. Have you considered tee-ing the fuel return to the pump suction side? Although this won't give you the benefit of cooling some of the return fuel because it's not mixing with the main fuel volume, it should work OK. ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 27 12:37:22 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:34 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:21:34 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: eDIST, or ignition the final answer From: Moofaloof@aol.com Subject: Re: eDIST, or ignition the final answer I've been wanting to try the eDist for a while now. How did you mount the LS1 coil packs Bruce ? Any interference problems with between coil and/or plug wires and headers? I mounted the coils up on the valve covers. Used a long bolt from the inside of the cover, outwards, and then some threaded stand offs that were about a 1/2 wide. Then used the stock LS1 plug wires. In an effort to keep this as easy to work on as possible I elected to just use the GM wires, so that any one would have them. The LS1 wires all have 45d ends on them, you might have to shop and match to get bits to do things in a custom manner. This set up for me, has the coil wires away from every thing as much as possible Bruce In a message dated 12/23/01 9:02:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes: In case you haven't heard FAST has a neat little deal called eDIST that allows you to run the Coil Near Plug set up found on LS1 cars on other applications. In case you haven't been under the hood of a LS1, they have one ignition coil pwer cylinder. The one little gotcha in interfacing it is that to be sure you have a full time EST signal. On GM ecms they may not be a full time EST signal from the ECM. ie on the GNs it looks like there is a 250 rpm min threshold for the timing calculation. What I did was use a 1K pull up resistor, and then the coil triggers tied together as *point* signal, that inverted the signal, but the eDIST has a selector switch for correcting that. I just got mine running on my GN yesterday, so testing for the moment is scetchy. But, there does seem to be a noticable change in the way the car runs. If one ign coil is good, 3 must be better, and 6 is just enough More notes as things progress I can say the idle seems cleaner, my normal cruise TPS, is about .84v at 65, with the eDIST it's now at .8, thou the average might be closer to .78.. I doubt anyone has a lower throttle opening then I do for cruise, and to improve on it would take some doing, and, installing the eDIST did. I passed some cars in a 55 zone during the first test drive, and well, I was caught off guard with the way it responded ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Wed Dec 26 23:55:43 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:22:13 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:22:13 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Maximum Piston Speed Greg Hermann wrote: > > At 5:54 PM 12/20/01, The Dupuis wrote: > >Brutal Snippage... > > > >> I'm currently in the middle of destroking my 400 with a 3.48 crank and 6 > >> inch rods. > >> And then supercharging the set up. > >> Minimizing cylinder side loading is what I'm after, The extra bore and air > >> flow appeals to me as well. > > > >Have a look at Hot Rod June '97: 400 block bored .030, 307/327 crank, > > Same bore and stroke (4-1/8" x 3-1/4") as the old Chubby 348 fat blocks > had. Hmmmmm. > > Greg > Yeah, but without those funky combustion chambers, and low-flow heads. Shannen >From tech support site: Your use of the driver is at your own risk, we do not guarantee the abnormal operation of system after installation. What a strange way to say their program might actually fix things. ; ) ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 27 12:16:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:22:49 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:22:49 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: SBC Turbo From: "SteveL" > >Twin Turbo SBC, anyone. > >Oh just ignore the plenum, he just thinks like me (well in that reguard). > >Bruce > > http://www.fullboost.com.au/cars/featurecars/vh_comtt/comtt.html > For the Ford fans out there; > http://members.tripod.com/~Red_Header/rrttm.html > Steve L In taking a close look at things, guess which one will have the better distribution. Point was the plenum size in the original posting, not a *brand* thing Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From davidmarkusgoldstein@yahoo.com Wed Dec 26 19:14:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:22:52 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:22:52 -0300 From: David Goldstein MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Bosch bins I'm also looking for a .bin for my Bosch LH Jetronic 2.4 ECU in my 1990 Volvo 760 turbo wagon. So far, no luck. I was told to look at the archive files on the DIY-EFI website but I have not been able to access the site. Any help is much appreciated! -----Original Message----- From: Dylan Johnson [SMTP:DJohnson@cancorpam.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 8:27 AM To: 'diy_efi@diy-efi.org' Subject: Bosch bins I'm looking for the bin from a 87-88 Peugeot 505 V6 NA. Awhile back one of the list members was working on a collection of Bosch bins but I can't find the URL to his site. Does anyone have it? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From antti.lehtonen@iki.fi Wed Dec 26 20:12:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:23:00 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:23:00 -0300 From: Antti Lehtonen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: AMF & efi.. Hi, newbie to group, some odd infos needed.. Anyone know how does bosch air flow meter talk to motronic ecu? I mean the heated platinium wire thing, are those bosch books sold in amazon.com telling this info? Don't want use big 'euros' to book I don't need. Another one, is there any completed carb to efi conversion to 4cyl vag type engines? You have pulse width meter project, could it be used adjust injector to maintain lamba sensor reading to near-rich, simplest carburator replacement I could figure out, just too simple to work? ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From bearbvd@mindspring.com Wed Dec 26 20:11:18 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:24:03 -0300 Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 16:24:03 -0300 From: bearbvd@mindspring.com (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts At 9:16 PM 12/24/01, Bruce wrote: From: "Bob - Uni" >Subject: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts >> It is interesting that on the graphs of cylinder pressure under >> knocking on that website >> (http://www.aquamist.co.uk/dc/technic/technic.html) that under knock >> the pressure doesnt just suddenly rise, but also has sharp dips as >> well, why is that? >> BW> According to the people who make some money from it, >> BW> (e.g. http://www.aquamist.co.uk) there are several locations where >> BW> you can introduce water injection for a variety of benefits. There's >> BW> no "perfect" location. Upstream of the intercooler is best for >> BW> vapourization, adding to the effectiveness of the intercooler >> BW> (charge density) and distribution from a single jet. > >Up stream of the intercooler can lead to excessive corrosion of the >intercooler. Not all are meant to deal with really high water temps, or >stream. The erosive, and corrosive effects of steam shouldn't be ignored. >Bruce For those with a serious