DIY_EFI Digest Friday, April 16 1999 Volume 04 : Number 228 In this issue: Test needed. Twin Turbos Re: 7747ecu Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #227 Re: seek knowledge Re: tbi adapter To The ECM GUY Re: Test needed. Re: Twin Turbos Phone No#s Re: sequential gearboxes Re: Test needed. Re: Phone No#s, Omega [OT] Parametric Modeling/turbo Re: seek knowledge Re: Phone No#s Re: ECU or ECM data files Re: sequential gearboxes Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) Re: Phone No#s Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) Chevy intake manifold 14033058 Re: Twin Turbos Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) Re: Twin Turbos Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) Re: ECU or ECM data files Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) Re: Phone No#s GM '86 2.8 Fuel Injected prom re-programming/replacing CDI See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 07:37:09 -0400 From: Shannen Durphey Subject: Test needed. If anyone has a bench run distributor and a 2 channel O'scope, and would be willing to run a simple test, please send E-mail off list. I need to see if my memory is any good. Shannen ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 08:44:07 From: Bob Tom Subject: Twin Turbos I noticed in a reply about whippled hummers that Frederic Breitwieser has a 413 with twin turbos. I am interested in the possibility of running twin turbos with the current Magnum 5.2L engine. I would be interested in hearing about your experiences, any recommendations, and any companies/resources that you may know that can help me with this modification. If this subject is off-topic for the list, please e-mail me privately. Thanks. Bob Burlington, Ontario Current: 97 CC Sport,5.2L,3.55SG auto.,4x2,Gibson dual,KN 96 Grand Caravan ES,3.8L 85 Shelby Intercooled Turbo Charger,2.2L,5-spd man. 78 customized B100 with '69 340-4bbl,3-spd auto. 70 Challenger,383-4bbl,slap-stik auto.,3.23SG,hemi orange ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 09:04:52 -0400 From: "David A. Cooley" Subject: Re: 7747ecu I'd like to play... - -----Original Message----- From: cwagner@xxx.net> To: diy_efi@xxx.edu> Date: Thursday, April 15, 1999 11:20 PM Subject: 7747ecu I have a modified ECU file for use with promedit. It is for use with any 7747 bin's. If anybody wants to give it a try, let me know and I will email it to you since I don't know how to upload it to the ftp area. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 09:33:11 -0400 From: David Rhoads Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V4 #227 Costs, even ballpark, on some packages could be a useful piece of additional information. The following message was sent to me offlist; Subject: tion and Modeling Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 21:45:36 -0400 From: "Gary Derian" To: There is lots of modeling in industry. Not too many years ago, it cost over $50,000 per seat of 3D CAD for software and hardware. Now it can be done for $8,000. The new systems run on Windows NT and Intel Pentium II and Pentium III. This makes it available to a whole new class of company. It is truly a revolution. Common low cost software is Solid Edge and Solid Works. Pro Engineer has dropped prices and is trying to compete in that arena. The really big buck systems, like Catia are useful to large global corporations are still expensive. Gary Derian > ------------------------------ > > Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1999 22:10:21 -0400 > From: H Villemure > Subject: Re: Simulation/Modeling Tools > > How much $$$? > Do you own a copy yourself? > > FHPREMACH@xxx.com wrote: > > > > In a message dated 4/14/99 8:47:52 PM Pacific Daylight Time, > > memvive@xxx.ca writes: > > > > << David Rhoads wrote: > > > > > > Help ... > > > > > > I'm looking for some additional information to wrap up a term paper that > > > I'm writing. What I need is info/comments on various > > > modeling/simluation languages/tools > > > > The Pro/Eng (Pro/Engineer) package is indeed the most complete one I > > have seen with mechanical, heat transfer and motion simulations. > > > > Hope this helps, > > -- > > Helene V. >> > > > > I beg to differ. ProE is a cumbersome package. If you want to use what the > > big boys use, look to SDRC IDEAS and Fluent Rampant for design and > > Computational Fluid Dynamics respectively. This is what people like Ford, > > Ilmor and others of that caliber use. The company (an international > > aerodynamics research and consulting firm) where I was in charge of design of > > gaging and database development spent a great deal of time evaluating > > packages. We talked to a number of companies who had IDEAS and ProE > > experience and they were fairly unanimous in their recommendation for design > > and analysis. Fluent is the world leader in CFD for virtually every kind of > > fluids flow analysis as well as thermal and combustion analysis. IDEAS was > > recommended by them as a tool for preprocessing the data for their analysis > > suite. > > Talk to these people. You will find that they are both companies with strong > > educational ties. > > Fred > > - -- > Helene V. > ___________________ > welcome to mk2@xxx.com > visit us at http://come.to/helene-and-matti > > ------------------------------ - -- . David Rhoads II . Applied Dynamics International . 