DIY_EFI Digest Sunday, 31 March 1996 Volume 01 : Number 094 In this issue: Motronic Look-Up Tables Re: lambda sensor Re: Motronic Look-Up Tables Re: Switching from carb to FI on a Ford (fwd) Re: Re[2]: injector pulse width Re: Multispark See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "George Theologitis" <193.92.133.35@xxx.gr> Date: Fri, 29 Mar 1996 17:06:40 +0200 Subject: Motronic Look-Up Tables The following two 12x12 matrixs are the advance and fueling look-up tables converted in dec, from a Bosch Motronic ECU with a map sensor. The problem is that, I'm not sure for the direction of engine speed (RPMs) and Load signal. (top to down, left to right ....) Any help is welcome.... Advance: 53 53 53 56 59 63 63 54 51 50 50 50 58 59 59 62 66 66 66 63 58 54 54 54 65 65 69 69 70 70 70 70 60 58 58 58 77 77 77 77 77 77 73 73 68 65 63 63 90 90 90 90 86 86 79 77 73 66 64 64 98 98 98 93 90 86 83 81 74 69 65 65 97 97 97 96 93 89 85 83 75 70 68 68 99 99 93 91 90 90 86 83 79 70 65 65 98 101 93 93 89 89 83 79 75 67 65 65 99 99 98 90 90 87 83 79 79 70 65 65 98 98 94 90 90 85 83 83 79 70 65 65 98 98 94 97 86 86 83 83 79 70 65 65 Fuel Map 113 113 113 113 113 114 116 117 118 127 132 148 122 122 122 122 122 123 123 126 126 132 137 149 133 133 133 139 139 139 140 140 141 146 148 151 139 139 141 149 153 153 153 155 155 160 162 161 134 138 140 143 144 148 149 152 154 157 163 166 136 144 146 152 155 156 158 160 161 165 168 171 132 132 138 143 148 154 156 158 161 165 168 176 122 122 127 134 139 145 149 151 156 163 170 179 127 128 138 146 155 159 162 169 172 177 181 190 123 123 141 142 156 164 170 172 177 178 182 189 124 126 140 158 169 179 179 180 182 184 195 201 121 121 136 147 170 179 183 185 186 186 190 199 Thanks in advance! ------------------------------ From: tom sparks Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 09:52:20 -0600 Subject: Re: lambda sensor At 12:43 AM 3/27/96 +0700, you wrote: >Does anybody have any info on adapting a lambda sensor to my toyota >engine (7K series engine, 1800 cc)? because the stock ecu did not have >one (BTW it is an open loop system and i want to modified it into a >close loop system). >What type of lambda sensor that matched to my engine, and where i can >get it? >please help me!!!!!! >thank you!!!!!!! > > Here's a web address that is a good primer on O2 sensors: http://ram.chem.tulane.edu:8080/f-body/trivia/o2sensor.html Hope it helps Best regards, Thomas Sparks ------------------------------ From: Land Shark Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 10:12:53 -0700 Subject: Re: Motronic Look-Up Tables At 17:06 3/29/96 +0200, you wrote: >The following two 12x12 matrixs are the advance >and fueling look-up tables converted in dec, Why yes, they are :) >from a Bosch Motronic ECU with a map sensor. What application?? >The problem is that, I'm not sure for the direction >of engine speed (RPMs) and Load signal. (top to down, >left to right ....) That much is easy, since you have the spark table ... Down is increasing RPM, and Across to the right is Increasing LOAD .. if you would be so kind as to post the 28 bytes BEFORE this data for EACH table, I can tell you EXACTLY what RPMS, and LOAD values are for the sites!! >Any help is welcome.... Also, If you get me the code, I can tell you exactly how the internal table values relate to the real world for spark and such ... >Advance: > 53 53 53 56 59 63 63 54 51 50 50 50 > 58 59 59 62 66 66 66 63 58 54 54 54 > 65 65 69 69 70 70 70 70 60 58 58 58 > 77 77 77 77 77 77 73 73 68 65 63 63 > 90 90 90 90 86 86 79 77 73 66 64 64 > 98 98 98 93 90 86 83 81 74 69 65 65 > 97 97 97 96 93 89 85 83 75 70 68 68 > 99 99 93 91 90 90 86 83 79 70 65 65 > 98 101 93 93 89 89 83 79 75 67 65 65 > 99 99 98 90 90 87 83 79 79 70 65 65 > 98 98 94 90 90 85 83 83 79 70 65 65 > 98 98 94 97 86 86 83 83 79 70 65 65 The fuel map always has a BASE value of 128 (0x80) and is a multiplicative correction to LOAD to get the injection time In your engine.. LOAD must be calculated from MAP and RPM >Fuel Map > 113 113 113 113 113 114 116 117 118 127 132 148 > 122 122 122 122 122 123 123 126 126 132 137 149 > 133 133 133 139 139 139 140 140 141 146 148 151 > 139 139 141 149 153 153 153 155 155 160 162 161 > 134 138 140 143 144 148 149 152 154 157 163 166 > 136 144 146 152 155 156 158 160 161 165 168 171 > 132 132 138 143 148 154 156 158 161 165 168 176 > 122 122 127 134 139 145 149 151 156 163 170 179 > 127 128 138 146 155 159 162 169 