DIY_EFI Digest Wednesday, 7 February 1996 Volume 01 : Number 035 In this issue: Re: Re[4]: IAC Re:PIC app. Re: Spellcheckers & Hall Effect sensors True dual exhaust and O2 Sensors Re: Spellcheckers RE: REQ. Info on EFI Re: Spellcheckers Re: Spellcheckers Re: True dual exhaust and O2 Sensors Re[6]: IAC Re[2]: Spellcheckers Re: Re[6]: IAC Re:PIC app. GM TPI system See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: arthurok@xxx.com (ARTHUR OKUN ) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 02:17:55 -0800 Subject: Re: Re[4]: IAC You wrote: > > >Previous stuff deleted > >>Does that wolf unit have any output that could control throttle air >>input you realize that its a multiphase ac stepping motor >>could probably make a circuit using cheap ics that would open >>it realative to tempature or how about a super simple circuit to >>open or close it with just a pair of push buttons when you read >>it with >>a scan tool it just tells you the number of counts open 80 is >>pretty much maximum but it will send it more if it thinks the iac is >>sticking so i guess you could concider it a feed back loop .> > >It just so happend that it may be possible to configure an aux injector >output as a mainly on/off output for an IAC. It all depends on when >the software is being updated. > >do you think there is a market for more than one unit? if i sent you a un prototyped schematic could you build and debug it? maybe i will build one using a pic16 up as a little learning exercise the pic only costs $2.50 us and can do the whole thing with just a little stepper driver circuit and a dip switch for open and closed pintle position; if you could pulse with modulate or vary the frequency of that output it would convert that into counts. maybe a solonoid valve and a needle valve would be easier for you does any one else out their have any interest in this project i am trying to come up with new pic16 applications and have developement hardware and software for it and eproms ,intel 87xx ups currently i can only program the 165x series because i have not upgraded my programmer. ------------------------------ From: Fred Miranda Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 05:43:44 GMT Subject: Re:PIC app. >if i sent you a un prototyped schematic could you build and debug it? > maybe i will build one using a pic16 up as a little learning exercise >the pic only costs $2.50 us and can do the whole thing with just >a little stepper driver circuit and a dip switch for open and closed >pintle position; if you could pulse with modulate or vary the frequency >of that output it would convert that into counts. >maybe a solonoid valve and a needle valve would be easier for you >does any one else out their have any interest in this project >i am trying to come up with new pic16 applications and have >developement hardware and software for it and eproms ,intel 87xx ups >currently i can only program the 165x series because i have not >upgraded my programmer. I've got a project for you. How about a boost controller. HKS uses a stepper in theirs and I think they go for $7-800US. I have thought about doing something like this once I get up to speed on controllers. Fred ------------------------------ From: "Mark Hillier" Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 08:59:49 +0000 Subject: Re: Spellcheckers & Hall Effect sensors Peter wrote: > I did look at and note his address, and said "up there". I prefer to > disagree with you on the spelling being in french. It just looks bad to me. I see... > > >I think he did > >quite well....you understood what he was trying to say -right ? > > No, and that was the reason for the comment. Working my way through all of > the spelling errors became such hard work that I gave up and went onto the > next posting. Funny, most people figures it out quite well. > Therefore, if I had been able to contribute anything to the > reply, I wouldn't have, because it would have been too much like hard work. But you seem to treat the list as just that -work. I think most of are here becaure we are interested or *enjoy* it. Your business side is showing. Be careful you don't let Superchips go to your head - -Cyberspace will trash you if you do. > This is why there are spell checkers, so that simple errors can be > eliminated by the computer. Poor English is a different story, and my French > would be a lot worse than his English, but I would try and run it through a > spell checker to get some sort of chance of the best possible responses to > my questions. Agreed. He could have done that. I could do that and eliminate my typos -but what a pain. Imagine if you had to spell-chek all your posts....adding all those tech. terms to the dictionary etc... > If the guy didn't speak English then the grammar and text content would be > very different and then everything would be excusable. I don't get it. Are you implying that if he had been *completely* incoherent, that it would be Ok; but that since he *almost* had it right, that its not ? -"are you for real ?" > > How about some slack ? > Ok,you answer the question, I'm off to the next posting Hurry... you have 27 more to do before lunch! >;-o - ------------------------------------------------------------------ DRASTIC CHANGE OF TOPIC (enough wasted bandwidth) Has anyone tried a Hall Effect sensor from Honeywell ? I have one at home that gives a nice 5 V pulse train. It is rated for automotive use. I have the part number and specs at home if anyone is interested. Cost is about 30 $CDN in single quantities. Mark Hillier DATARADIO Technical Support mhillier@xxx.com ------------------------------ From: Watergeo@xxx.