concern about corrosion of IC's, there is a coating called "Heresite" which is used on aluminium finned HVAC coils which are going to see unusually corrosive environments. It is not as good as copper fins, which of course is a lot more $$$, but it works pretty well, and doesn't screw up the heat transfer excessively. Don't know for sure, but it can probably only be applied to the outside (ambient air) surfaces of an IC coil. BUT--there are some big (huge might be a more appropriate word) gains in IC efficiency which can be had by spraying a water mist on the ambient air side, so----- Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 28 12:41:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:41:19 -0800 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:41:19 -0800 From: Carsten Beth MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: dwell angle control Hi, I read the list since a few weeks and find it very instructive. Because I never post something, I want to introduce me at first. My name is Carsten Beth, I am a student of computer science with special interrests in integrated circuit and embedded system design. I am very familiar with digital systems but less with analog. My favorite hobby is to drive an repaire old motorcycles. I own a Honda GL 1000 from 1977 with mechanicaly controled ignition. Since last summer I work on a efi solution for that motorcycle. It is based on a Atmel microcontroler which receives signals from a hall sensor and shall trigger a igbt. In the moment the controler hard- and software works, but there are some problems regarding the ignition driver. There is the smart device from Motorola, the MC3334. The main feature is to automaticaly adjust the dwell angle, so the solenoid stores an optimum energy with low losses. Does anybody now such a device which drives an igbt instead a darlington and is triggered on logic level instead of a reluctor pickup? Best regards, Carsten ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 28 12:41:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:41:32 -0800 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:41:32 -0800 From: joe daddy MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: My Introduction Hello, my name is Jud, im 17 years old, and have a little bit of experience with electronics (less than a little, actually), but I have had a lot of experience in programming basic, c, c++, and a smidge of ASM. Right now I'm trying to build a JY twin turbo 67 mustang. I really want a custom EFI, none of this Ford late model stuff (it's good, dont get me wrong, just very limited). I want to build something that i can tune for boost, something i can have complete control over the engine with. I came across this list, and read through the first months archive, and now I am very interested. Whats the state of the project now? Have they made a semi complete DIY-EFI system yet? I figure after 7 years you guys should be pretty much DONE :P __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 28 12:41:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:41:47 -0800 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:41:47 -0800 From: "Fran and Bud" Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return IMHO I believe that it is NECESSARY that the return line returns the fuel to VERY near the bottom of the tank, well BELOW the fuel level to prevent fuel aeration. Another reason to return to the bottom is that fuel flowing thru a line and discharging thru open air space CAN (not WILL - just can) ignite the vapor space under certain atmospheric conditions. Fortunately most of the time the vapor will be too rich to ignite and besides the weather wont be prone to static generation - BUT you only have to be the "one in a million" that it happens to for your whole day to be ruined. More important to using a tank that was not originally intended for EFI is an well or a baffle for the fuel pickup to assure that the pump does not suck air when the fuel level is low or when slosh from cornering, hard acceleration, or braking can uncover the inlet. I have had good luck for years in adding things like outlets or returns by cutting a 2 1/2" or 3" disc from some heavy sheet metal with a hole saw and then brazing tubing or fittings into it and drilling a 4 to 6 hole pattern near the outside edge. It can then be fastened over a small hole in the tank using cork or neoprene gasket material and bolted down with 4-6 self tapping sheet metal screws. If you want to get fancy you can use threaded inserts and machine screws. In any case all of the fabrication is external to the tank except for cutting the extra hole in it, and vacuuming out the shavings. Bud ---------- >From: ECMnut@aol.com >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return >Date: Wed, Dec 26, 2001, 2:10 PM > >Hey Bruce, >why does the return line have to be above the fuel level? >Thanks, >Mike V >In a message dated 12/26/2001 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, >nacelp@bright.net writes: > >> >> The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is >below >> the fuel level. >> >> Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. >> >> Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. >> >> Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the >> sender is the only answer. >> TIA >> Bruce > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 28 12:42:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:42:26 -0800 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:42:26 -0800 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts Driving over water that didn't evaporate in a high performane car can be too exciteing. But racing on dirt trails might be anither issue Bruce From: "Greg Hermann" > BUT--there are some big (huge might be a more appropriate word) gains in IC > efficiency which can be had by spraying a water mist on the ambient air > side, so----- > Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 28 12:42:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:42:39 -0800 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:42:39 -0800 From: Moofaloof@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return --part1_f8.143fa077.295d063d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Bruce, FWIW, when I did my retrofit, I plumbed a return line into my tank by hard soldering a new tube through the small plate that holds the sending unit. I specifically put the return line lower than the fuel level so that I would not create a fuel "fountain" inside the tank which tends to produce lots of vapor. jc In a message dated 12/26/01 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes: > In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. > The fuel tank has 3 lines, > one out to pump > charcoal canister > fuel return > > The fuel out is fine. > The pump needs a return line to the tank > we need a fuel return > and a vent line > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is > below > the fuel level. > > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > > Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the > sender is the only answer. > TIA > Bruce > > --part1_f8.143fa077.295d063d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Bruce,
FWIW, when I did my retrofit, I plumbed a return line into my tank by hard soldering a new tube through the small plate that holds the sending unit.  I specifically put the return line lower than the fuel level so that I would not create a fuel "fountain" inside the tank which tends to produce lots of vapor.
jc




