DIY_EFI Digest Thursday, May 6 1999 Volume 04 : Number 266 In this issue: Re: Trigger wheel positioning Re: Direct Injection - Stratified Re: atomization enhancement Re: Injectors & harness Re: Reverse Cooling? Re: alternative engines Re: ECU7 EFI project plans Re: Inside the 99 Chrysler 300M ECM/TCM Re: alternative engines Re: Reverse Cooling? Re: Reverse Cooling patents RE: 305 TPI and 808 ECM - correction Re: 305 TPI and 808 ECM - correction Re: alternative engines Re: alternative engines Re: Reverse Cooling? RE: 730edit program Re: Injectors & harness Re: Reverse Cooling patents Re: Reverse Cooling? Re: Reverse Cooling? Re: Reverse Cooling? RE: 730edit program Re: atomization enhancement Re: 305 TPI and 808 ECM O2 == 1.00? volts? See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 15:57:28 -0400 From: "David A. Cooley" Subject: Re: Trigger wheel positioning At 09:10 PM 5/5/99 +0200, you wrote: > >If I want the trigger wheels first pulse to occur at 60 degrees BTDC on my >60-2 toothed crank trigger wheel, how am I supposed to line it up? >Is it the center of the tooth that the sensor detects or is it the edge of >it? Rising or falling? Each tooth on my wheel is approx 4 degrees wide so >I want do this right or I will have the ignition offset by a few degrees >:( > >If it matters I will probably use a design like the one Tim Drury used for >his DDIS signal condition the sensor. And the microcontroller will sense a >falling edge. Best bet is mount it where it is mechanically the best location and use software (firmware) to modify where exactly the reference pulse occurs. =========================================================== 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: Wed, 5 May 1999 16:44:27 -0400 From: "CLsnyder" Subject: Re: Direct Injection - Stratified - ----- Original Message ----- From: Dave Williams To: Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 9:09 AM Subject: Re: Direct Injection - Stratified > > -> Can anybody spell COST? As long as the bean-counters and stock prices > -> have more to say about automotive design than the engineers they will > -> not see the light of day. > > Cost is barely relevant in these days of $30,000+ cars. > > As long as they can keep their payments under $300, most Americans will > pay on something all their life. > True, but the manufacturer will still chisel for the last 1/2 cent in manufacturing cost - even on a $30,000+ car. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 16:55:14 -0400 From: "CLsnyder" Subject: Re: atomization enhancement - ----- Original Message ----- From: James Montebello To: Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 1:53 PM Subject: RE: atomization enhancement > > I just looked this up. All the new german diesel engines use > > common-rail > > (BMW, Audi, Mercedes) and uses a pressures of approx 1350 bar. > > VW has a new diesel at 1.9 liter that uses one separate diesel > > pump/cyilinder and uses a pressure of 2050 bar. According to all these > > manufacturers the higher the pressure the better the combustion. > > 1350 BAR!?! 2050 BAR?!? > > 20,000psi and 30,000 psi? Tell me there's a missing decimal > point, or a units mistake here. 13.5 and 20.5 bar sound more > believable. > > james montebello > Hey guys, we are talking RAIL pressure here, not injector pressure. On these camshaft or hydraulically operated injectors, rail pressure can be multiplied by a factor of several hundred to one for injection. I can't remember what make and model the engine was - I remember it was on a huge generator in Zambia - I think it MAY have been an old Cummins - anyway, it had a primary pump that ran about 10PSI, and a booster pump to about 150 PSI. That was rail pressure. Each cyl had its own "pump" in the injector, which popped at about 28,000 PSI. Let's not get TOO confused. On independent injector (distributor type) diesels like the Bosh, or Roosa Master, the injection pressure is around the 28,000 PSI - and that fluid pressure runs from the pump to the injector in those skinny little steel lines that look like brake lines. The tiny bore of the line leaves a pretty thick wall - which still flexes enough that a Piezo sensor clamped to the line can sense injection pulses to check injection timing and/or run a tach!! NEVER leave a bracket off on one of these lines as vibration can fatigue the line, causing breakage - and at 28,000 + psi diesel fuel can puncture skin from several feet away, and remove metal at a range of close to an inch. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 16:58:19 -0400 From: "CLsnyder" Subject: Re: Injectors & harness - ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 2:09 PM Subject: Re: Injectors & harness > > > On Wed, 5 May 1999, CLsnyder wrote: > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Dave Williams > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 4:16 PM > > Subject: Re: Injectors & harness > > > > > > > > > > -> Ok. Then the 4.3W and the Syclone don't share injectors. The W > > > -> engine has one injector connected to 6 poppet nozzles, each through a > > > -> hose. Looks a little like a deformed spider. > > > > > > "Poppet nozzles"? Is there some sort of breakover valve involved? If > > > so, how do they keep all the gas from going through the first poppet to > > > unseat? > > > > > > That's why the Bosch K-Jet has a separate fuel pressure regulator for > > > each injector. > > > > > > > > There is an "injector" for each cyl according to the information I had on > > the subject. They are all in one housing, with K-Jet style nozzles on the > > ends of the "spider-legs" > > > > Do you have any info on whether a single coil is used for all the > "injectors" within the CPI (central port injector)? > > Thanks, > Tom > I can't find the article right now, but I seem to remember there being more than one schema. Some batch fired the whole works - presumably with one coil. Some alternate batched - which would require at least 2 coils - and I think there was one with multiple (3 or more) coils - but don't quote me. > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 15:55:00 -0500 From: dave.williams@xxx.us (Dave Williams) Subject: Re: Reverse Cooling? - -> Which would mean that Smokey and Circle Track put the idea into the - -> public domain--so how in#@$$% come the patent office gave Evans a - -> patent?? You can patent individual things, or you can patent a *combination* of previous things as a system. You might try IBM's patent site to see if there's a hit on MECA. No way to tell exactly what their patent covers until you see it. The US Patent Office is also notorious for granting patents that infringe on prior patents; it's the applicant's job to do the searching. If patents or prior art collide, it's court time, and the attorneys win. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 15:55:10 -0700 From: Aaron Willis Subject: Re: alternative engines At 02:22 PM 5/5/99 -0700, you wrote: >How about if ya had a HUGE donut shaped container, in space, and spun i >REALLY fast so as to force the air to the outside of the donut, THEN fly >an airplane within that 'SIMULATED' atmosphere? It would work... > >Now you've heard of an atmoshpere existing without gravity... Ha...ALMOST! Even I caught this one. I'm going to count that centrifugal force that threw the air to the outside of the donut as gravity in this example. Aaron Willis ICQ #27386985 AOL IM: hemiyota http://surf.to/garage-te51 Garage TE51 International ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 18:50:36 +0000 From: xxalexx@xxx.com Subject: Re: ECU7 EFI project plans I just threw out by MG etch tank, heater and bubbler. The FeCl is nasty, not something to keep in house. The landlord freaked when she saw that red carpet. After 2 years and alot of cleaning it stills has a red tint, still have some red splash marks on walls and red pants. I got some flex boards, that you just run thru a laser printer and etch, but have not tried. Article is in Nov. 97 of Electronics Now. I have heard of exposing in sun. According to Jan Axelson book. 300 watt quartz halogen headlight 275 watt sun lamp 15 watt black light any light source 350-425 nanometers There is alot of info on web, check newsgroup FAQ's Circuit Design in Central Point OR. made the lowest cost single sided boards I could find and all they need is a sketch Only problem is they take several months and there web site seems to be gone. I am going to try pcbmilling.com had problems with pcbexpress.com software but they have plated thru holes. alex > > You need a spray can of positive photoresist. Radio shack > > probably has it. You spray it on the clean board (two light coats). > > Anyone seen it recently? The precoated boards are expensive. > though not so bad at: > > http://www.web-tronics.com/webtronics/printed-circuit-board-supplies-positive-photo-resist-pre-sensitized-pcbs.html > > > Cure it for 20 mins at about 140F (oven set as low as possible is > > good). Align your laser printed transparency on the board. Make > > sure the toner side is down or you loose the details. Sheet of > > picture frame glass over the top to press it down flat. Expose 4 > > inches under a flourescent tube for 30-60mins per side. UV lights > > Anyone tried a black light UV tube? I'd guess the exposure time > will be a few minutes only. > > Orin. > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 18:50:35 +0000 From: xxalexx@xxx.com Subject: Re: Inside the 99 Chrysler 300M ECM/TCM > At 09:49 AM 5/5/99 +0000, you wrote: > >> For a upcoming project, I've purchased a 99 Chrysler 300M V6 3.5L > >> engine/trans/computer. > >> > >I