DIY_EFI Digest Wednesday, April 7 1999 Volume 04 : Number 214 In this issue: [Fwd: My MAF sensor] Insanity Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #213 Re: DFI vs TEC II Fw: We're doing this the wrong way... OFF TOPIC: convertible tops Re: DFI vs TEC II Re: DFI or Tec II Re: DFI or Tec II Re: EFI Head Volume Re: OFF TOPIC: convertible tops Re: Police / Taxi EFI 7748 ECM pinouts RE: EFI Head Volume Re: DFI or Tec II Re: DFI or Tec II Re: OFF TOPIC: convertible tops Re: EFI Head Volume NASA O2 sensor prom dump program uploaded Re: EFI Head Volume Re: prom dump program uploaded Re: EFI Head Volume Re:Halp Diamond Star Motored out Re: EFI Head Volume Re: Re:Halp Diamond Star Motored out See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 10:39:00 +0000 From: Frederic Breitwieser Subject: [Fwd: My MAF sensor] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - --------------8B62C24F38F9F75F12A07522 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Can someone help Robert out? Thanks! - -- Frederic Breitwieser Bridgeport, CT 06606 http://www.xephic.dynip.com 1993 Superchaged Lincoln Continental 1989 500cid Turbocharged HWMMV 1975 Dodge D200 Club Cab (soon to be twin turbo 440) 2000 Buick GTP (twin turbo V6) - --------------8B62C24F38F9F75F12A07522 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Return-Path: Resent-Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 06:29:18 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Resent-From: rhumphris@xxx.com Resent-Message-Id: <199904061029.GAA00273@webserver> Received: from hobbit ([90.0.0.25]) by serveit.synomics.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.62) with SMTP id 585 for ; Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:15:54 +0100 Message-ID: <03eb01be8018$825f32c0$1900005a@xxx.com> From: "Robert Humphris" To: "Frederic Breitwieser" Subject: My MAF sensor Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:30:36 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 Frederic, Could you post my request for information on the diy_efi list please? I need to know how to wire up a 6 pin UNISIA JECS maf from an early Subaru Legacy. God only knows how I will find out the information on this item, I might have been better to go for a GM one Rob Humphris - --------------8B62C24F38F9F75F12A07522-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 15:20:57 GMT From: bob@xxx.com (Robert Harris) Subject: Insanity Heres a page with some strange thoughts for those who are running diesels - say for tractor pulling. http://www.plasma.kth.se/~olsson/fc.html Seems these little beasties run at insane rpm with both centane enhancers to make it easy to light the fire and octane enhancers to smooth out the quickly lit fire to make more power. Since they work at different points in the combustion process they don't cancel. Amyl Nitrate lights it off cold and early. Ferrocene or lead slows the formation of free radicals - without affecting the ignition properties. Quick light off, much higher compression ( or boost ) without bad side effects of either. Food for diesel guys thoughts. 1963 Ford C-600 Prison Bus Conversion "Home" 1971 Lincoln Continental 460 "Christine" 1972 "Whale" Mustang awaiting transplant 1978 Dodge Long Bed Peeek Up "Bundymobile" Habaneros - not just for breakfast anymore ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 14:49:11 -0400 From: "Andrew F. Gunnesch" Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #213 The STOCK L98 (5.7L) cast iron heads are ~ 64cc. The STOCK L98 aluminum heads (found on the corvette only) are ~ 58cc. I believe that the 5.0L TPI heads are also close to ~ 58cc. > >I thought the aluminum vette heads and the early powerpack heads were > >the only ones with chambers that small. > >Any others? > >Shannen > > > >Mark Romans wrote: > >> > >> The stock cast iron head is 58.5? Whoa, I thought it would have a bigger > >> chamber than that. Thanks for the info. > >> > >> Also quench area is critical in preventing pre-ignition ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 15:27:47 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: DFI vs TEC II I'll be using a two bar sensor and want to > run it as a MAP system. Looking at