3800 Stone School Road, Ann Arbor, Mi 48108 . (734) 973-1300 . rhoads@xxx.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 09:39:19 -0400 From: "David A. Cooley" Subject: Re: seek knowledge Mike, Some PCM's (P6 and P4) have the operating program in the MEM-CAL... Others (C3) have the software in embedded ROM either on the CPU chip itself, or ROM chips built into the computer. - -----Original Message----- From: Mike Pilkenton To: DIY-EFI Date: Thursday, April 15, 1999 11:13 PM Subject: seek knowledge >Well this is probably a basic question for you experts but I have to start >somewhere. I understand that the various MEMCALs contain the efi tables, >fuel, spark curves, etc. in the form of hex codes programmed into the >EEPROM. However there must be am operating system or basic program that >runs on the computer and controls the logic. For example: > >step 1: go get engine data >step 2: pump fuel and spark >step 3: repeat > >Although this is extremely oversimplified, my question is: does this basic >program also reside in the MEMCAL or is it resident somewhere else on the >ECM computer? I would also like for someone to email me a sample program >perhaps converted to some common programming language so as to illustrate >the typical logic involved with runnung an efi system. I'm not ready to >play with fuel and spark maps but just want to gain more systems level >knowledge. > >Mike Pilkenton > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 09:15:58 -0500 From: Stephen Cranford Subject: Re: tbi adapter I would be intersted in a copy of this. I have access to a machine shop(a friend of mine) so I could really use this. - -- Stephen Cranford cranford@xxx.net 92 RS Sapphire Blue w/Purple Pearl & White Stripes 86 IROC-Z28 Red w/black hood and NO interior..new toy! 89 GMC 4WD 1/2 ton Suburban http://austin.f-body.org/ http://cranford.home.texas.net Eugene Jones wrote: > > I asked for an adapter for a tbi to a carb intake and Bruce Plecan > responded and others. > > I would like to find the gm part number to the "heater" adapter for 87-89 > bigblock trucks, if anyone has it. > no, I could not find it in the efi archives. > > I have designed a 3/4" aluminum plate that will bolt efi (350 or 454 type) > to both a holley 4150/4160 intake or a holley spread-bore(quadrojet) > manifolds. if you need a copy of this drawing (in microsoft word format) > just let me know. I am having it quoted for machining by a couple of local > machine shop (Greenville, S.C.) will post price later. > > thanks, > Gene Jones ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 10:41:12 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: To The ECM GUY Thanks Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:25:45 -0400 From: "Eugene Jones" Subject: Re: Test needed. What test do you need run? - ---------- > From: Shannen Durphey > To: diy_efi@xxx.edu > Subject: Test needed. > Date: Friday, April 16, 1999 7:37 AM > > If anyone has a bench run distributor and a 2 channel O'scope, and > would be willing to run a simple test, please send E-mail off list. I > need to see if my memory is any good. > Shannen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 24 Apr 1990 22:38:05 -0400 From: Frederic Subject: Re: Twin Turbos > I noticed in a reply about whippled hummers that Frederic Breitwieser > has a 413 with twin turbos. I am interested in the possibility of > running twin turbos with the current Magnum 5.2L engine. Actually, its a 383B mopar block that's been stroked to 431 cid, via a turned down 440 crank and 440 YJ rods, and custom wiseco pistons for a 9.2:1 c/r. the engine will go in the truck this weekend if the rain lets up. Anyway, I used moly rings for minimal wear under the additional pressure (10lbs max - its a tow vehicle not a race vehicle). This is one of the key things to remember to do. Also, the intake manifold is fairly intersting. Following an article in one of the Mopar ragazines I milled eight holes in the intake runners of an aluminum Edelbrock "Streetmaster 383" intake, made injector bungs on a friend's lathe, then TIG welded them into the holes. Using a die grinder, I ground out the "hang down" thats in the intake runner, so the only thing exposed inside the runner would be about 1/16" of the injector