will donate a ISO-9141-2 scan tool. You might need a CAN > >controller thou, or some other Chrysler protocol if these can be > >altered by bus messages. You will also need the message code. The > >software currently supports J1979 diagnostic messages. > >alex > >http://www.obd-2.com > > For my personal use only. Which ISO-9141-2 scan tool do you > have? Are there other makes available? What is a CAN controller? > TIA Yes, it is a single use license, the one i made, For PC based there is carcomp at carcomp.com and EASE at obd2.com Control Area Network developed by Bosch for automotive communication in early 80's. Is SAE class C vehicle mutiplexing alex ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 18:50:35 +0000 From: xxalexx@xxx.com Subject: Re: alternative engines Check your local 7-11 or food stores public reading room for this issue of Discover Magazine. Also the sci news groups. alex > That idea is intriguing to say the least! > > How may I ask, can ANY object which exists LOSE mass? > > How did they measrue this, where did you hear/read about this, I'd like > to read the article/book/newsflash? > > PLEASE let me know? > > Thanks! > > Todd....!! > > xxalexx@xxx.com wrote: > > > > There have been recent reports being investigated of large fly wheels > > and levitating superconductors loosing mass. > > alex > > > It probably uses cold fusion as its power source. > > > > > > Gary Derian > > > > > > > > > > Univ. of Alabamba is working on a anti-gravity car. > > > > Says could be ready within 10 yrs. > > > > Will not need fuel injection or conventional fuel as we know it. > > > > There is a photo of a car airborne, but did not say if prototype. > > > > article in this issue of Discover Magazine. > > > > alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 19:21:17 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: Reverse Cooling? Flip, Flip, Flip, repeated many times. Circle Track June 1990. reverse cooling article by S Y. Many more flippings, Sept 1990 first mention of Meca Evans cooling stuff, no patent or patent pending mentioned in their ad. Not claiming perfection in research, but from what I see, something is rotten Bruce > -> Which would mean that Smokey and Circle Track put the idea into the > -> public domain--so how in#@$$% come the patent office gave Evans a > -> patent?? > > You can patent individual things, or you can patent a *combination* of > previous things as a system. You might try IBM's patent site to see if > there's a hit on MECA. No way to tell exactly what their patent covers > until you see it. > > The US Patent Office is also notorious for granting patents that > infringe on prior patents; it's the applicant's job to do the searching. > If patents or prior art collide, it's court time, and the attorneys win. > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 19:47:32 -0400 (EDT) From: Frank F Parker Subject: Re: Reverse Cooling patents I lloked thru my Evans file and found some info on the Evans patents for aqueous and non-aqueous ( propylene glycol) cooling systems. The patents for PG systems are: 4,550,694 , 4,630,572 and 5,031,579. There is alot more to the patent for reverse flow cooling aqueous cooling systems than just reversing the flow. I have not read the patent but according to some literature, it is the understanding of the important role of vapor formation and recondensation which allowed Evans to solve problems not understood or solved by others. This, I believe, is why the patent was granted. The NUMBER is 5,255,636. It applies in the USA. That is why PG works so well if one does the whole system- ie : better, pump, radiator, etc etc. MUST get rid of all the water since any left will give the trouble causing vapor which allows high metal temps and detonation or esc retard etc etc regards, frank parker ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 09:35:20 +0930 From: "Jackson, Trevor" Subject: RE: 305 TPI and 808 ECM - correction Oops, that should have been APYM3493 - I can't even read my own writing. > -----Original Message----- > From: Jackson, Trevor > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 6:35 PM > To: 'diy_efi@xxx.edu' > Subject: RE: 305 TPI and 808 ECM > > Matt > > When I get time in the next few days I'll make up a circuit to disable the > VATS. What I need to know is what PROM code is the correct one to use - > I've > been unable to find any reference to the AGYM3493 EPROM that we currently > have. If I can get hold of the right data then I should be able to burn a > new EPROM to use. Do you know what the correct EPROM version is? > > Trevor > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Matt Tomlins [SMTP:Mattpw@xxx.au] > > Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 12:00 PM > > To: Jackson, Trevor; diy_efi@xxx.edu > > Subject: Re: 305 