the DFI and the TEC II systems. The > DFI seems to be very popular and is widely used. > The TEC II is touted as the best thing next to the expensive Motec > system. It has a data logging feature and many options for the various > types of software available, such as MAP, MAF. However, by time you pay > for the software license, the TEC II seems to be more expensive. > Based on experience is the TEC II worth the extra $$, or is the DFI > everything needed? Is one easier to tune than the other? Does one > system do a better job of fine tuning fuel and ignition? Try calling the manufacturers and faking a problem, and see which tech line acts like they know where to plug the ecm into. Can be a real nightmare, and the price of the ecm has little to do with customer service, IMHO. The Felpro can run closed loop at WOT. So that is their claim to fame. No ecm does any tuning on it's own. You still have to tell it what to do. At one point in time, I had searched around looking for demo software, and from that view, the Felpro, and Haltechs looked friendly.. I really wouldn't run what some folks do for the shear fact that you see lots of them. At one time it seems one manufacturer really wanted to be "out there".. Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 16:11:42 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Fw: We're doing this the wrong way... If ya wanna figure out how much your saving, vs could spend on a TBI, here are some prices. BTW, I saved alot......... And recycled parts!!. > http://www.turbocity.com/EFIPricing.htm#Pricing and Options Cheers Bruce Doc just reminded me, guess all we use around here is junk parts... Ironic ain't it...... ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 15:15:37 -0500 From: steve ravet Subject: OFF TOPIC: convertible tops If there are any custom type people here who have added convertible tops or hard tops to cars that didn't originally have them, please get back to me privately since this is way off charter. I have a car with a lot of roof rot and I think this might be a way to save it, but I'd like to talk to someone who's "been there". Thanks, - --steve - -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@xxx.com Advanced Risc Machines, Inc. www.arm.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 16:20:19 EDT From: CEIJR@xxx.com Subject: Re: DFI vs TEC II I can't give you comparison information. I have been quite happy with the Electromotive TEC II, on a normally aspirated four-cylinder race engine. It is flexible both for mixture and ignition. We have found that tuning the with a wide-range mixture meter (NTK) really works, with the Superblend software. The ecu and software are a bit pricey, but the ignition seems really good, and it has such features as boost retard, and an auxiliary channel to control an accessory of your choice, so when we get our blown engines back running, we will probably use the TEC II instead of the Haltech that we have run in years past. Charlie Iliff ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 20:32:54 +0000 From: Frederic Breitwieser Subject: Re: DFI or Tec II > I've mostly narrowed it down to the Accel/DFI and Tec II systems. I've > called the manufacturers and discussed the various features of each > system and the available software. Chebby 350 engine, speed density. Hmmm :) DFI is an awesome setup, flexible, yada yada. Tec II also is flexible. I prefer the Tec II simply because the ignition, ECM, and everything else is one, firewall mounted, self-contained unit. You can run batch injection or true sequential. Another option you have to is leach an entire TPI setup from a Camaro, Trans-Am or Corvette with the TPI setup - might cost you a lot less if you hunt a bit, and the advantage is you can get parts at any pep boys, summit racing, etc. Just a thought. Speed density OEM stuff is 90-93 TPI, maybe other years as well. > dis-advantages over the other. Seems to me that Tec II system is more > expensive after you include the buying the software license. But the Yes, it is, however its self contained, you can put it together without a wiring harness, using junkyard connectors to the sensors, with crimped spades on the ends of the wires. True do it