tip. Took a bit of experimenting to get it right. Then, I sealed off the runners that clamp to the heads, sealed off each injector bung, and pressurized the carb seat surface to find leaks. Lots of leaks Cleaned that all up, then too the modified intake to a machine shop where they could "deck" the tops of the injector bungs to be the same height. They still haven't done this as of yet, and keep blowing me off, but that's another story. They will also make the fuel rails since I made two sets that were absolutely terrible. Anyway, with this intake configuration, I can slap a carb on the intake until I figure out all the EFI stuff. I waffled between EEC-IV Ford stuff (have a low-performance ECM and harness from a 88 Crown Vic) as well as the 93 GM TPI setup found on Camaros and Firebirds. Turned out my GM ECM is bad, so I'm seeking a 730 ECM and Andy Quaas and I will be sharing notes since we are working on engines with about the same displacement. The choice to go GM was more due to the GM steering column I have sitting here with cruise, tilt, etc, as well as a caddy body harness, with all motors, switches, digital dash, and all that happy stuff to embed into the truck. See, a junkyard caddy harness was $150, whereas a "replica" harness for the 75 Dodge truck will be 3 times that, and have power nothing. Unused connectors can always hang. Anyway, with the above information, you can see where I'm going. Now, onto the turbos. I have two smaller turbos because my top RPMs on this engine would be in the 4000 range (I originally was going for 5000 RPM, but no point in a tow vehicle), therefore I don't need vast, oversized turbos since the "top end" is very low. I have two turbos from Dodge Daytonas, and will try them and see if they provide enough air for my 10lb goal. If not, I can "step up" as necessary. I prefer OEM parts for easy, convienent replacement and junkyard availability. Anyway, the iron intake manifolds that came with the 383 have had the exhaust bolt holes for the Y-pipe welded close (brazed actually), then redrilled and threaded so the daytona turbos will "bolt right on". Cracked two left manifolds trying to tap the new holes. Anyway, turbos are mounted. The remainder of the exhaust system post-turbo hasn't been fabricated as of yet, and that will be the last thing to do. Quite honestly, since emmisions testing are no longer required for my 75 truck in Connecticut, I might just run straight pipes down the frame and have them stick out post wheel, without mufflers. 4000 RPM is not going to be *that* loud, with two turbos absorbing a fair amount of noise. Time will tell. Connecting the turbo fresh-air outlets to the intake required a little creativity. I have an edelbrock carb opening on the top of the streetmaster intake, thus a plenum had to be constructed out of sheet aluminum. The turbos are at the back of the engine, therefore two Ford throttle bodies have been bolted to the back side of the intake, immediately next to each other, one for each turbo. They have been "ganged" and the throttle cable will connect in between the two throttle bodies. More than likely, I will replace them with GM units so the GM ECM gets the throttle position sensor it wants. Have two FWD 3.8L Throttles that will fit with minimal drilling into the plenum I've made. On the back side of the plenum, there is aan ATR adjustable sneeze valve, which will be set for 10psi so that additional pressure over that setting will blast out into the open area. I think its ATR. It was a leftover from my twin-turbo Buick V6 project. Anyway, inside the plenum is a 2" thick transmission or oil cooler, that I sized the inside dimensions of my plenum around, as once welded, I wanted an air-tight fit. All pressurized air from the turbos will blast into the upper plenum, go through the intercooler, then into the lower plenum, then through the carb bore, then into the runners following the OEM path of a carb-based intake. The injectors I selected are 56lb units, however the more I play with the math, I am thinking they are gross overkill. Something in the 42-48lb range would probably be more suitable. What the intercooler will be attached to hasn't been decided yet. I did some preliminary experiments on a Buick V6 engine using radiator coolant as the "intercooling fluid", and while I didn't document this even remotely well, I will state that this actually works. Kudo's to Bruce "Grumpy" Plecan who drilled the idea into my head. The idea is to tap the radiator fluid pre-engine post-radiator since the coolant is about 100-110 degrees at this point, and the fresh air post-turbo is closer to 200 degrees. While not the absolute best design, Bruce was right in saying that the intercooler temperature would be more consistant, therefore providing consistant performance, and is MUCH