In a message dated 12/26/01 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes:


In the process of doing a EFI retrofit.
The fuel tank has 3 lines,
one out to pump
charcoal canister
fuel return

The fuel out is fine.
The pump needs a return line to the tank
we need a fuel return
and a vent line

The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below
the fuel level.

Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers.

Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA.

Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the
sender is the only answer.
TIA
Bruce



 --part1_f8.143fa077.295d063d_boundary-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 28 12:42:57 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:42:57 -0800 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:42:57 -0800 From: Jason Francolini MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AMF & efi.. antti, a very good bosch book is "bosch fuel injection and engine managment" by charles probst. it covers most every bosch system ever made in pretty good detail. im sure ud b able to find it o a site like amazon.com or sumthin. if u cant let me know and i will give u more info on it, i just dont have it next to me. good luck. jay Antti Lehtonen wrote: > Hi, newbie to group, some odd infos needed.. > > Anyone know how does bosch air flow meter talk > to motronic ecu? I mean the heated platinium > wire thing, are those bosch books sold in > amazon.com telling this info? Don't want use > big 'euros' to book I don't need. > > Another one, is there any completed carb to efi > conversion to 4cyl vag type engines? You have > pulse width meter project, could it be used > adjust injector to maintain lamba sensor > reading to near-rich, simplest carburator > replacement I could figure out, just too > simple to work? > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 28 12:43:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:43:29 -0800 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 12:43:29 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor Let's try it one more time... 1 kgf/cm^2 = 14.223343 psi 1 Bar = 100 kPa = 14.50 psi 1 Atm = 14.696 psi (this is the standard, not necessarily true in your area) These numbers come from the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, and this subject is a popular point of debate on import lists...Japanese gauges ALL read in kgf/cm^2, some European gauges read in Bar, nobody makes a gauge for an automotive application that reads in atm. Here's a link to a fairly complete chart in Excel that I made a few years ago when I was working in a gas analysis lab... http://www.mkiv.com/techarticles/pressure_chart.xls/pressure_chart.xls Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Programmer Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 3:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: MAP Sensor I stand corrected 1 atmosphere (1kgf/cm) is 14.22 pound per square in. 1 Bar is 100 kPa 100 kPa is 14.5 PSI 1 Bar is 0.98692 of an Atmosphere Close enough ? Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Schaumberg" To: Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 6:38 PM Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > Arnie qualifies with: > > For reference let it be known that 1 bar is NOT equal to 1 atmosphere. > I bar is equal to 14.5 psi. Care should be taken when comparing > apples to oranges. > > > Programmer wrote: > > 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). > So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost above > atmospheric. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Fri Dec 28 13:35:14 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 13:35:14 -0800 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 13:35:14 -0800 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts We used water in front of the radiator in 1972 on a 1/2 mile dirt track car (Plymouth Road Runner, 426 Hemi). It was driver controlled, and it actually washed off some of the dirt build up in long (200+ lap) races as well as enhancing cooling... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 2:11 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts Driving over water that didn't evaporate in a high performane car can be too exciteing. But racing on dirt trails might be anither issue Bruce From: "Greg Hermann" > BUT--there are some big (huge might be a more appropriate word) gains > in IC > efficiency which can be had by spraying a water mist on the ambient > air side, so----- Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From nacelp@bright.net Thu Dec 27 19:11:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:01:50 -0300 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:01:50 -0300 From: "Bruce" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts Driving over water that didn't evaporate in a high performane car can be too exciteing. But racing on dirt trails might be anither issue Bruce From: "Greg Hermann" > BUT--there are some big (huge might be a more appropriate word) gains in IC > efficiency which can be had by spraying a water mist on the ambient air > side, so----- > Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Moofaloof@aol.com Thu Dec 27 20:18:21 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:04 -0300 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:04 -0300 From: Moofaloof@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return --part1_f8.143fa077.295d063d_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Bruce, FWIW, when I did my retrofit, I plumbed a return line into my tank by hard soldering a new tube through the small plate that holds the sending unit. I specifically put the return line lower than the fuel level so that I would not create a fuel "fountain" inside the tank which tends to produce lots of vapor. jc In a message dated 12/26/01 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes: > In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. > The fuel tank has 3 lines, > one out to pump > charcoal canister > fuel return > > The fuel out is fine. > The pump needs a return line to the tank > we need a fuel return > and a vent line > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is > below > the fuel level. > > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > > Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the > sender is the only answer. > TIA > Bruce > > --part1_f8.143fa077.295d063d_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Bruce,
FWIW, when I did my retrofit, I plumbed a return line into my tank by hard soldering a new tube through the small plate that holds the sending unit.  I specifically put the return line lower than the fuel level so that I would not create a fuel "fountain" inside the tank which tends to produce lots of vapor.
jc




In a message dated 12/26/01 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, nacelp@bright.net writes:


In the process of doing a EFI retrofit.
The fuel tank has 3 lines,
one out to pump
charcoal canister
fuel return

The fuel out is fine.
The pump needs a return line to the tank
we need a fuel return
and a vent line

The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below
the fuel level.

Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers.

Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA.

Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the
sender is the only answer.
TIA
Bruce