yourself. The DFI system doesn't have the same tunability, which might affect you down the road with turbocharging and/or nitrous, or other "stuff". DFI is a good system, I'm not knocking it, between the two, I'd prefer the Electromotive stuff. And their tech support is excellent. We built a twin-turbo buick V6 with a sheet metal plenum, and the Electromotive guys, upon our calling in a panic, answered all our questions, and made good recommendations in how to get things started properly. We were running very lean before the turbos kicked in, and they helped resolve that over the phone. I think we clocked about 2 hours with the one guy total, over a 5 hour period. We kept calling back. This advice is free, take it for what its worth - -- Frederic Breitwieser Bridgeport, CT 06606 http://www.xephic.dynip.com 1993 Superchaged Lincoln Continental 1989 500cid Turbocharged HWMMV 1975 Dodge D200 Club Cab (soon to be twin turbo 440) 2000 Buick GTP (twin turbo V6) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 00:12:25 +0200 From: "Espen Hilde" Subject: Re: DFI or Tec II I have tryed the Tec system( I am getting angry........trying not to loose temper)I think the system is fine if you have a natural aspirated v8 with max 5000 rpm.With a high hp reving engine with a more mystery torque curve I dont think its good.You want it to be perfect woudnt you ? or you could stick to carbs! Dont let all the features blind you , you dont need them.And they dont work with a pulse width resolution of 0,1 millisec and big injectors..... How its possible to have automatic fuel calibration on the tec system on a turbo engine with a narrow band 02 sensor is a mystery to me...... You need better pulse width resolution than 0,1milisec if your not going to use staggered injectors. You have to grind the toothed wheel to get accurate timing.(I had to) You have to adjust max hp/rpm first! Do you want to run your new engine at max at the early stages of calibration? You have to turn the engine of each time you want to change calibration..... you must let the turbochargers chill of before you take it of.......time consuming and not userfrendly.The money you save on the system you will loose fast in more dynotime and headaces. voltage compensation dont work, its more sensitive to voltage change at low rpm than high. Acceleration calibration is confusing . If you want to raise the fuel pressure or put in bigger injectors you have to start calibrating from the beginning. here is more systems: http://www.motec.com/ http://www.obr.dk/ http://www.dtafast.demon.co.uk/ http://www.haltech.com.au/ http://www.lincoln.ac.nz/ccb/techs/simon/link.htm http://www.madefi.com/mercecu/mercecu.htm http://www.gems.co.uk/software.html Espen Hilde - ---------- > From: David Sagers > To: diy_efi@xxx.edu > Subject: DFI or Tec II > Date: 2. april 1999 02:33 > > I getting to the point where I want to buy the computer to control the > EFI on my turbo SBC engine. It'll be used as a street strip car. From > the info it sounds like I'll use a speed density system. > I've mostly narrowed it down to the Accel/DFI and Tec II systems. I've > called the manufacturers and discussed the various features of each > system and the available software. > > Now I'd like to ask some of the experts on this list what are the > primary differences and does one system have advantages or > dis-advantages over the other. Seems to me that Tec II system is more > expensive after you include the buying the software license. But the > DFI might lack the ultimate tune-ability, or maybe the guy on the DFI > tech line wasn't as sharp as the guy at Electromotive. > > Thanks > Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 16:41:20 -0700 From: "Mark Romans" Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume I have had several people contact me off list and tell me that the Vet aluminum head is 58cc and the cast iron head (F-body) is 64cc, both L98 engines. Mark - -----Original Message----- From: Shannen Durphey To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Monday, April 05, 1999 7:40 PM Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume >I thought the aluminum vette heads and the early powerpack heads were >the only ones