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 11:14:57 -0500 Subject: True dual exhaust and O2 Sensors Hello I'm exploring the possibility of changing from single to true dual exhaust on my late model Ford truck which appears to have the EEIV and MAF sensor (California). Do I need to install a second O2 sensor? Would this sensor be connected parallel to the original or does the EEIV have an input for a second sensor? I think many (most?) late model mustangs had true dual exhaust and the controllers are similar I would guess. Nick Hagen ------------------------------ From: pjwales@xxx.net (Peter Wales) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 12:53:32 -0500 Subject: Re: Spellcheckers At 08:59 AM 2/6/96 +0000, diy_efi@xxx.edu wrote: >> No, and that was the reason for the comment. Working my way through all of >> the spelling errors became such hard work that I gave up and went onto the >> next posting. > >Funny, most people figures it out quite well. It never ceases to amaze me how you guys all know what everyone else is doing. Must be telepathy or something. > >> Therefore, if I had been able to contribute anything to the >> reply, I wouldn't have, because it would have been too much like hard work. > >But you seem to treat the list as just that -work. I think most of >are here becaure we are interested or *enjoy* it. I think I'm getting flamed for the sake of it here. If you have a question, don't you think it makes sense to present your question neatly written with no spelling errors. That way those who can offer the answers will not have to try and decipher your laziness and do the spelling for you. Please feel free to disagree with me and continue to type garbage to the list. My reaction when I read it is that if the poster can't be bothered to pose the question properly, why should I waste my time answering it properly. It all depends upon whether you are a giver or a taker in this world I suppose. >Your business side >is showing. Be careful you don't let Superchips go to your head >-Cyberspace will trash you if you do. Too late, it has already gone to my head, and tried to trash me as well, but fortunately it failed. > >> This is why there are spell checkers, so that simple errors can be >> eliminated by the computer. Poor English is a different story, and my French >> would be a lot worse than his English, but I would try and run it through a >> spell checker to get some sort of chance of the best possible responses to >> my questions. > >Agreed. He could have done that. I could do that and eliminate my >typos -but what a pain. Imagine if you had to spell-chek all your >posts....adding all those tech. terms to the dictionary etc... So everyone else has to do it for him? Sounds like he didn't need the answer to the question very badly. > >> If the guy didn't speak English then the grammar and text content would be >> very different and then everything would be excusable. > >I don't get it. Are you implying that if he had been *completely* >incoherent, that it would be Ok; but that since he *almost* had it >right, that its not ? -"are you for real ?" > Look at the address and the place of employment. If the questioner had been from a non English speaking country and had made an effort to write the question in English, then it would have been obvious he didn't speak English, and deserved a lot of credit for trying. This post was simply the result of bashing it out on the keyboard and not checking it before posting. How do I know? I've done it myself and been embarrassed about it when I've seen it on the screen. >> > How about some slack ? > >> Ok,you answer the question, I'm off to the next posting > >Hurry... you have 27 more to do before lunch! >;-o I'm going as fast as I can. If I were to pose a question on this list, I would take the time to think out exactly what it is I want to know, phrase the question carefully to screen out the answers and then check the grammar and spelling before I post it. After all, the people who reply are under no obligation to help me out and so I am going to make it as easy for them as possible. As a corollary, if I make it difficult to understand the question, why should anyone bother to unravel the mystery I have made, just so they can do something for me? Think about it. Peter Wales President Superchips Inc Florida Chairman Superchips Ltd Buckingham "Timing is everything" Superchips home page with all the answers http://www.superchips.com ------------------------------ From: Paul Shackleton Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 16:24:11 -0500 Subject: RE: REQ. Info on EFI Brian wrote: >`Hi I am looking for info on EFI for a friend. He does a bit of >rallying and was reading in a magazine about a man in England that >built is own version. This is like the ProFlo fuel injector in that he >can alter the settings while