 --part1_f8.143fa077.295d063d_boundary-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From quest100@gte.net Thu Dec 27 18:14:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:07 -0300 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:07 -0300 From: "Fran and Bud" Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return IMHO I believe that it is NECESSARY that the return line returns the fuel to VERY near the bottom of the tank, well BELOW the fuel level to prevent fuel aeration. Another reason to return to the bottom is that fuel flowing thru a line and discharging thru open air space CAN (not WILL - just can) ignite the vapor space under certain atmospheric conditions. Fortunately most of the time the vapor will be too rich to ignite and besides the weather wont be prone to static generation - BUT you only have to be the "one in a million" that it happens to for your whole day to be ruined. More important to using a tank that was not originally intended for EFI is an well or a baffle for the fuel pickup to assure that the pump does not suck air when the fuel level is low or when slosh from cornering, hard acceleration, or braking can uncover the inlet. I have had good luck for years in adding things like outlets or returns by cutting a 2 1/2" or 3" disc from some heavy sheet metal with a hole saw and then brazing tubing or fittings into it and drilling a 4 to 6 hole pattern near the outside edge. It can then be fastened over a small hole in the tank using cork or neoprene gasket material and bolted down with 4-6 self tapping sheet metal screws. If you want to get fancy you can use threaded inserts and machine screws. In any case all of the fabrication is external to the tank except for cutting the extra hole in it, and vacuuming out the shavings. Bud ---------- From: ECMnut@aol.com >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return >Date: Wed, Dec 26, 2001, 2:10 PM > >Hey Bruce, >why does the return line have to be above the fuel level? >Thanks, >Mike V >In a message dated 12/26/2001 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, >nacelp@bright.net writes: > >> >> The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is >below >> the fuel level. >> >> Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. >> >> Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. >> >> Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the >> sender is the only answer. >> TIA >> Bruce > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From joedaddyshagg@yahoo.com Thu Dec 27 14:28:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:15 -0300 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:15 -0300 From: joe daddy MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: My Introduction Hello, my name is Jud, im 17 years old, and have a little bit of experience with electronics (less than a little, actually), but I have had a lot of experience in programming basic, c, c++, and a smidge of ASM. Right now I'm trying to build a JY twin turbo 67 mustang. I really want a custom EFI, none of this Ford late model stuff (it's good, dont get me wrong, just very limited). I want to build something that i can tune for boost, something i can have complete control over the engine with. I came across this list, and read through the first months archive, and now I am very interested. Whats the state of the project now? Have they made a semi complete DIY-EFI system yet? I figure after 7 years you guys should be pretty much DONE :P __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From iracing@netlabs.net Fri Dec 28 03:31:05 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:20 -0300 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:20 -0300 From: Jason Francolini MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: AMF & efi.. antti, a very good bosch book is "bosch fuel injection and engine managment" by charles probst. it covers most every bosch system ever made in pretty good detail. im sure ud b able to find it o a site like amazon.com or sumthin. if u cant let me know and i will give u more info on it, i just dont have it next to me. good luck. jay Antti Lehtonen wrote: > Hi, newbie to group, some odd infos needed.. > > Anyone know how does bosch air flow meter talk > to motronic ecu? I mean the heated platinium > wire thing, are those bosch books sold in > amazon.com telling this info? Don't want use > big 'euros' to book I don't need. > > Another one, is there any completed carb to efi > conversion to 4cyl vag type engines? You have > pulse width meter project, could it be used > adjust injector to maintain lamba sensor > reading to near-rich, simplest carburator > replacement I could figure out, just too > simple to work? > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Carsten.Beth@Informatik.Uni-Oldenburg.DE Thu Dec 27 11:27:24 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:21 -0300 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:21 -0300 From: Carsten Beth MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: dwell angle control Hi, I read the list since a few weeks and find it very instructive. Because I never post something, I want to introduce me at first. My name is Carsten Beth, I am a student of computer science with special interrests in integrated circuit and embedded system design. I am very familiar with digital systems but less with analog. My favorite hobby is to drive an repaire old motorcycles. I own a Honda GL 1000 from 1977 with mechanicaly controled ignition. Since last summer I work on a efi solution for that motorcycle. It is based on a Atmel microcontroler which receives signals from a hall sensor and shall trigger a igbt. In the moment the controler hard- and software works, but there are some problems regarding the ignition driver. There is the smart device from Motorola, the MC3334. The main feature is to automaticaly adjust the dwell angle, so the solenoid stores an optimum energy with low losses. Does anybody now such a device which drives an igbt instead a darlington and is triggered on logic level instead of a reluctor pickup? Best regards, Carsten ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 27 17:24:13 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:24 -0300 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:02:24 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: MAP Sensor Let's try it one more time... 1 kgf/cm^2 = 14.223343 psi 1 Bar = 100 kPa = 14.50 psi 1 Atm = 14.696 psi (this is the standard, not necessarily true in your area) These numbers come from the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, and this subject is a popular point of debate on import lists...Japanese gauges ALL read in kgf/cm^2, some European gauges read in Bar, nobody makes a gauge for an automotive application that reads in atm. Here's a link to a fairly complete chart in Excel that I made a few years ago when I was working in a gas analysis lab... http://www.mkiv.com/techarticles/pressure_chart.xls/pressure_chart.xls Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Programmer Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 3:53 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: MAP Sensor I stand corrected 1 atmosphere (1kgf/cm) is 14.22 pound per square in. 1 Bar is 100 kPa 100 kPa is 14.5 PSI 1 Bar is 0.98692 of an Atmosphere Close enough ? Lyndon. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gary Schaumberg" To: Sent: Monday, December 24, 2001 6:38 PM Subject: Re: MAP Sensor > Arnie qualifies with: > > For reference let it be known that 1 bar is NOT equal to 1 atmosphere. > I bar is equal to 14.5 psi. Care should be taken when comparing > apples to oranges. > > > Programmer wrote: > > 1bar=1 atmosphere (or 14.7 PSI). > So a 2 bar MAP would be a 30 PSI sensor--or 15 PSI boost above > atmospheric. > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to > majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From efi.student@sbcglobal.net Thu Dec 27 18:33:10 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:59:49 -0300 Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 18:59:49 -0300 From: "efi_student" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts We used water in front of the radiator in 1972 on a 1/2 mile dirt track car (Plymouth Road Runner, 426 Hemi). It was driver controlled, and it actually washed off some of the dirt build up in long (200+ lap) races as well as enhancing cooling... Lance -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 2:11 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Re[2]: Turbo Chubby parts Driving over water that didn't evaporate in a high performane car can be too exciteing. But racing on dirt trails might be anither issue Bruce From: "Greg Hermann" > BUT--there are some big (huge might be a more appropriate word) gains > in IC > efficiency which can be had by spraying a water mist on the ambient > air side, so----- Greg ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:30:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:30:16 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:30:16 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: My Introduction Hi, Jud In 7 years this list has really changed its "character." This tends to support many, many different approaches to and aspects of DIY-EFI, including using readily available systems and/or parts. There are a few brave souls here creating their own systems from scratch. There is a list dedicated to building an efi controller. Go to the DIY home page, and look at the efi332 list archives. That may well be what interests you rather than the much more generalized content of the DIY-EFI list. Shannen joe daddy wrote: > > Hello, my name is Jud, im 17 years old, and have a > little bit of experience with electronics (less than a > little, actually), but I have had a lot of experience > in programming basic, c, c++, and a smidge of ASM. > > Right now I'm trying to build a JY twin turbo 67 > mustang. I really want a custom EFI, none of this > Ford late model stuff (it's good, dont get me wrong, > just very limited). I want to build something that i > can tune for boost, something i can have complete > control over the engine with. > > I came across this list, and read through the first > months archive, and now I am very interested. > > Whats the state of the project now? Have they made a > semi complete DIY-EFI system yet? I figure after 7 > years you guys should be pretty much DONE :P > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:30:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:30:27 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:30:27 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Now general warnings for retrofits was Re: Adding a gas tank return Fran and Bud wrote: > > I have had good luck for years in adding things like outlets or returns by > cutting a 2 1/2" or 3" disc from some heavy sheet metal with a hole saw and > then brazing tubing or fittings into it and drilling a 4 to 6 hole pattern > near the outside edge. It can then be fastened over a small hole in the > tank using cork or neoprene gasket material and bolted down with 4-6 self > tapping sheet metal screws. If you want to get fancy you can use threaded > inserts and machine screws. In any case all of the fabrication is external > to the tank except for cutting the extra hole in it, and vacuuming out the > shavings. > > Bud This is not an unusual approach. There is another consideration when building an efi system including a tank not originally designed for it. A return type efi system will transfer heat to the fuel in the tank. The fuel will expand and produce vapors as a result of this. The tank should be positively vented in these situations. If a sender/tube/whatever has been added by the method mentioned above, it is very very likely that fuel vapor will be forced out of the tank around the screws and gasket. Do not rely on a pressure release cap to vent the vapors. These caps can vary significantly in their "release pressure." 4-5 psi pressure in the tank can easily force fuel vapor out around a home made sender. Better to be cautious (and responsible) than sorry. Shannen ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:30:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:30:39 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:30:39 -0800 From: Moofaloof@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: My Introduction --part1_57.41bedf9.295e6c63_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jud, You might have a look at the efi332 project and/or Megasquirt. These are two systems at either end of the spectrum that are completely diy (i.e. no hacking of OEM equipment). Both systems are fully developed and running. In a message dated 12/28/2001 3:46:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, joedaddyshagg@yahoo.com writes: > Hello, my name is Jud, im 17 years old, and have a > little bit of experience with electronics (less than a > little, actually), but I have had a lot of experience > in programming basic, c, c++, and a smidge of ASM. > > Right now I'm trying to build a JY twin turbo 67 > mustang. I really want a custom EFI, none of this > Ford late model stuff (it's good, dont get me wrong, > just very limited). I want to build something that i > can tune for boost, something i can have complete > control over the engine with. > > I came across this list, and read through the first > months archive, and now I am very interested. > > Whats the state of the project now? Have they made a > semi complete DIY-EFI system yet? I figure after 7 > years you guys should be pretty much DONE :P > > > --part1_57.41bedf9.295e6c63_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jud,
You might have a look at the efi332 project and/or Megasquirt.  These are two systems at either end of the spectrum that are completely diy (i.e. no hacking of OEM equipment).  Both systems are fully developed and running. 