TPI and 808 ECM > > > > Trevor, > > The 165 is the same as an 808 apart from having 1 extra chip to perform > > high > > speed serial communications. > > The Camaro application is a Mass Air Flow system, whereas the Commodore > is > > MAP based. If you try to run the Camaro on the ASBX calibration, it will > > run, but in limp home mode. You need to use a MAP sensor for it to run > > properly. If you want to run the Camaro calibration, you will need to > > disable the VATS. This can be done via an external circuit, or disabled > in > > the calibration (Much tidier solution). All of this informaion is in the > > DIY_EFI archeives. Having said all that, I have run a mates Camaro on an > > ASBX memcal. It ran quite well, but needed some modifications to the > idle > > control area. > > > > If you need any more help, let me know > > Cheers > > Matt Tomlins > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Jackson, Trevor > > To: ; > > > Sent: Tuesday, 4 May 1999 5:05 > > Subject: 305 TPI and 808 ECM > > > > > > > I'm currently trying to help a friend get a 305 TPI engine running, > but > > > without much success so far. I believe that the engine is from an 87 > or > > 88 > > > Camero auto (bought from a wrecked car), the wiring loom is from a > > manual > > > Camero, and the ECM we have is from the Australian Holden Commodore > > (which > > > from what I've read from the archives is the 1227808). > > > > > > I understand that the '808 ecm is more or less equivalent to the '165 > > ecm, > > > and so we should be able to use it OK. The problem we have is with the > > > Memcals. We have the Memcal that came with the ecm, which is a ASBX > 9285 > > > from the 307 engine that is used in the Commodores, and a Memcal from > > (we > > > think) a 89 Camero with a 305 TPI (EPROM AGYM 3493). > > > > > > As yet we have been able to get the engine running using the 89 Camero > > > Memcal, but it does run (not very well though) using the Memcal from > the > > > Commodore. > > > > > > We think that the Memcal from the 89 Camero is not working because we > do > > not > > > have a VATS signal to send to the ecm - I plan to build the circuit to > > > emulate that so that we can see if that is the problem. If this is the > > > problem, is the program/data from the AGYM 3493 EPROM suitable for > this > > > engine, or do I need to get hold of a different EPROM image and > program > > up > > > another EPROM? > > > > > > BTW, can anyone tell me what is the correct EPROM image for an 87/88 > 305 > > TPI > > > engine? > > > > > > I've only just discovered these mailing lists and am slowly making my > > way > > > through the archives. There is a mountain of info there - I just need > to > > > find the relevant pieces. > > > > > > regards > > > > > > Trevor Jackson > > > > > > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 20:25:35 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: 305 TPI and 808 ECM - correction Your asking for a Broadcast code? (If so, what tranny?). You need a VATS signal generator circuit? (If so mail me off list and I'll send it to you as an attachment). OK, now what's the question?, I'm getting ADD from trying to follow this. Grumpy > Oops, that should have been APYM3493 - I can't even read my own writing. > > From: Jackson, Trevor > > Subject: RE: 305 TPI and 808 ECM > > Matt > > When I get time in the next few days I'll make up a circuit to disable the > > VATS. What I need to know is what PROM code is the correct one to use - > > I've > > been unable to find any reference to the AGYM3493 EPROM that we currently > > have. If I can get hold of the right data then I should be able to burn a > > new EPROM to use. Do you know what the correct EPROM version is? > > Trevor > > > From: Matt Tomlins [SMTP:Mattpw@xxx.au] > > > To: Jackson, Trevor; diy_efi@xxx.edu > > > Subject: Re: 305 TPI and 808 ECM > > > Trevor, > > > The 165 is the same as an 808 apart from having 1 extra chip to perform > > > high > > > speed serial communications. > > > The Camaro application is a Mass Air Flow system, whereas the Commodore > > is > > > MAP based. If you try to run the Camaro on the ASBX calibration, it will > > > run, but in limp home mode. You need to use a MAP sensor for it to run > > > properly. If you want to run the Camaro calibration, you will need to > > > disable the VATS. This can be done via an external circuit, or disabled > > in > > > the calibration (Much tidier solution). All of this informaion is in the > > > DIY_EFI archeives. Having said all that, I have run a mates Camaro on an > > > ASBX memcal. It ran quite well, but needed some modifications to the > > idle > > > control area. > > > If you need any more help, let me know > > > Cheers > > > Matt Tomlins > > > From: Jackson, Trevor > > > Subject: 305 TPI and 808 ECM > > > > I'm