it is running. Unlike the ProFlo this >connects to an ordinary PC . This allows him to put it on a rolling >road and fiddle with the settings till he gets the right horsepower >etc. The Circuit I understand was called M3d and the guy built it for >a Few hundred pounds. I would appreciate any help on this as he is >driving me up the wall. > Thanks > Brian Prior This system has recently come on the market. It is, as you point out, called M3D and is produced by a South London (UK) firm called Emerald Cams. M3D started out as an ignition only setup and has recently had injection added. The cost is UKP300 + VAT for ignition only and UKP350 + VAT for both. It comes as a kit which includes the ECU, wiring harness, throttle pot, free software and sundry other bits and pieces and can be set up on the fly using a PC. It appears to be suitable only for 4 cylinder motors, although I have heard of someone fitting it to a Mini (A-series engine) using only 2 injectors (siamese intake). The bloke who runs Emerald Cams is called Dave Walker and is the Technical Editor of Cars and Car Conversions (CCC) magazine, which has run a couple of articles on M3D. Emerald have had their system hooked up to a Golf GTi and have also linked it to a pulsed nitrous kit. I haven't got the advert with me, but if you get a hold of a copy of CCC, they advertise in there. I am soon going to be fitting one of these systems to a GM 2.0 16v powered Westfield, coz at 350 pounds plus some homemade throttle bodies, you can't go wrong. It works out cheaper than a pair of carbs and anyone elses programmable ignition system. If you want an address/phone no., just ask and I will dig the advert out. Paul P.M.Shackleton@xxx.uk ------------------------------ From: m_mcdonald@xxx.com Date: Tue, 6 Feb 96 17:47:50 EST Subject: Re: Spellcheckers It's time for the flaming about spell checking, grammar checking, etc. to stop. IMHO the real point is having effective written communication among us DIY_EFI enthusiasts. Speaking as a former mathematics teacher and current software technical writer, I think we communicate quite well as we exchange questions/answers and problems/solutions. I certainly notice many spelling and grammatical errors in the messages. Rarely do these and other errors reduce my understanding of the messages' content. As an American who has made his share of grammatical mistakes while speaking German in Europe, I understand the difficulties non-Americans have with English. I also commend their sincere efforts in writing without using a computer to check their spelling. Peter, we appreciate the technical help you've given us and want to continue receiving it. I just don't think your non-technical comments belong on this list. In summary -- while my job centers around communicating technical information effectively, I encourage perfection but am not upset by less-than-perfect English on 'Net discussion lists. Marll McDonald KB1AGM m_mcdonald@xxx.com These opinions are strictly my own. ------------------------------ From: pjwales@xxx.net (Peter Wales) Date: Tue, 06 Feb 1996 20:46:22 -0500 Subject: Re: Spellcheckers > >It's time for the flaming about spell checking, grammar checking, >etc. to stop. Yes Teach! > >IMHO the real point is having effective written communication among >us DIY_EFI enthusiasts. Speaking as a former mathematics teacher and >current software technical writer, I think we communicate quite well >as we exchange questions/answers and problems/solutions. OK, we'll all stay sloppy >In summary -- while my job centers around communicating technical >information effectively, I encourage perfection but am not upset by >less-than-perfect English on 'Net discussion lists. Lets recap. I said "Do they have spell checkers up there". Thats all. Nothing else. Zip. I'm not upset, just amazed by people supporting bad English and saying that it's a good thing. But if thats the way you want it, ok by me. It's just that I'm not the one who is going to lose out. And just in case you guys think that I think I'm perfect, let me tell you about a good one that I made tonight. On another group, while telling them how things should be done, as is my way, I suggested they ought to "do XYZ, but then I'm biassed" The reply "but the rest of us are mono" had me puzzled for about 5 minutes until I saw it. Can you see it? To the relief of many this is the last from me on this subject, but still smiling. Peter Wales President Superchips Inc Chairman Superchips Ltd "Timing is everything" Superchips home page with all the answers http://www.superchips.com ------------------------------ From: "George M. Dailey" Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 18:55:18 -0600 Subject: Re: True dual exhaust and O2 Sensors At 11:14 AM 2/6/96 -0500, Nick Hagen wrote: > >I'm exploring the possibility of changing from single to true dual exhaust on >my late model Ford truck which appears to have the EEIV and MAF sensor >(California). Do I need to install a second O2 sensor? Would this sensor be >connected parallel to the original or does the EEIV have an input for a >second sensor? I think many (most?) late model mustangs had true dual exhaust >and the controllers are similar I would guess. > > > >I don't think you need a second o2 