In a message dated 12/28/2001 3:46:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, joedaddyshagg@yahoo.com writes:


Hello, my name is Jud, im 17 years old, and have a
little bit of experience with electronics (less than a
little, actually), but I have had a lot of experience
in programming basic, c, c++, and a smidge of ASM.

Right now I'm trying to build a JY twin turbo 67
mustang.  I really want a custom EFI, none of this
Ford late model stuff (it's good, dont get me wrong,
just very limited). I want to build something that i
can tune for boost, something i can have complete
control over the engine with.

I came across this list, and read through the first
months archive, and now I am very interested.

Whats the state of the project now?  Have they made a
semi complete DIY-EFI system yet?  I figure after 7
years you guys should be pretty much DONE :P




 --part1_57.41bedf9.295e6c63_boundary-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:30:51 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:30:51 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:30:51 -0800 From: "Jeff Meager" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Adding a gas tank return And note. Depending on how much your pump flows, you will need to ensure that the return goes back into the in-tank swirl pot, not outside it.....or the pump will empty the swirl pot - esp if the pump can flow more than the holes in the swirl pot - had this before.... LJ -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Fran and Bud Sent: Friday, 28 December 2001 5:15 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return IMHO I believe that it is NECESSARY that the return line returns the fuel to VERY near the bottom of the tank, well BELOW the fuel level to prevent fuel aeration. Another reason to return to the bottom is that fuel flowing thru a line and discharging thru open air space CAN (not WILL - just can) ignite the vapor space under certain atmospheric conditions. Fortunately most of the time the vapor will be too rich to ignite and besides the weather wont be prone to static generation - BUT you only have to be the "one in a million" that it happens to for your whole day to be ruined. More important to using a tank that was not originally intended for EFI is an well or a baffle for the fuel pickup to assure that the pump does not suck air when the fuel level is low or when slosh from cornering, hard acceleration, or braking can uncover the inlet. I have had good luck for years in adding things like outlets or returns by cutting a 2 1/2" or 3" disc from some heavy sheet metal with a hole saw and then brazing tubing or fittings into it and drilling a 4 to 6 hole pattern near the outside edge. It can then be fastened over a small hole in the tank using cork or neoprene gasket material and bolted down with 4-6 self tapping sheet metal screws. If you want to get fancy you can use threaded inserts and machine screws. In any case all of the fabrication is external to the tank except for cutting the extra hole in it, and vacuuming out the shavings. Bud ---------- >From: ECMnut@aol.com >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return >Date: Wed, Dec 26, 2001, 2:10 PM > >Hey Bruce, >why does the return line have to be above the fuel level? >Thanks, >Mike V >In a message dated 12/26/2001 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, >nacelp@bright.net writes: > >> >> The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is >below >> the fuel level. >> >> Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. >> >> Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. >> >> Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the >> sender is the only answer. >> TIA >> Bruce > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:31:16 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:31:16 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:31:16 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: eDIST, or ignition the final answer Bruce, if you dont mind, what did the eDIST run? the rest I can either fake it or call GM. thanks BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:31:29 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:31:29 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:31:29 -0800 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return I just added EFI to an old carb type tank. I brazed a return line that is three inches long in the sender plate. It sure would be nice to know what a stock EFI setup normally has! It already has baffles in the tank. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fran and Bud" To: Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 4:14 PM Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return > IMHO > I believe that it is NECESSARY that the return line returns the fuel to VERY > near the bottom of the tank, well BELOW the fuel level to prevent fuel > aeration. > > Another reason to return to the bottom is that fuel flowing thru a line and > discharging thru open air space CAN (not WILL - just can) ignite the vapor > space under certain atmospheric conditions. Fortunately most of the time > the vapor will be too rich to ignite and besides the weather wont be prone > to static generation - BUT you only have to be the "one in a million" that > it happens to for your whole day to be ruined. > > More important to using a tank that was not originally intended for EFI is > an well or a baffle for the fuel pickup to assure that the pump does not > suck air when the fuel level is low or when slosh from cornering, hard > acceleration, or braking can uncover the inlet. > > I have had good luck for years in adding things like outlets or returns by > cutting a 2 1/2" or 3" disc from some heavy sheet metal with a hole saw and > then brazing tubing or fittings into it and drilling a 4 to 6 hole pattern > near the outside edge. It can then be fastened over a small hole in the > tank using cork or neoprene gasket material and bolted down with 4-6 self > tapping sheet metal screws. If you want to get fancy you can use threaded > inserts and machine screws. In any case all of the fabrication is external > to the tank except for cutting the extra hole in it, and vacuuming out the > shavings. > > > Bud > > ---------- > >From: ECMnut@aol.com > >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > >Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return > >Date: Wed, Dec 26, 2001, 2:10 PM > > > > >Hey Bruce, > >why does the return line have to be above the fuel level? > >Thanks, > >Mike V > >In a message dated 12/26/2001 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, > >nacelp@bright.net writes: > > > >> > >> The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is > >below > >> the fuel level. > >> > >> Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > >> > >> Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > >> > >> Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the > >> sender is the only answer. > >> TIA > >> Bruce > > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:31:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:31:49 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:31:49 -0800 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: DIY-WB pcb layout Hi guys, This wide band project is awesome, but as I only joined the group recently and am located in Europe I see some difficulties in going the group buy route. Are the board layouts available somewhere as gif/pdf/gerber/hpgl so I can try to etch the board myself? Seasons greetings, Igor Dorrestijn ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:32:04 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:32:04 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:32:04 -0800 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal "Tomas" wrote: > Hi, I'm writing an opensource program to plot HP > curves and monitor/log engine RPMs. I'm using a > voltage divider to pick the 12V signal from the > coil input. The input is recorded with my soundcard > using the Line input. I'm having troubles with > trying to figure out how to count the spikes, > because the signal I get is VERY far from a square > wave :). And with my ignition, when the RPM goes up, > the signal amplitude goes DOWN ....so no static > treshold for counting spikes :/. One suggestion would be to substitute a signal diode such as a 1N916 or 1N4148 for the "bottom" resistor in the divider, cathode (band) end to ground. This should give you a relatively constant 0.7V high "pulse" waveform across the RPM range. If your input signal goes below ground, then add another diode in parallel w/ the first but connected "backwards" (anode to ground). If you truely want a square wave, you may have to run the signal above into an op-amp to amplify it again, then into the clock input of a flip-flop IC to make a square wave at half the input frequency, then into another voltage divider to bring it back down to a level compatible w/ the line input. I'd probably use CMOS for good noise immunity, low power, and wide power supply tolerance, just