currently trying to help a friend get a 305 TPI engine running, > > but > > > > without much success so far. I believe that the engine is from an 87 > > or > > > 88 > > > > Camero auto (bought from a wrecked car), the wiring loom is from a > > > manual > > > > Camero, and the ECM we have is from the Australian Holden Commodore > > > (which > > > > from what I've read from the archives is the 1227808). > > > > I understand that the '808 ecm is more or less equivalent to the '165 > > > ecm, > > > > and so we should be able to use it OK. The problem we have is with the > > > > Memcals. We have the Memcal that came with the ecm, which is a ASBX > > 9285 > > > > from the 307 engine that is used in the Commodores, and a Memcal from > > > (we > > > > think) a 89 Camero with a 305 TPI (EPROM AGYM 3493). > > > > As yet we have been able to get the engine running using the 89 Camero > > > > Memcal, but it does run (not very well though) using the Memcal from > > the > > > > Commodore. > > > > We think that the Memcal from the 89 Camero is not working because we > > do > > > not > > > > have a VATS signal to send to the ecm - I plan to build the circuit to > > > > emulate that so that we can see if that is the problem. If this is the > > > > problem, is the program/data from the AGYM 3493 EPROM suitable for > > this > > > > engine, or do I need to get hold of a different EPROM image and > > program > > > up > > > > another EPROM? > > > > BTW, can anyone tell me what is the correct EPROM image for an 87/88 > > 305 > > > TPI > > > > engine? > > > > I've only just discovered these mailing lists and am slowly making my > > > way > > > > through the archives. There is a mountain of info there - I just need > > to > > > > find the relevant pieces. > > > > regards > > > > Trevor Jackson ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 21:20:52 -0400 From: Raymond C Drouillard Subject: Re: alternative engines >How may I ask, can ANY object which exists LOSE mass? I lose mass by eating less and exercising more. ___________________________________________________________________ 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: Wed, 5 May 1999 21:08:05 -0400 From: Raymond C Drouillard Subject: Re: alternative engines I have never been exposed to this high-tech stuff. I do know someone who owns a twelve-cylinder broom, however. I never got close enough to see if it has EFI ;-) On Tue, 4 May 1999 22:50:34 -0400 "Bruce Plecan" writes: >Hey, just think about what would have happened if I mentioned Mommy in >law. >She had the special slippers to go along with the broom >Grumpy > >> Now Bruce, see what you've gone and done... I've >> got miller all over the keyboard, >> BobR... >> Subject: Re: alternative engines >> Ex-Wife had anti-gravity Broom 10+ years ago. >> Grumpy >> (Pardon, lack of efi content) >> > >Univ. of Alabamba is working on a anti-gravity car. >> > >Says could be ready within 10 yrs. >> > That's what they have been saying about fusion power for the >last 30 >> > years or so.... >> > Soren > > ___________________________________________________________________ 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: Wed, 5 May 1999 19:45:38 -0500 (CDT) From: Roger Heflin Subject: Re: Reverse Cooling? On Wed, 5 May 1999, Bruce Plecan wrote: > Flip, Flip, Flip, repeated many times. > Circle Track June 1990. reverse cooling article by S Y. > Many more flippings, > Sept 1990 first mention of Meca Evans cooling stuff, no patent or patent > pending mentioned in their ad. > Not claiming perfection in research, but from what I see, something is > rotten > Bruce > > As simple as reversing the water is in the block (as an idea) I am sure someone tried it long before 1990, the only question is did they publish enough to invalidate the current patent. Roger ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 21:47:08 -0400 From: "Scott Feaver" Subject: RE: 730edit program How are you making out with this? > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu > [mailto:owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu]On Behalf Of Squash > Sent: Friday, April 23, 1999 3:16 PM > To: diy efi > Subject: 730edit program > > > I've begun work on the 730 AUJP editor. > > If you would like a copy of the VERY immature version, > e-mail me. I'll be posting updates on a website soon. > > I only have the spark table section complete at this > time. I should have all the VE and the high-end spark > done this weekend. > > As for ALL of the rest of the switches and tables, i > plan on adding them all over the next week or 2. > > The biggest challenge for me is converting the data to > something readable (i.e. 39H to 20 degrees advance). > > See ya > > Andy > > _________________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get your free @xxx.com > ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 22:29:55 -0400 From: Shannen Durphey Subject: Re: Injectors & harness Dave Williams wrote: > > -> Ok. Then the 4.3W and the Syclone don't share injectors. The W > -> engine has one injector connected to 6 poppet nozzles, each through a > -> hose. Looks a little like a deformed spider. > > "Poppet nozzles"? Is there some sort of breakover valve involved? If > so, how do they keep all the gas from going through the first poppet to > unseat? > > That's why the Bosch K-Jet has a separate fuel pressure regulator for > each injector. > 55 psi opens the valve in the nozzles. The injector "connects" the poppets to the feed line, and fuel pump pressure opens the valves. Pressure is regulated after the injector to max of 65psi (IIRC). These systems are pretty particular about minimum pressure requirements. If pressure doesn't rise above 53psi, you've almost always got a no-start. Hope the description works. Think of the plumbing like a single injector TBI system, with the injector at regulated pressure. The poppets, connected to the injector, require a minimum pressure to open. Injector opens, pressure opens poppet valves, fuel's squirted. Shannen ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 21:12:15 -0600 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Reverse Cooling patents >I lloked thru my Evans file and found some info on the Evans patents for >aqueous and non-aqueous ( propylene glycol) cooling systems. The patents >for PG systems are: 4,550,694 , 4,630,572 and 5,031,579. > >There is alot more to the patent for reverse flow cooling aqueous >cooling systems than just reversing the flow. I have not read the >patent but according to some literature, it is the understanding of the >important role of vapor formation and recondensation which allowed Evans >to solve problems not understood or solved by others. This, I believe, >is why the patent was granted. The NUMBER is 5,255,636. It applies in >the USA. > >That is why PG works so well if one does the whole system- ie : better, >pump, radiator, etc etc. MUST get rid of all the water since any left >will give the trouble causing vapor which allows high metal temps and >detonation or esc retard etc etc > >regards, > >frank parker Well--the trouble is that the vapor over a glycol (either one) water solution condenses at a significantly lower temp than the temp of the liquid--basically because the vapor has a higher percentage of water (the lower boiling component of the solution) in it than the solution does. Same principal as what goes on in a fractional distillation tower to make it work. The difference between the boiling temp and the condensing temp is greatest for glycol/water solutions at about a 50/50 mixture. What that means is--that the little nucleate boiling bubbles have to travel further out into the liquid stream in the water jacket before they condense. This is hardly new science or technology--it is at least as old as absorbtion refrigeration cycles and fractionating towers. I am still kind of astounded that Evans was able to get a patent on it! And the liquid pumping horsepower to get the same cooling effect with 100% Glycol is pretty astoundingly higher than what is required with water. Regards, Greg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 23:02:17 -0400 From: Shannen Durphey Subject: Re: Reverse Cooling? Frank F Parker wrote: > > > The LT1 was the first production reverse cooling from GM. The problem was > > getting the air out. Evans ran a Trans-Am car with reverse cooling for a > > few years. I think that work led GM to reverse cool the LT1. > > > Yes, and I was a data engineer on a TranaAm car that was used for a > number of tests. It works well BUT you need a higher flow pump, radiator > capable of handling the higher flows etc. > > The REAL reason GM quit using reverse cooling is the lawsuit that Evans > started against GM for using reverse cooling and not honoring his > patents. GM lawers looked at it and said: lets limit our liability in > case we lose and not make any more cars with reverse cooling. Last time > I talked to Evans, suit still was pending. > > regards, > > frank parker Looking up "reverse flow and LT1" on the internet and should find reports about this case, if anyone's interested. Shannen ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 05 May 1999 23:35:18 -0400 From: Shannen Durphey Subject: Re: Reverse Cooling? Dave Williams wrote: > > -> GM went to it earlier than the LT1. If you look at late 80's IROC's > -> TA's and vettes they should all be reverse flowed. > > '55-'58 Pontiac V8s were reverse flow. Chevrolet only did the LT1 and > its variants. The motors you're talking about were L98 type and had > conventional cooling no different from the '55 265 Chevy. Any external tell-tales? Friend's