sensor because most V(8s or 6s) have the sensor placed in only one manifold (from the factory). My '58 is V8 powered, dual exhaust with crossover and one O2 vsensor. It's crossover is three feet from the O2. True enough, your ecm will only correct for one side of the motor. This does not seem to be a problem for the millions of Vs using a single o2 sensor. If you have a 'hurt me plenty' philosophy, you could connect two sensors and send the AVERAGE voltage to the ecm. Don't even think about wireing them together directly. You will need some type of analog circuit that will average the voltages. The circuit would need a very high impedence since the 02 sensors generate low voltage at extremly low currents. There are other things to consider also. good luck. GMD ------------------------------ From: dzorde@xxx.au Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 08:24:52 Subject: Re[6]: IAC Previous stuff deleted >>It just so happend that it may be possible to configure an aux injector >>output as a mainly on/off output for an IAC. It all depends on when >>the software is being updated. >> >do you think there is a market for more than one unit? if i sent you a un prototyped schematic could you build and debug it? maybe i will build one using a pic16 up as a little learning exercise the pic only costs $2.50 us and can do the whole thing with just a little stepper driver circuit and a dip switch for open and closed pintle position; if you could pulse with modulate or vary the frequency of that output it would convert that into counts. maybe a solonoid valve and a needle valve would be easier for you does any one else out their have any interest in this project i am trying to come up with new pic16 applications and have developement hardware and software for it and eproms ,intel 87xx ups currently i can only program the 165x series because i have not upgraded my programmer. Thanks for the offer, yes I'm sure there would be others wanting the same thing for controlling IAC's of any kind. Unfortunately I need to get the car on the road in a great hurry, so I need a quick fix solution. However, once I have the car going, I'll have some spare time and if still interested, I'm sure I could build and debug it. But at the moment I just don't have any spare time. (By the way from memory I think PICs are slightly more expensive in OZ) ------------------------------ From: dzorde@xxx.au Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 10:06:52 Subject: Re[2]: Spellcheckers C'mon guys, quit filling up the net with useless crap. Even the best spellers get it wrong because their dyslexic fingers can't hit the right keys. Dan dzorde@xxx.au ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: Spellcheckers Author: diy_efi@xxx.edu at INTERNET Date: 07/2/96 9:59 AM At 08:59 AM 2/6/96 +0000, diy_efi@xxx.edu wrote: >> No, and that was the reason for the comment. Working my way through all of >> the spelling errors became such hard work that I gave up and went onto the >> next posting. > >Funny, most people figures it out quite well. It never ceases to amaze me how you guys all know what everyone else is doing. Must be telepathy or something. > >> Therefore, if I had been able to contribute anything to the >> reply, I wouldn't have, because it would have been too much like hard work. > >But you seem to treat the list as just that -work. I think most of >are here becaure we are interested or *enjoy* it. I think I'm getting flamed for the sake of it here. If you have a question, don't you think it makes sense to present your question neatly written with no spelling errors. That way those who can offer the answers will not have to try and decipher your laziness and do the spelling for you. Please feel free to disagree with me and continue to type garbage to the list. My reaction when I read it is that if the poster can't be bothered to pose the question properly, why should I waste my time answering it properly. It all depends upon whether you are a giver or a taker in this world I suppose. >Your business side >is showing. Be careful you don't let Superchips go to your head >-Cyberspace will trash you if you do. Too late, it has already gone to my head, and tried to trash me as well, but fortunately it failed. > >> This is why there are spell checkers, so that simple errors can be >> eliminated by the computer. Poor English is a different story, and my French >> would be a lot worse than his English, but I would try and run it through a >> spell checker to get some sort of chance of the best possible responses to >> my questions. > >Agreed. He could have done that. I could do that and eliminate my >typos -but what a pain. Imagine if you had to spell-chek all your >posts....adding all those tech. terms to the dictionary etc... So everyone else has to do it for him? Sounds like he didn't need the answer to the question very badly. > >> If the guy didn't speak English then the grammar and text content would be >> very different and then everything would be excusable. > >I don't get it. Are you implying that if he had been *completely* >incoherent, that it would be Ok; but that since he *almost* had it >right, that its not ? -"are you for real ?" > Look at the address and the place of employment. If