with chambers that small. >Any others? >Shannen > >Mark Romans wrote: >> >> The stock cast iron head is 58.5? Whoa, I thought it would have a bigger >> chamber than that. Thanks for the info. >> >> Also quench area is critical in preventing pre-ignition so he would rather >> increase the combustion chamber volume than shim the head up. Thanks again. >> Mark >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Marc Piccioni >> To: 'diy_efi@xxx.edu> >> Date: Sunday, April 04, 1999 9:46 AM >> Subject: RE: EFI Head Volume >> >> >The head cc's should be 58.5 if the heads have not been cut. One possible >> >method (depending on how much boost he wants to run) is to use Fel-Pro's >> >head save gasket shim, it adds ~0.040" in thickness which roughly >> >translates into ~ 0.8 -> 1.0 drop in C.R. This would save a bunch of $$$ on >> >AL heads if that is what he would like to do......... >> > >> >/Marc >> > >> >---------- >> >From: Mark Romans[SMTP:romans@xxx.net] >> >Sent: April 4, 1999 12:45 AM >> >To: diy_efi@xxx.edu; EFI >> >Subject: EFI Head Volume >> > >> >I have a friend who has an 89 Firebird 5.7 w/tpi and a Vortech and he has >> >the stock cast iron heads. (No casting #) and we are trying to determine >> >what the stock head combustion chamber volume is. He wants to go to >> >aluminum heads and drop his compression to 8.0-8.5 to one range. Anyone >> >know what the stock cast iron L98 F-Body app combustion chamber CC's are? >> >Thanks. Mark >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 19:57:45 -0400 From: Shannen Durphey Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: convertible tops I won't ask to keep this on list, but I'm interested as well. If anyone has any info/experiences here, please let me know. Shannen steve ravet wrote: > > If there are any custom type people here who have added convertible tops > or hard tops to cars that didn't originally have them, please get back > to me privately since this is way off charter. I have a car with a lot > of roof rot and I think this might be a way to save it, but I'd like to > talk to someone who's "been there". Thanks, > > --steve > > -- > Steve Ravet > steve.ravet@xxx.com > Advanced Risc Machines, Inc. > www.arm.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 20:22:41 -0400 From: Shannen Durphey Subject: Re: Police / Taxi EFI Bruce Plecan wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Fran and Bud > To: > Sent: Sunday, April 04, 1999 1:20 PM > Subject: Police / Taxi EFI > > >From what I've heard/seen the pursuit packages are about a dead deal > anymore. > Last info I read about the cop packages was things like parking with the > nose of the car up by a wall, to test for air flow at sustained idle. > Some of the instrument clusters also had warnings like not to use OD at > sustained high speed. > In this day of litigation for a Police Dept to order a Pursuit Package > would be lawyer food. > So the best is, Fleet Service. > Some years ago some Police Depts had to lower the top speed mins, cause none > of the cars could pass it, with a light bar................ That also > explains some unmarked cars... 96 Lumina with light bar, 113mph max, then the grade dropped to 0 and I lost speed. The complaint was that the overdrive wasn't working. Just didn't have enough power. If I run across it, I have a VIN from a police optioned 96 pickup around here somewhere. Shannen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 19:32:26 -0500 From: steve ravet Subject: 7748 ECM pinouts If someone could upload scanned pinouts of the 7748 ECM I'd be grateful. Local library has no service manuals (I live in a small town). - --steve - -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@xxx.com Advanced Risc Machines, Inc. www.arm.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 18:42:29 -0600 From: Marc Piccioni Subject: RE: EFI Head Volume True, as the quench area increase so does the likely hood of detonation. /Marc - ---------- From: Greg Hermann[SMTP:bearbvd@xxx.net] Sent: April 5, 1999 10:24 PM To: diy_efi@xxx.edu Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume >I thought the aluminum vette heads and the early powerpack heads were >the only ones with chambers that small. >Any others? >Shannen > >Mark Romans wrote: >> >> The stock cast iron head is 58.5? Whoa, I thought it would have a bigger >> chamber than that. Thanks for the info. >> >> Also quench area is critical in preventing pre-ignition Make that "DETONATION"!! Different animals.