easier to plumb than a Peterson coolant tank, a box of ice, a 12V marine sump pump, or any other creative solution you come up with. > 85 Shelby Intercooled Turbo Charger,2.2L,5-spd man. One of the things you *should* do, and I've done this many, many times, is to sit and stare at turbocharged cars. You can learn a lot about the mechanicals (mounting, brackets, etc) from the OEMs, so sit in front of your car that I snipped out your tagline, and see what they've done. Wander the junkyards for other turbo'd cars, and see what different companies do. Also, here are two weblinks of others who have achieved what you desire. Dodge, Chevy, Ford, the concepts are pretty much the same. http://www.eecs.tufts.edu/~askulte/ttt/logbook.html http://www.geocities.com/MotorCity/Downs/8668/tthowto.htm Corky Bell has a book called "Maximum Boost", and if you can get through his interesting sarcasm , you'll find it a great resource. There are some minor inaccuracies in there, and a lot of this is all subjective, none-the-less its a good resource. I'd also recommend you go with a fuel injection system, either OEM parts or something like Haltach or Electromotive or DFI etc. The reason being (and this is just my opinion) that lean conditions under boost will kill your engine faster than running it without oil, therefore the more precise control that EFI can give you, if configured correctly, will help your engine's survivability. And without boost, you can get acceptable mileage too. If you are looking for low-end boost, another option is to skip the turbochargers, and go with a Paxton or Vortech supercharger. They are much easier to install (an afternoon), and give the 5.2 engine a lot of kick for the effort you will put into it. Of course, they are in the 2600-3200 US dollar range, complete, from Summit Racing for example. Many ways to skin this cat ya know :) One last comment I will make before I bore everyone to tears... is that you are right on the border of the single/twin turbo line. Corky Bell's rule of thumb is 350 cid. Anything 350cid and larger, requires two turbos, whereas below that line, requires one turbo. Nothing wrong with two undersized turbos on a 318, or one larger turbo. In general, smaller turbos will spool up faster due to the lighter rotational weight of the blower pieces that spin to 80,000 RPM, and the orifaces entering the turbo of course would be a smaller diameter, therefore higher velocity of exhaust flow going in. Well, you get the idea. On my Buick V6 block, which is a mere 252 cid (plus .030 overbore), one turbo seemed just dandy. However, converting to two turbos, we saw improved performance by using two Daytona turbos (same ones I will be testing on the truck motor actually), and it worked fine. Then, as we built the motor up enough to withstand the the punishment, we used two TE43's (I think), which are very large turbos. However, at lower RPMs turbos of this size were completely useless, and it wasn't until the 6500 RPM range that things started to really hum. Unfortunately, the V6, with all the girdles, valve train support, and other fabricated "strengthening" things we added... the crank still kicked out at 8000 RPM after only 30 minutes. But 849 HP at 38lbs of boost was a lot of fun, using the same intake/intercooler design that I described above, and will be installing into the truck. Hope that helped somehow :) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 09:36:48 -0600 From: Andrew Subject: Phone No#s Does anyone have the number for either Omega Engineering or Brooks MicroOval that offer flowmeters. I am building a fuel injector flowbench and want to use this item. Thanks, Andrew Calgary, Alberta, Canada ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 08:35:07 -0700 From: Eric Aos Subject: Re: sequential gearboxes > Well I guess I will have to put my foot in my mouth on > this one :-) I > have been shifting a 4 speed without "lifting" for over 25 > years. Amen to that one. My first car was a '69 GTO with a 455 and a crashbox Muncie. Used to go through 2 sets of synchros a year :) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 11:55:48 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: Test needed. - ----- Original Message ----- From: Shannen Durphey To: Sent: Friday, April 16, 1999 7:37 AM Subject: Test needed. I just wish I could be around to see how ya wire yourself up to make memory tests, with a two channel scope. Even if your doing simple tests. Grumpy > If anyone has a bench run distributor and a 2 channel O'scope, and > would be willing to run a simple test, please send E-mail off list. I > need to see if my memory is any good. > Shannen > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:59:59 EDT From: A70Duster@xxx.com Subject: Re: Phone No#s, Omega The number for Omega is 800-TC-OMEGA. There