the questioner had been from a non English speaking country and had made an effort to write the question in English, then it would have been obvious he didn't speak English, and deserved a lot of credit for trying. This post was simply the result of bashing it out on the keyboard and not checking it before posting. How do I know? I've done it myself and been embarrassed about it when I've seen it on the screen. >> > How about some slack ? > >> Ok,you answer the question, I'm off to the next posting > >Hurry... you have 27 more to do before lunch! >;-o I'm going as fast as I can. If I were to pose a question on this list, I would take the time to think out exactly what it is I want to know, phrase the question carefully to screen out the answers and then check the grammar and spelling before I post it. After all, the people who reply are under no obligation to help me out and so I am going to make it as easy for them as possible. As a corollary, if I make it difficult to understand the question, why should anyone bother to unravel the mystery I have made, just so they can do something for me? Think about it. Peter Wales President Superchips Inc Florida Chairman Superchips Ltd Buckingham "Timing is everything" Superchips home page with all the answers http://www.superchips.com ------------------------------ From: arthurok@xxx.com (ARTHUR OKUN ) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 21:05:52 -0800 Subject: Re: Re[6]: IAC You wrote: > > > >Previous stuff deleted > >>>It just so happend that it may be possible to configure an aux >injector >>>output as a mainly on/off output for an IAC. It all depends on when >>>the software is being updated. >>> >>do you think there is a market for more than one unit? >if i sent you a un prototyped schematic could you build and debug it? > maybe i will build one using a pic16 up as a little learning exercise >the pic only costs $2.50 us and can do the whole thing with just >a little stepper driver circuit and a dip switch for open and closed >pintle position; if you could pulse with modulate or vary the frequency >of that output it would convert that into counts. >maybe a solonoid valve and a needle valve would be easier for you >does any one else out their have any interest in this project >i am trying to come up with new pic16 applications and have >developement hardware and software for it and eproms ,intel 87xx ups >currently i can only program the 165x series because i have not >upgraded my programmer. > >Thanks for the offer, yes I'm sure there would be others wanting the >same thing for controlling IAC's of any kind. Unfortunately I need to >get the car on the road in a great hurry, so I need a quick fix >solution. However, once I have the car going, I'll have some spare >time and if still interested, I'm sure I could build and debug it. >But at the moment I just don't have any spare time. (By the way from >memory I think PICs are slightly more expensive in OZ) > > > just close the iac manually and use a "choke cable " manual throttle to set idle airflow throttle stop position . did you ever hear of dick smith electronics he has parts inexpensively. ------------------------------ From: arthurok@xxx.com (ARTHUR OKUN ) Date: Tue, 6 Feb 1996 21:11:28 -0800 Subject: Re:PIC app. You wrote: > >>if i sent you a un prototyped schematic could you build and debug it? >> maybe i will build one using a pic16 up as a little learning exercise >>the pic only costs $2.50 us and can do the whole thing with just >>a little stepper driver circuit and a dip switch for open and closed >>pintle position; if you could pulse with modulate or vary the frequency >>of that output it would convert that into counts. >>maybe a solonoid valve and a needle valve would be easier for you >>does any one else out their have any interest in this project >>i am trying to come up with new pic16 applications and have >>developement hardware and software for it and eproms ,intel 87xx ups >>currently i can only program the 165x series because i have not >>upgraded my programmer. > >I've got a project for you. How about a boost controller. HKS uses a stepper >in theirs >and I think they go for $7-800US. I have thought about doing something like this >once I get up to speed on controllers. > >Fred > most use a pwm valve to control the waste gate the only problem is i dont have a turboed car to experiment on right now.> ------------------------------ From: dzorde@xxx.au Date: Wed, 07 Feb 96 17:07:50 Subject: GM TPI system For anyone out there How do you clean the injectors on the GM TPI systems (85 system). I presume you have to pull them out of the fuel rail ? If so, do you have to pull the whole top apart to get the fuel rail off the manifold bosses ? I know the injectors are held in by a sort of 1/3 turn locking clip, when this is undone do you just pull out the injectors (they seem to be in very tightly) ? Any help appreciated Dan dzorde@xxx.au ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V1 #35 **************************** To subscribe to DIY_EFI-Digest, send the command: subscribe diy_efi-digest in the body of a message to "Majordomo@xxx. A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, replace "diy_efi-digest" in the command above with "diy_efi".