--Yeah, I'm being picky tonight! Greg so he would rather >> increase the combustion chamber volume than shim the head up. Thanks again. >> Mark begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT M>)\^(BP!`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$-@ 0` M`@````(``@`!!) &`% !```!````# ````,``# #````"P`/#@`````"`?\/ M`0```%L`````````@2L?I+ZC$!F=;@#=`0]4`@````!D:7E?969I0&5S;"YE M;F5]E9FE 97-L+F5N9RYO:&EO+7-T871E+F5D=2<` M`````@$+, $````D````4TU44#I$25E?149)0$533"Y%3D`' ``0```!0```!2 M13H@xxx.HWL3Q'2 MOIQ$15-4`````!X`'@P!````!0```%--5% `````'@`?# $````8````;7!I M8V-I;VYI0&%T=&-A;F%D82YN970``P`&$,I,*W@#``<03P(``!X`"! !```` M90```%12544L05-42$51545.0TA!4D5!24Y#4D5!4T533T1/15-42$5,24M% M3%E(3T]$3T9$151/3D%424].+TU!4D,M+2TM+2TM+2TM1E)/33I'4D5'2$52 M34%.3E--5% Z0D5!4D(``````@$)$ $```!L`P``: ,```H&``!,6D9U*[VL M`?\`"@$/`A4"J 7K`H,`4 +R"0(`8V@*P'-E=#(W!@`&PP*#,@/%`@!P)S=&5M`H,SMP+D!Q,"@S02S!3%?0J BPC/"=D[%Y\R-34"@ <*@0VQ"V!N M9S$P,R\44 L*%%$+\F,`0"!4(G(*4"P@800@=&CH92!Q"E!N$7 @/&$@ M"X %`!W@$; @P!' `B!A=)II M`B N"H4*A2]-"L".8R$,"O0?8#$X, +1X&DM,30T#? ,T"03N0M9,38*H -@ M$]!C!4"^+28W"H5])#0;"X)\&=H+F]H(, M M$\ @H&49-T!D=3*?+BYU8FHG)?$TORHK4F4ZX$5&JDDK,6$@`%8&\'4'@',B M/R-#,S8DMQO5);8^YST@'1 (8&=H!4 =$@= YSW "X ]P"!V$< 3T!_ ?SU1 M!" `<" `'1(L(1^A<,QO=P20"K!C:T+%1#']/>8^'1("(!^A`B 'D0/P_1T0 M(!%Q!M $D!SR(* >D,T`P&PW,$5606Y&01T1]1&@/T564Q& *Y )\$56OT56 M(?%$D @#1/$EPCI%5EU*USX<" M`Z!'DB[W3\!-L !P:P0@`A!30ATPSPN `A!(-TT)06P>H1U;_P0@!0$@L$Y0 M`R +@xxx.051) M6\ BT"$A($0&D&9%(0(PIT,A!W '0',N)C!9'>!Z:% A)T)0+!!9`U@0:^\? ML"!Q4?!!<"$A#"KR(0SW'I(=(5$4SVC4U1S-Z!"4!T23O-U\G!3^&%G"W%56%K12X#O(0P]_S\.%6(R$K EM@J% M!1;!`&V0`P`0$ `````#`!$0`````$ `!S" OHIFCX"^`4 `"#" OHIFCX"^ 7`1X`/0`!````!0```%)%.B `````I5X` ` end ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 20:03:50 -0500 From: Tom Sharpe Subject: Re: DFI or Tec II David Sagers wrote: > I getting to the point where I want to buy the computer to control the > EFI on my turbo SBC engine. It'll be used as a street strip car. If you only want 475 HP, I recommend the Edelbrock ProFlow 3500. From Lopers in Phoenix, it's 1/2 the proce of anything else and you can program it while your wife drives without a PC. You'll have to forget the turbo though. Sharpe ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 20:04:20 -0500 From: Tom Sharpe Subject: Re: DFI or Tec II David Sagers wrote: > I getting to the point where I want to buy the computer to control the > EFI on my turbo SBC engine. Go first class - FelPro Sharpe ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 22:24:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Scott Winnicki Subject: Re: OFF TOPIC: convertible tops I am going down this road right now-- I have a 1980 mazda rx-7 that is a "califorina" convertible (chopped top, with no provsion made for a rag top) I bought the car this way, and have been thinking of ways to "make" a top for it. here's what I have so far: 1: sailboat sail places can work wounders with canvase. One place told me they could rig something that would just snap on to the car, but not have a metal frame. This would probably work ok, but at highway speeds It might just blow off 2: I have bought a metal frame from from a 70's Alfa romeo and it seems to fit well, with a a little modification. But it will need to be recovered. Any good upolstery shop can do this. if you come up with any profesional shops that do this let me know bob On Tue, 6 Apr 1999, steve ravet wrote: > If there are any custom type people here who have added convertible tops > or hard tops to cars that didn't originally have them, please get back > to me privately since this is way off charter. I have a car with a lot > of roof rot and I think this might be a way to save it, but I'd like to > talk to someone who's "been there". Thanks, > > --steve > > -- > Steve Ravet > steve.ravet@xxx.com > Advanced Risc Machines, Inc. > www.arm.com > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 22:47:23 