172 177 181 190 > 123 123 141 142 156 164 170 172 177 178 182 189 > 124 126 140 158 169 179 179 180 182 184 195 201 > 121 121 136 147 170 179 183 185 186 186 190 199 I can really help you more if you show me the actual code, in fact I can probably have it reversed for you in a few hours ... It's kind of a hobby with me :) Jim Conforti lndshrk@xxx.com ------------------------------ From: "George M. Dailey" Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 20:04:02 -0600 Subject: Re: Switching from carb to FI on a Ford (fwd) At 04:43 PM 3/28/96 -0600, you wrote: I want to get rid of the old unreliable inefficient carb on my 84 F-150 4.9L. (It's my tow vehicle so this is sort of Auto-X related). I don't see any reason why >:I shouldn't be able to convert to a TBI system (Throttle Body Injection) >:I just don't know where to start to look. >:So if anyone has done this to their vehicle I'd like to hear the pros >:and cons of it based on your experiences. As well as your manufacturer >:and cost. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I'm sure you are aware of the Holly complete kit systems so.... On my '58 chevy truck, prior to TPEFI, I used an '89 GM throttle body system off of a truck. The swap was relatively easy. There should be a posting of this somewhere. To BRIEFLY summarize: get ECM, throttle body, pump, all sensors, electrical connectors, 7 term HEI distributer, lots of wiring,and a service manual for the TBI system Fab the harnes per the service manual Test the system (off the vehicle) via check engine light and other indicators Fabricate an adapter plate for throttle body to intake manifold carb mount Modify exiesting fuel lines for a return fuel flow configuration. Install TBI Fuel pump Install Throttle body and prefabed & pretested harness Install 7 term HEI distributer. crank engine and work out any bugs It's that simple. I drive Maxine ('58 chevy) every day and did not miss a beat. I did every thing possible, without disabling the truck, first. What was left, was completed in 6 hours. Total project cost was about $250.00 (give or take a little) Now, for your ford... (let the flames begin!!) I THINK you could adapt this same system (GM TBI) to your 351 / 302 ford with one extra step. Replace your exiesting ignition module with the GM 7 term HEI ignition module. Yes, your ford engine will be following 350 / 305 TBI fuel and timming curves. I don't think this will be much of a problem. I'm not sure what ford has available as far as OEM TBI systems but they don't have a good reputation of parts interchangability between years. See what they have FIRST. Find out how difficult a conversion could possibly be. I'm about to mail my complete TBI system to a friend with an 265cid '84 olds cutlass. You guesed it.... Since the system is 350 based we expect a need for smaller injectors, 4.3 or 3.8L v6 might be the ticket. He might get lucky and not need too do any thing. One more thing, If you have one of those "ford pissing on a Chevy" window stickers you would have to remove it after the GM conversion. In this part of the country those are shooting graphics. You could receive lead from both sides :-) Good luck GMD ------------------------------ From: "George M. Dailey" Date: Sat, 30 Mar 1996 20:29:31 -0600 Subject: Re: Re[2]: injector pulse width At 09:41 AM 3/29/96, you wrote: > > >>Per Frank "Choco" Munday's book, TPFI, he states that 305/350 injectors >>will work reasonably well if exchanged as a complete set. This refers to >>the MAF type TPI systems up to '89, and exclude your '85 baby (even though >>it's MAF equiped). His book only covers the '86-'89 models, but I think the >>injector swaping rule will apply to your system also since it's a MAF type. >>Choco goes on to say that he can not tell the difference below 4,500rpm. >>Thats big in small and small in big. >> >>There are differences in the operating pressures. Per chilton, 44psi for >>5.0 & 37psi for 5.7 > >>22lbs/hr flow rate for the 350 per Ben Watsons chevy fuel injection book (no >>305 data). > >>BTW guys, The '89 TPI in my '58 is running great! All bugs have been worked >>out and I've clocked over 600 trouble free city miles already. The R700 is >>comming soon. > >>Dan, if you can give the symtoms, I sure one of us gurus could help. > >>Good luck >>GMD > >Thanx for the info. > >The system is infact of a TPI of a 305 '85 F-body according to the fuel rail >number. However the system is now MAP