don't let the input signals exceed the power supplys (Vcc or ground) or you could destroy the chip. Also don't let any unused inputs "float", tie them to Vcc or ground. If this is a laptop, you can "steal" power (5V) from the external keyboard connector, in my experience it tends to be electrically noisy (I used it in place of batteries for some external speakers and you could hear the noise) so you'd probably need some filtering. [snip] regards, philh (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:32:32 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:32:32 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:32:32 -0800 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: wbo2 testing question Are you saying that if you power the circuit with nothing hooked up that the LED will come on in 10 secs? I have not tried powering it without a load on the heater circuit. With a 3.1ohm lamp the LED did not come on even after about 75 seconds. I am getting about 6 volts (open circuit) at the heater outputs with 14 volt input. That sounds kind of low isn't it? Anybody got any ideas or recommendations on how to check the circuit thoroughly (for an electronics idiot) after construction but prior to connecting the sensor? I really don't want to smoke $120... On the ISO is the dot (pin 1) supposed to be in the top left corner when looking at it on the board with the heater circuit in the top left? How about the LED? Not sure that I put it in the right way... Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of rr > Subject: Re: wbo2 testing question > > Yes, the dot is pin 1 on iso1. Without a sensor hooked up the heater > ready LED should come on within 10 seconds. Then J8 will move > from 2.5 V. > > BobR. > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:33:11 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:33:11 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:33:11 -0800 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return BTDT (retrofit), at least a couple of times. 1st time, added 3/8 line to sender for fuel supply, used OEM 5/16" line for return. Vent line added to filler neck. Second time used tank in middle 80's truck as-is. OEM return below fuel level? Unless I'm missing something, that's-a no problem. If above, nothing wrong with removing sender and extending the line with some soldered on tubing. Vent is tricky. Since it's a smogger vintage tank, CCP should be ok to use. Old tanks w/ no baffles burp fuel if the vent's not right. If there's more to this story than it seems, let me know. Shannen Bruce wrote: > > In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. > The fuel tank has 3 lines, > one out to pump > charcoal canister > fuel return > > The fuel out is fine. > The pump needs a return line to the tank > we need a fuel return > and a vent line > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below > the fuel level. > > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > > Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the > sender is the only answer. > TIA > Bruce > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:33:19 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:33:19 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:33:19 -0800 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Adding a gas tank return I can tell you what I did, right or wrong. I took my sending unit down to my radiator guy & told him that I wanted a 1/2" output & what he did was to take the factory unit out & put a 1/2" line in. He had an old Power Steering Pressure line laying around for a BMW. I cut the flex line off if it & took the part that most closely matched the shape of the old sending line. what we did then was remove the old line & put the new one in & tried to lay it in the exact spot as the old one. that was a mess. ( I was running the Carb @ the time & wanted 1/2" line) We had to put the float back on & all that & it is still not "right" if the tank is <1/8 & I hit a hard corner it starves the pickup (not good). Were I to do it again, I would pop a hole in the top of the sending unit & run the new line down as close to the factory PU line & call it a day. as a matter of fact I have an NOS one here that I think I am going to do that with to see if I cant fix that up. I don't see any reason why it wont work, it has worked for 25 years now with a carb, & 5 with the EFI (happy birthday to her, happy birthday to her, happy birthday dear franceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnne, happy birthday to her) HTH's BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2001 5:21 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Adding a gas tank return In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. The fuel tank has 3 lines, one out to pump charcoal canister fuel return The fuel out is fine. The pump needs a return line to the tank we need a fuel return and a vent line The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below the fuel level. Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the sender is the only answer. TIA Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From diy_efi-owner Sat Dec 29 13:33:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:33:27 -0800 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 13:33:27 -0800 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Bosch bins http://motronicinfo.homestead.com/index.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dylan Johnson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 5:26 AM Subject: Bosch bins > I'm looking for the bin from a 87-88 Peugeot 505 V6 NA. Awhile back one of > the list members was working on a collection of Bosch bins but I can't find > the URL to his site. Does anyone have it? > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Fri Dec 28 20:36:17 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: My Introduction Hi, Jud In 7 years this list has really changed its "character." This tends to support many, many different approaches to and aspects of DIY-EFI, including using readily available systems and/or parts. There are a few brave souls here creating their own systems from scratch. There is a list dedicated to building an efi controller. Go to the DIY home page, and look at the efi332 list archives. That may well be what interests you rather than the much more generalized content of the DIY-EFI list. Shannen joe daddy wrote: > > Hello, my name is Jud, im 17 years old, and have a > little bit of experience with electronics (less than a > little, actually), but I have had a lot of experience > in programming basic, c, c++, and a smidge of ASM. > > Right now I'm trying to build a JY twin turbo 67 > mustang. I really want a custom EFI, none of this > Ford late model stuff (it's good, dont get me wrong, > just very limited). I want to build something that i > can tune for boost, something i can have complete > control over the engine with. > > I came across this list, and read through the first > months archive, and now I am very interested. > > Whats the state of the project now? Have they made a > semi complete DIY-EFI system yet? I figure after 7 > years you guys should be pretty much DONE :P > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Send your FREE holiday greetings online! > http://greetings.yahoo.com > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Moofaloof@aol.com Fri Dec 28 21:46:27 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 From: Moofaloof@aol.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: My Introduction --part1_57.41bedf9.295e6c63_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jud, You might have a look at the efi332 project and/or Megasquirt. These are two systems at either end of the spectrum that are completely diy (i.e. no hacking of OEM equipment). Both systems are fully developed and running. In a message dated 12/28/2001 3:46:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, joedaddyshagg@yahoo.com writes: > Hello, my name is Jud, im 17 years old, and have a > little bit of experience with electronics (less than a > little, actually), but I have had a lot of experience > in programming basic, c, c++, and a smidge of ASM. > > Right now I'm trying to build a JY twin turbo 67 > mustang. I really want a custom EFI, none of this > Ford late model stuff (it's good, dont get me wrong, > just very limited). I want to build something that i > can tune for boost, something i can have complete > control over the engine with. > > I came across this list, and read through the first > months archive, and now I am very interested. > > Whats the state of the project now? Have they made a > semi complete DIY-EFI system yet? I figure after 7 > years you guys should be pretty much DONE :P > > > --part1_57.41bedf9.295e6c63_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Jud,
You might have a look at the efi332 project and/or Megasquirt.  These are two systems at either end of the spectrum that are completely diy (i.e. no hacking of OEM equipment).  Both systems are fully developed and running. 