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume - ----- Original Message ----- From: Marc Piccioni To: Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 8:42 PM Subject: RE: EFI Head Volume I've heard comment that, there is actually a chance to reduce detonation in a wedge chamber (specifically the SBC), cause of the turbulence. Bruce > True, as the quench area increase so does the likely hood of detonation. > /Marc > ---------- > From: Greg Hermann[SMTP:bearbvd@xxx.net] Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume > >I thought the aluminum vette heads and the early powerpack heads were > >the only ones with chambers that small. > >Any others? > >Shannen > >Mark Romans wrote: > >> The stock cast iron head is 58.5? Whoa, I thought it would have a bigger > >> chamber than that. Thanks for the info. > >> Also quench area is critical in preventing pre-ignition > Make that "DETONATION"!! Different animals.--Yeah, I'm being picky tonight! > Greg > so he would rather > >> increase the combustion chamber volume than shim the head up. Thanks again. > >> Mark ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 22:19:45 +0000 From: xxalexx@xxx.com Subject: NASA O2 sensor April 99 issue of NASA tech briefs has some minature light weight 02 sensors. Do not look to techy, since not wide range, have over a 10ms response time, (which article said is the max for engine control), poor durability, temp control, and sensitivity. So they must be very small or our tax money is reinventing the wheel. Saving weight in a O2 sensor seems to be getting a little extreem. but with 6 O2 sensors maybe small size also means small cost. thou I think galium and silver paste is a liitle pricey. alex ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 22:51:31 +0100 From: steve ravet Subject: prom dump program uploaded I wrote a little program that dumps prom images to the screen in sort of a text format. It's called tuna. It's like promedit in that it's driven by a text file that describes the location and size of tables, but the .ecm files are easier to read and create (IMO). I eventually want to make this an editor but I'm uploading it now for 2 reasons: 1) I'd like to get comments on the .ecm format. It's a little verbose but I think it works well. 2) Other people are working on other editors, and I hope that they'll be able to incorporate this code into their programs to make them extendable to other ECMs. Look for tuna.zip on the ftp site in the incoming directory. There's a .c and a .h file in there, along with a sample .ecm file based on the 7747.ecu file for promedit. Also a readme and a sample 747 bin (akal.bin). There's also a compiled version, but it's only for Sun workstations! That's the 3rd reason I uploaded it, I'd like a PC type person to get it and compile it for the PC. It's a simple command line program, only uses printf and stuff, so it should compile directly. If someone can do this for me, I'll add it to the .zip file for everyone to use. If you are working on a PROM editor, please feel free to incorporate my stuff into your program. Also, send me any changes/suggestions/additions. thanks, - --steve - -- Steve Ravet ARM, INC steve.ravet@xxx.com www.arm.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 06 Apr 1999 21:47:59 -0700 From: Mark Romans Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume Hi Bruce: Lingenfelter's book on modifying small block chevy engine's on page 47-48 says that "A performance piston-to-head clearance is usually between .040 and .045 inch. This quench area is too small to support combustion, service instead a more useful function. As the piston approaches top dead center, this tight area tends to squirt or squish the air/fuel mixture in this area into the open combustion space. This violent action produces turbulence that acts like a very efficient blender. This blending action helps homogenize the air-fuel mixture and supports more efficient combustion. Dyno testing has proven that improving the piston-to-head quench area from .060 inch to .045 inch will improve power even when the compression ratio remains the same. It is even possible to optimize the quench and increase compression without suffering