web site is www.omega.com Hope this help! See ya, ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 09:33:03 -0700 From: Jason_Leone@xxx.com Subject: [OT] Parametric Modeling/turbo With this talk of parametric solid modeling, I feel I'm qualified to jump in (I have over 5000+ hours on ProE). First off, ProE is a really powerful program. One of the most powerful ones on the planet. There are limitless "modules" that can be used (cable, piping, molds, CNC machine, jig & fixtures, etc.) with ProE. That being said, it's a difficult program for the average person to lean. The learning curve is steep. The hardware demands are high (I recommend 350Mhz, 128Mb RAM as the bare minimum!). A few years back, the PC hardware wasn't able to even run the software...we had to use SGI workstations and run it on UNIX. Now, anybody with WinNT, 450Mhz+, and 256Mb+ RAM won't have any problems (as long as the assemblies are under 200 parts!). Cost? BUHAHAHA! Well, it used to run about $20k for the basic vanilla version ProE...and another $30k for the tutorial (Coach Pro) software. SGI workstation was $10k. Yikes! Now days...Parametric Technology (company that makes ProE) has become very aggressive in their marketing. They offer a light version of ProE called PT Modeler (about $3500-$6500), that runs on Win95/98 or NT. This was in response to the upstart program called SolidWorks. SolidWorks is so much easier to learn than ProE, as it uses a lot of basic Windows commands that most people are already familiar with. Cost? About $3500. Power? Pretty good...it can do about 80% of what the basic ProE can do...but it does have a few short comings in the "sketch tools" commands. It does offer a lot of powerful things for the price! I recommend using NT as the operating system, and 256Mb RAM...with a 300Mhz+ CPU. SDRC IDEAS is really nice. KATIA is another one. HP Solid Designer is one. Most industries have a certain program they use, that's really tailroed to thier design process and their product. So how does this stuff help the hot rod people? Well, I use SolidWorks to design a lot of parts for my car. I use it to do a layout of components, to check for fit (or interference). For instance, I use it to design turbo piping. Once a basic model of the engine, and engine bay is in place...I'm free to route my 3D virtual pipes in tight places. That helps me drastically reduce the material cost when ordering material for R & D. I know how much material (and what bends) to get from Burns Stainless, before I even touch a pipe or a cut-off wheel. I use it to design brackets, molded plastic parts (custom A-pillar pod?), or to figure out how much these parts will weigh (plug in the material density, and it tells you). Pretty neat, eh? Of course, I use AutoCad to actually do the detailed 2D drawings that go to the machinist (all parametric modeling programs have a lack luster "drawing mode"). You can design anything you want, if you can imagine it...and are good enough to know how to use the tool (the modeling program). In closing, I'd like to say that all drafting/modeling programs are merely tools. That's all. You MUST have the knowledge to design something first and foremost. You must have a good materials and manufacturing process knowledge before creating and testing new parts in a software program. You must know how those parts are going to be made, and what's the most cost effective approach (based on the end-user's needs, the part itself, the design intent, lead time, and a lot of other factors). You must have a really good reference database! It's impossible to remember everything, or know everything...but if you know WHERE to find the data, that doesn't matter! Just because you know how to swing a hammer, doesn't mean you know how to build a house! Every single man made object you see, or touch...had to be drawn first, by somebody. Think about that. Jason '93 SLC ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:39:51 -0500 From: steve ravet Subject: Re: seek knowledge For GMs: C3 type ECMs (80's, early 90's) had some code in a prom on the board, and had some more code plus all the data in a socketed PROM. P4 ECMs have all code and data in a socketed thing that includes an EPROM plus passive components that determine limp home mode, knock sensor parameters, etc. This is in general, there is at least one P4 that uses a plain socketed EPROM without all the other components. You have to be careful with the terms calpak, mempak, memcal because they refer to specific parts on different ECMs. As far as EFI software, Al Lipper has one written for the 8051. There is another one written in C for the efi332 project, search around on diy_efi for Al Lippers and on efi332 for the other one. These are written from scratch, not OEM programs. Mike Pilkenton wrote: > > Well