sensing. Can anyone confirm that what I >have done seem right. I have the ECU water temp sensor mounted in one of the >three holes in the front of the manifold, the air temp sensor is mounted in the >hole on the underside at the back of the plenumb chamber, and the MAP ensor >vacuum line is taken of the back corner of the plenumb chamber. > >The cam is: inlet - open 23 deg, close 61 deg (I think) > exhaust - open 68 deg, close 26 deg (I think) > >The engine only seem to run evenly at a stoic of 11.5, CO=5%-7% (very rich) at >idle. When you try and improve on this and actually load up the engine, the >engine starts to jerk around quite violently and only seem to settle down >slightly in the low rpm range when you give it lots of fuel. > >Is it possible to calculate a theoretical fuel map for my computer, either a VE >value or an inject time pulse width for the rpm range that we can follow ? > >If this is possible can someone please send me the formulas ? > >By the way, I'm using the old type HEI dizzy, and when we checked the ignition, >it looked like one bank of the engine had a problem (the pulses were not all >level, but went up and down and up and down) but I have been told that the wrong >air/fuel ratio can cause this. Anyone have any ideas ? > >Is it a timing problem ? Is it a fuel problem ? > >Much help needed here > > >Dan dzorde@xxx.au ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++ Dan, If I were you, I would START by follow this GENERAL diagnostic procedure. Start writting down things you have checked and there results. There are a lot of things that can fail on a TPI system. I'm almost sure that the '85 TPI used a MAP and MAF sensor. The '85 is a stand alone system as far as electronics are concerned. Verify that the ignition system is working properly and that each plug is firing. Check your fuel pressure and make sure that it is being Vacuume compensated. There should be no fuel on the Vacuume side of the pressure regulator. GET A SERVICE MANUAL for the system. Chilton or if possible, OEM. What type of trouble codes are being sent? I can't give much more advice without knowing more (a lot more) details. In general, be certian the mechanical portion of the engine is in good shape. Look for the simple things first like cold start valve leaks, vacuume leaks. Good luck and be patient & persistant. GMD ------------------------------ From: "Clinton L. Corbin : Backgrind/Gold : Pager 0544" Date: Sun, 31 Mar 96 00:57:17 PST Subject: Re: Multispark >(assuming by this you meant waste spark). In addition, half the spark >plugs on wastespark systems erode the ground electrode faster than the >center electrode, so if you want 100,000 mile tune up intervals, you >need double platinum plugs OR customers/dealers/mechanics who are >willing to take the care to install the two kinds of single platinum >plugs in the correct cylinders. Guess how often we count on them to >do it right! Thus, we have to install the fancy plugs in each cylinder >to idiot proof the tuneup. >and burning change. Surely ion sensing is easier and more robust across >a single gap compared to two in series. Ed, Ok, I can see the advantages of one coil per plug. Of course, most of this started out of a discusion about DIY EFI, so the 100,000 mile tune up is kind of irrelevant. But then, you are not looking at this from a diyers point of view. What problems would there be in having one TPU channel fire two coils? It would still be a type of wasted spark (so you save 4 TPU channels), but you would have the same polarity on all of the plugs. And, you would only have to do the ion sensing across one gap. If you really can't stand to have the plug fire on the wasted spark, could you drive the ignition driver with a latch? The cylinders would be paired in and "odds or evens" type system (just the way they are in the wasted spark system) and a normal output port from the micro would select which cylinder out of the pairs would fire. The TPU channel for the cylinder pair would feed both cylinders. The cylinder select line would go straight to the even cylinders and be inverted to feed the odd cylinders. The TPU and the select line would be ANDed together to control the latch. Possible? What problems do you see? But anyway, thanks for the input Ed. Clint Corbin ccorbin@xxx.com ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V1 #94 **************************** 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".