detonation problems! This is because improving the homogenization of the mixture in the chamber reduces the tendency for lean areas in the chamber to promote detonation. " I have my piston to head clearance set at .039 inch! 11.0 to one with efi, aluminum heads and 92 octane unleaded! Mark - -----Original Message----- From: Bruce Plecan To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 7:49 PM Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Marc Piccioni >To: >Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 8:42 PM >Subject: RE: EFI Head Volume > >I've heard comment that, there is actually a chance to reduce detonation in >a wedge chamber (specifically the SBC), cause of the turbulence. >Bruce > > >> True, as the quench area increase so does the likely hood of detonation. >> /Marc >> ---------- >> From: Greg Hermann[SMTP:bearbvd@xxx.net] > Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume >> >I thought the aluminum vette heads and the early powerpack heads were >> >the only ones with chambers that small. >> >Any others? >> >Shannen >> >Mark Romans wrote: >> >> The stock cast iron head is 58.5? Whoa, I thought it would have a >bigger >> >> chamber than that. Thanks for the info. >> >> Also quench area is critical in preventing pre-ignition >> Make that "DETONATION"!! Different animals.--Yeah, I'm being picky >tonight! >> Greg >> so he would rather >> >> increase the combustion chamber volume than shim the head up. Thanks >again. >> >> Mark > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 07 Apr 1999 00:37:00 +0100 From: steve ravet Subject: Re: prom dump program uploaded Wow, that's service with a smile. And fast too. I have put a new tuna.zip on the ftp site that includes the PC version of tuna. Thanks David. Again, it doesn't do a lot at this point, so don't expect too much. I'm hoping that the other people writing editors will be able to make use of the code. - --steve "David A. Cooley" wrote: > > At 10:51 PM 4/6/99 +0100, steve ravet wrote: > > >Look for tuna.zip on the ftp site in the incoming directory. There's a > >.c and a .h file in there, along with a sample .ecm file based on the > >7747.ecu file for promedit. Also a readme and a sample 747 bin > >(akal.bin). There's also a compiled version, but it's only for Sun > >workstations! That's the 3rd reason I uploaded it, I'd like a PC type > >person to get it and compile it for the PC. It's a simple command line > >program, only uses printf and stuff, so it should compile directly. If > >someone can do this for me, I'll add it to the .zip file for everyone to > >use. > > Steve, > Here is the DOS executeable. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Name: tuna.exe > tuna.exe Type: unspecified type (application/octet-stream) > Encoding: base64 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > =========================================================== > David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net > Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068 > I am Pentium of Borg...division is futile...you will be approximated. > =========================================================== - -- Steve Ravet ARM, INC steve.ravet@xxx.com www.arm.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 23:46:30 -0600 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume >----- Original Message ----- >From: Marc Piccioni >To: >Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 8:42 PM >Subject: RE: EFI Head Volume > >I've heard comment that, there is actually a chance to reduce detonation in >a wedge chamber (specifically the SBC), cause of the turbulence. >Bruce More than a chance---more squish helps to get rid of detonation---Marc stated it backwards. Greg > > >> True, as the quench area increase so does the likely hood of detonation. >> /Marc >> ---------- >> From: Greg Hermann[SMTP:bearbvd@xxx.net] > Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume >> >I thought the aluminum vette heads and the early powerpack heads were >> >the only ones with chambers that small. >> >Any others? >> >Shannen >> >Mark Romans wrote: >> >> The stock cast iron head is 58.5? Whoa, I thought it would have a >bigger >> >> chamber than that. Thanks for the info. >> >> Also quench area is critical in preventing pre-ignition >> Make that "DETONATION"!! Different animals.