this is probably a basic question for you experts but I have to start > somewhere. I understand that the various MEMCALs contain the efi tables, > fuel, spark curves, etc. in the form of hex codes programmed into the > EEPROM. However there must be am operating system or basic program that > runs on the computer and controls the logic. For example: > > step 1: go get engine data > step 2: pump fuel and spark > step 3: repeat > > Although this is extremely oversimplified, my question is: does this basic > program also reside in the MEMCAL or is it resident somewhere else on the > ECM computer? I would also like for someone to email me a sample program > perhaps converted to some common programming language so as to illustrate > the typical logic involved with runnung an efi system. I'm not ready to > play with fuel and spark maps but just want to gain more systems level > knowledge. > > Mike Pilkenton - -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@xxx.com Advanced Risc Machines, Inc. www.arm.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 10:22:44 -0700 (PDT) From: thergen@xxx.net Subject: Re: Phone No#s I'd check www.omega.com for contact info. On Fri, 16 Apr 1999, Andrew wrote: > > Does anyone have the number for either Omega Engineering or Brooks > MicroOval that offer flowmeters. I am building a fuel injector flowbench > and want to use this item. > > Thanks, > > Andrew > Calgary, Alberta, Canada > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 11:49:00 -0600 From: cwagner@xxx.net Subject: Re: ECU or ECM data files It just so happens that I made up a detailed ecu file for the 7747 computer for use with promedit. I would send it to incoming if I knew how, maybe some one could help. The file even goes into setting BLM's and EGR on temp to name a few. > Hi all, I've been getting requests for .ecu file for Promedit. > Has any one built up any of these files for various ECU. > If you could post any info files you'd like to share to the > "incoming" area I can point people at it. > Or is there a collection of these some where ? > There is a newer version of promedit on the ftp site. > IF! I get the time I'll enhance the program so it can work with the > TUNA style info file also. > > <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< bye >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > wayne > [Brisbane Australia] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 13:56:54 -0400 From: Pat Ford Subject: Re: sequential gearboxes On Fri, 16 Apr 1999, Eric Aos wrote: > Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 08:35:07 -0700 > From: Eric Aos > To: "'diy_efi@xxx.edu'" > Subject: Re: sequential gearboxes > > > Well I guess I will have to put my foot in my mouth on > > this one :-) I > > have been shifting a 4 speed without "lifting" for over 25 > > years. > > Amen to that one. My first car was a '69 GTO with a 455 and a crashbox > Muncie. Used to go through 2 sets of synchros a year :) I thought that a crash box has gears wiht NO syncros (like my 61 rover) 1+2 no syncros and noisy as hell 3+4 smallist syncros Pat Ford email: pford@xxx.com QNX Software Systems, Ltd. WWW: http://www.qnx.com (613) 591-0931 (voice) mail: 175 Terrence Matthews (613) 591-3579 (fax) Kanata, Ontario, Canada K2M 1W8 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 15:18:18 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) - ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederic To: Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 1990 10:38 PM Subject: Re: Twin Turbos > Turned out > my GM ECM is bad, so I'm seeking a 730 ECM and Andy Quaas and I will be > sharing notes since we are working on engines with about the same > displacement. I'd recommend ya look for a 749 instead. Running a 2 bar program would be MUCH better than a 1 bar. Would allow for much better boost control. Sneeze valve for a Truck, might be disaster... (Doc+Grumpy already taking bets). > On the back side of the plenum, there is aan ATR adjustable > sneeze valve, which will be set for 10psi so that additional pressure > over that setting will blast out into the open area. I think its ATR. Usually/Often a sneeze valve is for a high rpm+high load limit (often trimming, rather than absolute control). If I understand you right your wanting a low rpm monster. It might take a ton of work to limit/modulate a sneeze valve for this. Using the Wastegate signal off of the syty 749 would be one option. But, Intake tract boost control often winds up a bang/bang affair. Meaning anything wrong, and it flucctuates greatly. Just getting it right on a 400 CID is gonna be work, and since EGT reflects work done, heavy payloads might drive ya around the bend... Might think of using a EGR as a spill valve, would be to be electric not vac operated (ie newer Digitial type) > Corky Bell's > rule of thumb is 350 cid. Anything 350cid and larger, requires two > turbos, whereas below that line, requires one turbo. One think about sweeping statements is that they are usually wrong. Bruce ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 13:25:37 -0600 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Phone No#s >I'd check www.omega.com for contact info. > > >On Fri, 16 Apr 1999, Andrew wrote: > >> >> Does anyone have the number for either Omega Engineering or Brooks >> MicroOval that offer flowmeters. I am building a fuel injector flowbench >> and want to use this item. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Andrew >> Calgary, Alberta, Canada Omega, Canada= (514) 856-6928 (Laval, Que.) Greg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 25 Apr 1990 03:01:23 -0400 From: Frederic Subject: Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) > I'd recommend ya look for a 749 instead. Running a 2 bar program would be > MUCH better than a 1 bar. I just haven't found one in the local junkyard. Been looking big time! Now, this particular ECM drives eight injectors, or does it drive a TBI setup only? I thought the latter, however I've been wrong before. > Sneeze valve for a Truck, might be disaster... (Doc+Grumpy already taking > bets). Actually, I'm anticipating this - and all of the statements you made about pulsating in the intake plenum due to the sneeze valve opening and closing repeatedly will more than likely be true. My other option is to use a wastegate setup, however I just don't have one at the moment. Ideally, I'd like to use VATS turbos, however they are not to be found in junkyards . > wanting a low rpm monster. It might take a ton of work to limit/modulate a > sneeze valve for this. Using the Wastegate signal off of the syty 749 would Yes, exactly. I adapted my thinking to low RPM only, hence the 4k cutoff point. > Might think of using a EGR as a spill valve, would be to be electric not > vac operated (ie newer Digitial type) This is a good idea actually... I had not planned to have any emmissions or recirculation anything... vented the old way, since the hood will never be opened at the emissions station. > One think about sweeping statements is that they are usually wrong. LOL, good point :) Frederic ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 16:47:38 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) - ----- Original Message ----- From: Frederic To: Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 1990 3:01 AM Subject: Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) > > I'd recommend ya look for a 749 instead. Running a 2 bar program would be > > MUCH better than a 1 bar. > I just haven't found one in the local junkyard. Been looking big time! Now, > this particular ECM drives eight injectors, or does it drive a TBI setup > only? I thought the latter, however I've been wrong before. It can run 8 saturated, or 4 Peak+Hold. There is ver specific wiring for the two modes of operation. The www.syty.org or .com has a list of all the candidates. > > Sneeze valve for a Truck, might be disaster... (Doc+Grumpy already taking > > bets). > Actually, I'm anticipating this - and all of the statements you made about > pulsating in the intake plenum due to the sneeze valve opening and closing > repeatedly will more than likely be true. My other option is to use a > wastegate setup, however I just don't have one at the moment. Ideally, I'd > like to use VATS turbos, however they are not to be found in junkyards . OK whatza VATS turbo? > > wanting a low rpm monster. It might take a ton of work to limit/modulate a > > sneeze valve for this. Using the Wastegate signal off of the syty 749 would > Yes, exactly. I adapted my thinking to low RPM only, hence the 4k cutoff > point. > > > Might think of using a EGR as a spill valve, would be to be electric not > > vac operated (ie newer Digitial type) > This is a good idea actually... I had not planned to have any emmissions or > recirculation anything... vented the old way, since the hood will never be > opened at the emissions station. > > > One think about sweeping statements is that they are usually wrong. > > LOL, good point :) > > Frederic > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 13:56:17 -0700 From: "Stowe, Ted-SEA" Subject: Chevy intake manifold 14033058 Does this number ring a bell with anyone ? it is supposed to be a corvette alum. intake w egr. I am trying to figure out if it would fit my 73 350. thanks, Ted Stowe ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 17:13:16 From: Bob Tom Subject: Re: Twin Turbos Thanks, Frederic, for taking the time for your comprehensive response. Certainly a lot of facts, tips and ideas to mull over. You've shortened my learning curve in this area a lot. Much