got a 55 Pontiac w/V8 to look at. True for Jimmy's, also (they used the Poncho engine)? Shannen ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 21:45:25 -0600 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Reverse Cooling? >On Wed, 5 May 1999, Bruce Plecan wrote: > >> Flip, Flip, Flip, repeated many times. >> Circle Track June 1990. reverse cooling article by S Y. >> Many more flippings, >> Sept 1990 first mention of Meca Evans cooling stuff, no patent or patent >> pending mentioned in their ad. >> Not claiming perfection in research, but from what I see, something is >> rotten >> Bruce >> >> > >As simple as reversing the water is in the block (as an idea) I am >sure someone tried it long before 1990, the only question is did they >publish enough to invalidate the current patent. > > Roger Any publication, or sale of a device to the public is enough to put it into the public domain after one year. Greg ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 21:09:41 -0700 (PDT) From: Squash Subject: RE: 730edit program I've got the spark, high-end spark, and 2 VE tables nailed down, but i'm having some problems keeping the tables squished on the 80 column screen. I'm using one decimal place (i.e. "10.5") for all tables, and that is making some stuff run off the screen. Its not too big of an issue, but i sure makes it look crappy. I will be working hard at it this weekend. I will start adding all of the simple single value "switches" this weekend. Andy - --- Scott Feaver wrote: > How are you making out with this? > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu > > [mailto:owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu]On > Behalf Of Squash > > Sent: Friday, April 23, 1999 3:16 PM > > To: diy efi > > Subject: 730edit program > > > > > > I've begun work on the 730 AUJP editor. > > > > If you would like a copy of the VERY immature > version, > > e-mail me. I'll be posting updates on a website > soon. > > > > I only have the spark table section complete at > this > > time. I should have all the VE and the high-end > spark > > done this weekend. > > > > As for ALL of the rest of the switches and tables, > i > > plan on adding them all over the next week or 2. > > > > The biggest challenge for me is converting the > data to > > something readable (i.e. 39H to 20 degrees > advance). > > > > See ya > > > > Andy > > > > > _________________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Get your free @xxx.com address at > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @xxx.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 21:19:23 -0700 From: "Howard Wilkinson" Subject: Re: atomization enhancement James: I'm firmly in your camp.......Statements recently made about Cummins and other engines are absurd. Either someone is mixing up decimal points or mistaking bar for PSI. I can speak from experience with Cummins common rail systems when I say that they are nowhere close to these numbers (I've guaged them). Also The injector pop pressures of most diesel engines I've worked with would make me think that someone is mistaking bar and psi pressures. 1500 psi would be a reasonable breaking pressure for a typical injector, and 4k-5k psi would be a very high pressure injector. I believe that Cummins B series and C series engines (not common rail) operate in the latter range.... don't quote me here as I have only hearsay numbers on these. There is no way on God's earth that a CAV, Roosamaster, or Stanadyne rotary pump can produce the pressures people have been throwing about, and I have grave doubts that any of the piston pumps can do this either. There is no doubt that diesels develop more power with better atomization, and run more efficiently.... as do gas engines...this has long been known, but pressures of 20,000 psi are not only difficult to achieve, but EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. The only safe way to achieve these kind of pressures safely would be to do it with an injector which did the pumping so that there was no danger of line breakage. We are being deluged with bad information here, but unfortunately I have no way of convincingly refuting it. In my opinion it's utter nonsense!! H.W. - -----Original Message----- From: James Montebello To: diy_efi@xxx.edu Date: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 12:37 PM Subject: RE: atomization enhancement >> I just looked this up. All the new german diesel engines use >> common-rail >> (BMW, Audi, Mercedes) and uses a pressures of approx 1350 bar. >> VW has a new diesel at 1.9 liter that uses one separate diesel >> pump/cyilinder and uses a pressure of 2050 bar. According to all these >> manufacturers the higher the pressure the better the combustion. > >1350 BAR!?! 2050 BAR?!? > >20,000psi and 30,000 psi? Tell me there's a missing