--Yeah, I'm being picky >tonight! >> Greg >> so he would rather >> >> increase the combustion chamber volume than shim the head up. Thanks >again. >> >> Mark ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 22:53:46 -0700 From: "Peter Fenske" Subject: Re:Halp Diamond Star Motored out Hi Gang Got a problem that maybe someone more in the know can help me. 90 Lazer, poor mans talon with 2.0 dual overhead cam no turbo engine has a no start and we tried for one whole day to start it.. 47 psi pressure, injectors firing. plugs wet with fuel, drowned actually. Visible spark on all cyl. is a bit orangey though.. Ecm gives the 111111 ok same as code 12 gm.. Cams timing dead on mark.. Tps idle switch is dead but not cause of no start When the dodges guys at the counter stopped laughing and saying why on earth did you guys get a lazer they said bout 100 $ for a simple switch. Think we will use door jam switch.. Okay normal Gmese wisdom don't work here. Junk er recycler says eh what when we ask if he has a used ecm or cam/crank sensor or trans ign amp each item bout 500$ new..laughs a whole bunch too So besides using this car as a barbeque any ideas definitely upset peter ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 01:38:42 -0600 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: EFI Head Volume >Hi Bruce: >Lingenfelter's book on modifying small block chevy engine's on page 47-48 >says that "A performance piston-to-head clearance is usually between .040 >and .045 inch. This quench area is too small to support combustion, service >instead a more useful function. As the piston approaches top dead center, >this tight area tends to squirt or squish the air/fuel mixture in this area >into the open combustion space. This violent action produces turbulence that >acts like a very efficient blender. This blending action helps homogenize >the air-fuel mixture and supports more efficient combustion. Dyno testing >has proven that improving the piston-to-head quench area from .060 inch to >.045 inch will improve power even when the compression ratio remains the >same. It is even possible to optimize the quench and increase compression >without suffering detonation problems! This is because improving the >homogenization of the mixture in the chamber reduces the tendency for lean >areas in the chamber to promote detonation. " > >I have my piston to head clearance set at .039 inch! >11.0 to one with efi, aluminum heads and 92 octane unleaded! >Mark Precisely stated--the tight quench area helps AVOID detonation. More clearance, or less area with tight clearance, is not so good. Greg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 10:12:09 +0200 From: "Espen Hilde" Subject: Re: Re:Halp Diamond Star Motored out Hi! What about the fuel , is it ok? (Water etc.) how wide can you make the arc of the ignition jump? Do you have compression?(offcourse....) Espen Hilde - ---------- > From: Peter Fenske > To: diy_efi@xxx.edu > Subject: Re:Halp Diamond Star Motored out > Date: 7. april 1999 07:53 > > > > Hi Gang > > Got a problem that maybe someone more in the know can help me. > > 90 Lazer, poor mans talon with 2.0 dual overhead cam no turbo engine > has a no start and we tried for one whole day to start it.. > > 47 psi pressure, injectors firing. plugs wet with fuel, drowned actually. > Visible spark on all cyl. is a bit orangey though.. > Ecm gives the 111111 ok same as code 12 gm.. > Cams timing dead on mark.. > > Tps idle switch is dead but not cause of no start > When the dodges guys at the counter stopped laughing > and saying why on earth did you guys get a lazer they > said bout 100 $ for a simple switch. Think we will use door > jam switch.. > > Okay normal Gmese wisdom don't work here. > Junk er recycler says eh what when we ask if he has > a used ecm or cam/crank sensor or trans ign amp > each item bout 500$ new..laughs a whole bunch too > > So besides using this car as a barbeque any ideas > > definitely upset peter > ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #214 ***************************** 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".