appreciated. Bob Burlington, Ontario Current: 97 CC Sport,5.2L,3.55SG auto.,4x2,Gibson dual,KN 96 Grand Caravan ES,3.8L 85 Shelby Intercooled Turbo Charger,2.2L,5-spd man. 78 customized B100 with '69 340-4bbl,3-spd auto. 70 Challenger,383-4bbl,slap-stik auto.,3.23SG,hemi orange ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 17:26:35 -0400 From: "Frederic" Subject: Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) >the two modes of operation. The www.syty.org or .com has a list of all the >candidates. OKay, i'm on the way! EIght is good. >OK whatza VATS turbo? I may have the acronym wrong, but its the turbo with integral "wastegate", which instead of a flap door or plunger/spring type of configuration, the turbo has small vanes that move depending on boost, the vanes completely surrounding the turbo fan. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 17:55:23 -0400 From: "Frederic" Subject: Re: Twin Turbos >Thanks, Frederic, for taking the time for your comprehensive Not a problem. I spent 2 years leaching off this list, about time I give something back :) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 15:58:26 -0600 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) > >Sneeze valve for a Truck, might be disaster... (Doc+Grumpy already taking >bets). > I'll bet they would take bets on valving Sneezy!!! Ow!!!! Greg ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 18:01:17 -0400 From: "David A. Cooley" Subject: Re: ECU or ECM data files At 11:49 AM 4/16/99 -0600, you wrote: >It just so happens that I made up a detailed ecu file for the 7747 >computer for use with promedit. I would send it to incoming if I >knew how, maybe some one could help. The file even goes into >setting BLM's and EGR on temp to name a few. I just received it via email, so I'll upload it right now! =========================================================== David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068 Sponges grow in the ocean... Wonder how deep it would be if they didn't?! =========================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 18:03:34 -0400 From: "David A. Cooley" Subject: Re: Twin Turbos (Massive snippage safe to read) >> Corky Bell's >> rule of thumb is 350 cid. Anything 350cid and larger, requires two >> turbos, whereas below that line, requires one turbo. If properly sized (Both Turbine and compressor) a single turbo can be made to work properly on any displacement engine. =========================================================== David Cooley N5XMT Internet: N5XMT@xxx.net Packet: N5XMT@xxx. Member #7068 Sponges grow in the ocean... Wonder how deep it would be if they didn't?! =========================================================== ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 18:39:50 -0700 From: "Walter Sherwin" Subject: Re: Phone No#s >Does anyone have the number for either Omega Engineering or Brooks >MicroOval that offer flowmeters. I am building a fuel injector flowbench >and want to use this item. > >Thanks, > >Andrew >Calgary, Alberta, Canada Just some food for thought.......if you have a recirculating flow style bench you may want two flow meters. One in the feed side, and one in the return side. You might also want to consider a flow meter(s) with built-in thermal compensation. They are more $$$, but worth the accuracy. Walt. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 19:25:38 -0400 From: James P Hunt Subject: GM '86 2.8 Fuel Injected prom re-programming/replacing As I stated in a previous post, I have an '85 Fiero, that I am planning to turbocharge, but I failed to mention that the ECM, wiring, etc. is from an '86 Fiero. I realized this after the last time I took my interior apart and noticed a late-model style ECM. So now my question is as follows, does anyone know where I can find a prom file, or info on programming a replacement prom for the ECM, preferably to use in conjunction with a 2-bar MAP sensor. TIA James H. Valrico, FL war_machine1@xxx.com '82 Honda CB650 '85 Fiero 2m6 SC ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866] ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 19:51:26 -0300 From: "Pedro Haynes" Subject: CDI I got the schematics form the DIY EFI site...I looks simple enough and I think it would be easily incorporated into an Efi system. All we need is the capacitive discharge driver. My problem is to calculate the impedance of the transformer. The transformer in the MSD system are custom made by Autotronics, so I will need a match up, the closest thing to it. The frequency of the oscillator circuit need to be about 500 Hz. Can any one help me here? I plan to develop this then pass it on. ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #228 ***************************** 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".