In a message dated 12/28/2001 3:46:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, joedaddyshagg@yahoo.com writes:


Hello, my name is Jud, im 17 years old, and have a
little bit of experience with electronics (less than a
little, actually), but I have had a lot of experience
in programming basic, c, c++, and a smidge of ASM.

Right now I'm trying to build a JY twin turbo 67
mustang.  I really want a custom EFI, none of this
Ford late model stuff (it's good, dont get me wrong,
just very limited). I want to build something that i
can tune for boost, something i can have complete
control over the engine with.

I came across this list, and read through the first
months archive, and now I am very interested.

Whats the state of the project now?  Have they made a
semi complete DIY-EFI system yet?  I figure after 7
years you guys should be pretty much DONE :P




 --part1_57.41bedf9.295e6c63_boundary-- ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Sat Dec 29 00:36:45 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: eDIST, or ignition the final answer Bruce, if you dont mind, what did the eDIST run? the rest I can either fake it or call GM. thanks BW ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Fri Dec 28 20:48:30 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Now general warnings for retrofits was Re: Adding a gas tank return Fran and Bud wrote: > > I have had good luck for years in adding things like outlets or returns by > cutting a 2 1/2" or 3" disc from some heavy sheet metal with a hole saw and > then brazing tubing or fittings into it and drilling a 4 to 6 hole pattern > near the outside edge. It can then be fastened over a small hole in the > tank using cork or neoprene gasket material and bolted down with 4-6 self > tapping sheet metal screws. If you want to get fancy you can use threaded > inserts and machine screws. In any case all of the fabrication is external > to the tank except for cutting the extra hole in it, and vacuuming out the > shavings. > > Bud This is not an unusual approach. There is another consideration when building an efi system including a tank not originally designed for it. A return type efi system will transfer heat to the fuel in the tank. The fuel will expand and produce vapors as a result of this. The tank should be positively vented in these situations. If a sender/tube/whatever has been added by the method mentioned above, it is very very likely that fuel vapor will be forced out of the tank around the screws and gasket. Do not rely on a pressure release cap to vent the vapors. These caps can vary significantly in their "release pressure." 4-5 psi pressure in the tank can easily force fuel vapor out around a home made sender. Better to be cautious (and responsible) than sorry. Shannen ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From shannen@grolen.com Thu Dec 27 00:04:52 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:44 -0300 From: Shannen Durphey MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return BTDT (retrofit), at least a couple of times. 1st time, added 3/8 line to sender for fuel supply, used OEM 5/16" line for return. Vent line added to filler neck. Second time used tank in middle 80's truck as-is. OEM return below fuel level? Unless I'm missing something, that's-a no problem. If above, nothing wrong with removing sender and extending the line with some soldered on tubing. Vent is tricky. Since it's a smogger vintage tank, CCP should be ok to use. Old tanks w/ no baffles burp fuel if the vent's not right. If there's more to this story than it seems, let me know. Shannen Bruce wrote: > > In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. > The fuel tank has 3 lines, > one out to pump > charcoal canister > fuel return > > The fuel out is fine. > The pump needs a return line to the tank > we need a fuel return > and a vent line > > The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below > the fuel level. > > Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > > Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > > Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the > sender is the only answer. > TIA > Bruce > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From SAndersen@advan-tek.com Wed Dec 26 23:41:58 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:48 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:48 -0300 From: Stephen Andersen MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: wbo2 testing question Are you saying that if you power the circuit with nothing hooked up that the LED will come on in 10 secs? I have not tried powering it without a load on the heater circuit. With a 3.1ohm lamp the LED did not come on even after about 75 seconds. I am getting about 6 volts (open circuit) at the heater outputs with 14 volt input. That sounds kind of low isn't it? Anybody got any ideas or recommendations on how to check the circuit thoroughly (for an electronics idiot) after construction but prior to connecting the sensor? I really don't want to smoke $120... On the ISO is the dot (pin 1) supposed to be in the top left corner when looking at it on the board with the heater circuit in the top left? How about the LED? Not sure that I put it in the right way... Thanks, Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On > Behalf Of rr > Subject: Re: wbo2 testing question > > Yes, the dot is pin 1 on iso1. Without a sensor hooked up the heater > ready LED should come on within 10 seconds. Then J8 will move > from 2.5 V. > > BobR. > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From jmeager@bigpond.com Fri Dec 28 22:01:25 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:51 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:51 -0300 From: "Jeff Meager" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Adding a gas tank return And note. Depending on how much your pump flows, you will need to ensure that the return goes back into the in-tank swirl pot, not outside it.....or the pump will empty the swirl pot - esp if the pump can flow more than the holes in the swirl pot - had this before.... LJ -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Fran and Bud Sent: Friday, 28 December 2001 5:15 AM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return IMHO I believe that it is NECESSARY that the return line returns the fuel to VERY near the bottom of the tank, well BELOW the fuel level to prevent fuel aeration. Another reason to return to the bottom is that fuel flowing thru a line and discharging thru open air space CAN (not WILL - just can) ignite the vapor space under certain atmospheric conditions. Fortunately most of the time the vapor will be too rich to ignite and besides the weather wont be prone to static generation - BUT you only have to be the "one in a million" that it happens to for your whole day to be ruined. More important to using a tank that was not originally intended for EFI is an well or a baffle for the fuel pickup to assure that the pump does not suck air when the fuel level is low or when slosh from cornering, hard acceleration, or braking can uncover the inlet. I have had good luck for years in adding things like outlets or returns by cutting a 2 1/2" or 3" disc from some heavy sheet metal with a hole saw and then brazing tubing or fittings into it and drilling a 4 to 6 hole pattern near the outside edge. It can then be fastened over a small hole in the tank using cork or neoprene gasket material and bolted down with 4-6 self tapping sheet metal screws. If you want to get fancy you can use threaded inserts and machine screws. In any case all of the fabrication is external to the tank except for cutting the extra hole in it, and vacuuming out the shavings. Bud ---------- From: ECMnut@aol.com >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org >Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return >Date: Wed, Dec 26, 2001, 2:10 PM > >Hey Bruce, >why does the return line have to be above the fuel level? >Thanks, >Mike V >In a message dated 12/26/2001 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, >nacelp@bright.net writes: > >> >> The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is >below >> the fuel level. >> >> Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. >> >> Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. >> >> Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the >> sender is the only answer. >> TIA >> Bruce > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From ilphayunterhay@yahoo.com Sat Dec 29 16:25:26 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:53 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:53 -0300 From: Phil Hunter MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Datalogging RPM signal "Tomas" wrote: > Hi, I'm writing an opensource program to plot HP > curves and monitor/log engine RPMs. I'm using a > voltage divider to pick the 12V signal from the > coil input. The input is recorded with my soundcard > using the Line input. I'm having troubles with > trying to figure out how to count the spikes, > because the signal I get is VERY far from a square > wave :). And with my ignition, when the RPM goes up, > the signal amplitude goes DOWN ....so no static > treshold for counting spikes :/. One suggestion would be to substitute a signal diode such as a 1N916 or 1N4148 for the "bottom" resistor in the divider, cathode (band) end to ground. This should give you a relatively constant 0.7V high "pulse" waveform across the RPM range. If your input signal goes below ground, then add another diode in parallel w/ the first but connected "backwards" (anode to ground). If you truely want a square wave, you may have to run the signal above into an op-amp to amplify it again, then into the clock input of a flip-flop IC to make a square wave at half the input frequency, then into another voltage divider to bring it back down to a level compatible w/ the line input. I'd probably use CMOS for good noise immunity, low power, and wide power supply tolerance, just don't let the input signals exceed the power supplys (Vcc or ground) or you could destroy the chip. Also don't let any unused inputs "float", tie them to Vcc or ground. If this is a laptop, you can "steal" power (5V) from the external keyboard connector, in my experience it tends to be electrically noisy (I used it in place of batteries for some external speakers and you could hear the noise) so you'd probably need some filtering. [snip] regards, philh (digest) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Send your FREE holiday greetings online! http://greetings.yahoo.com ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From elcamino73@mindspring.com Sat Dec 29 08:50:49 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:59 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 18:59:59 -0300 From: "elcamino73" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return I just added EFI to an old carb type tank. I brazed a return line that is three inches long in the sender plate. It sure would be nice to know what a stock EFI setup normally has! It already has baffles in the tank. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Fran and Bud" To: Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2001 4:14 PM Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return > IMHO > I believe that it is NECESSARY that the return line returns the fuel to VERY > near the bottom of the tank, well BELOW the fuel level to prevent fuel > aeration. > > Another reason to return to the bottom is that fuel flowing thru a line and > discharging thru open air space CAN (not WILL - just can) ignite the vapor > space under certain atmospheric conditions. Fortunately most of the time > the vapor will be too rich to ignite and besides the weather wont be prone > to static generation - BUT you only have to be the "one in a million" that > it happens to for your whole day to be ruined. > > More important to using a tank that was not originally intended for EFI is > an well or a baffle for the fuel pickup to assure that the pump does not > suck air when the fuel level is low or when slosh from cornering, hard > acceleration, or braking can uncover the inlet. > > I have had good luck for years in adding things like outlets or returns by > cutting a 2 1/2" or 3" disc from some heavy sheet metal with a hole saw and > then brazing tubing or fittings into it and drilling a 4 to 6 hole pattern > near the outside edge. It can then be fastened over a small hole in the > tank using cork or neoprene gasket material and bolted down with 4-6 self > tapping sheet metal screws. If you want to get fancy you can use threaded > inserts and machine screws. In any case all of the fabrication is external > to the tank except for cutting the extra hole in it, and vacuuming out the > shavings. > > > Bud > > ---------- > >From: ECMnut@aol.com > >To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org > >Subject: Re: Adding a gas tank return > >Date: Wed, Dec 26, 2001, 2:10 PM > > > > >Hey Bruce, > >why does the return line have to be above the fuel level? > >Thanks, > >Mike V > >In a message dated 12/26/2001 4:49:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, > >nacelp@bright.net writes: > > > >> > >> The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is > >below > >> the fuel level. > >> > >> Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. > >> > >> Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. > >> > >> Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the > >> sender is the only answer. > >> TIA > >> Bruce > > > >----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- - > >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From r71chevy@earthlink.net Thu Dec 27 00:51:47 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 19:00:11 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 19:00:11 -0300 From: "Bob Wooten" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: RE: Adding a gas tank return I can tell you what I did, right or wrong. I took my sending unit down to my radiator guy & told him that I wanted a 1/2" output & what he did was to take the factory unit out & put a 1/2" line in. He had an old Power Steering Pressure line laying around for a BMW. I cut the flex line off if it & took the part that most closely matched the shape of the old sending line. what we did then was remove the old line & put the new one in & tried to lay it in the exact spot as the old one. that was a mess. ( I was running the Carb @ the time & wanted 1/2" line) We had to put the float back on & all that & it is still not "right" if the tank is <1/8 & I hit a hard corner it starves the pickup (not good). Were I to do it again, I would pop a hole in the top of the sending unit & run the new line down as close to the factory PU line & call it a day. as a matter of fact I have an NOS one here that I think I am going to do that with to see if I cant fix that up. I don't see any reason why it wont work, it has worked for 25 years now with a carb, & 5 with the EFI (happy birthday to her, happy birthday to her, happy birthday dear franceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnnnnne, happy birthday to her) HTH's BW -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org [mailto:owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org]On Behalf Of Bruce Sent: Tuesday, December 25, 2001 5:21 PM To: diy_efi@diy-efi.org Subject: Adding a gas tank return In the process of doing a EFI retrofit. The fuel tank has 3 lines, one out to pump charcoal canister fuel return The fuel out is fine. The pump needs a return line to the tank we need a fuel return and a vent line The oem sender has a restrictor on the CCP line, and the oem return is below the fuel level. Has anyone dealt with a similiar situation?, and what was your answers. Drilling into the filler neck looks like a real PITA. Beginning to look like a tank R+R and adding bulk head AN stuff around the sender is the only answer. TIA Bruce ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From Dorrestijn@corps.nl Sat Dec 29 10:10:39 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 19:00:45 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 19:00:45 -0300 From: Igor Dorrestijn Subject: DIY-WB pcb layout Hi guys, This wide band project is awesome, but as I only joined the group recently and am located in Europe I see some difficulties in going the group buy route. Are the board layouts available somewhere as gif/pdf/gerber/hpgl so I can try to etch the board myself? Seasons greetings, Igor Dorrestijn ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org From f_wilk@hotmail.com Thu Dec 27 04:32:15 2001 Received: from [00.00.00.00] by xxx.xxx.xx; Sat, 29 Dec 2001 19:01:29 -0300 Date: Sat, 29 Dec 2001 19:01:29 -0300 From: "944Technologist" MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Bosch bins http://motronicinfo.homestead.com/index.html ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dylan Johnson" To: Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 5:26 AM Subject: Bosch bins > I'm looking for the bin from a 87-88 Peugeot 505 V6 NA. Awhile back one of > the list members was working on a collection of Bosch bins but I can't find > the URL to his site. Does anyone have it? > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) > in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org > > ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@diy-efi.org ----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org