decimal >point, or a units mistake here. 13.5 and 20.5 bar sound more >believable. > >james montebello > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 00:57:27 -0400 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: 305 TPI and 808 ECM - ----- Original Message ----- From: Jackson, Trevor Subject: RE: 305 TPI and 808 ECM Welp, I don't have any good 87-89 165 5.0 files Sorry. I do have a list of some bins thou. AKFM N P R S Z AKHA B C D ANYH J ANYD Z APYP T U Y Z Using 8 injectors instead of 9 would let you use a 89 bin Bruce > Matt > When I get time in the next few days I'll make up a circuit to disable the > VATS. What I need to know is what PROM code is the correct one to use - I've > been unable to find any reference to the AGYM3493 EPROM that we currently > have. If I can get hold of the right data then I should be able to burn a > new EPROM to use. Do you know what the correct EPROM version is? > Trevor > > From: Matt Tomlins [SMTP:Mattpw@xxx.au] > > Subject: Re: 305 TPI and 808 ECM > > The 165 is the same as an 808 apart from having 1 extra chip to perform > > high > > speed serial communications. > > The Camaro application is a Mass Air Flow system, whereas the Commodore is > > MAP based. If you try to run the Camaro on the ASBX calibration, it will > > run, but in limp home mode. You need to use a MAP sensor for it to run > > properly. If you want to run the Camaro calibration, you will need to > > disable the VATS. This can be done via an external circuit, or disabled in > > the calibration (Much tidier solution). All of this informaion is in the > > DIY_EFI archeives. Having said all that, I have run a mates Camaro on an > > ASBX memcal. It ran quite well, but needed some modifications to the idle > > control area. > > If you need any more help, let me know > > Cheers > > Matt Tomlins > > From: Jackson, Trevor > > Subject: 305 TPI and 808 ECM > > > I'm currently trying to help a friend get a 305 TPI engine running, but > > > without much success so far. I believe that the engine is from an 87 or > > 88 > > > Camero auto (bought from a wrecked car), the wiring loom is from a > > manual > > > Camero, and the ECM we have is from the Australian Holden Commodore > > (which > > > from what I've read from the archives is the 1227808). > > > I understand that the '808 ecm is more or less equivalent to the '165 > > ecm, > > > and so we should be able to use it OK. The problem we have is with the > > > Memcals. We have the Memcal that came with the ecm, which is a ASBX 9285 > > > from the 307 engine that is used in the Commodores, and a Memcal from > > (we > > > think) a 89 Camero with a 305 TPI (EPROM AGYM 3493). > > > As yet we have been able to get the engine running using the 89 Camero > > > Memcal, but it does run (not very well though) using the Memcal from the > > > Commodore. > > We think that the Memcal from the 89 Camero is not working because we do > > not > > > have a VATS signal to send to the ecm - I plan to build the circuit to > > > emulate that so that we can see if that is the problem. If this is the > > > problem, is the program/data from the AGYM 3493 EPROM suitable for this > > > engine, or do I need to get hold of a different EPROM image and program > > up > > > another EPROM? > > > BTW, can anyone tell me what is the correct EPROM image for an 87/88 305 > > TPI > > > engine? > > I've only just discovered these mailing lists and am slowly making my > > way > > > through the archives. There is a mountain of info there - I just need to > > > find the relevant pieces. > > regards > > > Trevor Jackson ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 06 May 1999 00:58:37 -0800 From: Ludis Langens Subject: O2 == 1.00? volts? Is it possible for an O2 sensor to output a full volt (plus a few millivolts)? I thought they peaked out at 9/10ths of a volt or so. The 1+ volts were measured with a DVM. The meter's ground lead was clipped to the engine<->body braid. The engine end of this braid is where the computer picks up the O2 ground. This was on an EEC-IV w/ Motorcraft 2150 feedback carb. I got the 1+ volt reading just after starting a cold engine. The temp guage hadn't even reached "C" yet. This engine is freshly rebuilt - I was continuing the initial fast idle break-in after fixing a vacuum leak / major lean misfire problem. At the time, the engine had 20 to 25 minutes of running time. Once the engine started warming up a bit, the computer took over and the O2 started swinging back and forth. In a related matter, what is the proper position of the idle mixture adjustment screws? I assume that they should be set so that the feedback solenoid is running at around 50%. - -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #266 ***************************** 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".