DIY_EFI Digest Wednesday, June 9 1999 Volume 04 : Number 347 In this issue: Re: 10,000 RPM Re: 10,000 RPM RE: 02 Sensors Re: New Microchip PIC processor. Re: Topic scan tool bin files o2 price? Public & Private Groups Compared vacuum hose help Re: 02 Sensors Re: Injectors Re: New Microchip PIC processor. Re: Tricolor LED Re: New Microchip PIC processor. Re: Edelbrock TBI conversion to PI Re: Topic scan tool bin files Re: metric Re: Topic scan tool bin files Re: dummy Re: New Microchip PIC processor. See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 20:04:36 -0500 From: Steve Gorkowski Subject: Re: 10,000 RPM They also have Lincoln" FWD 4.6l v8 tight fit eecV system man it is a nice car . Can't own one I would fall asleep behind the wheel. Steve Frederic Breitwieser wrote: > > gearing. Federal law for emissions keeps law enforcement agencies to the > > same calibrations in the ECM's as civilian vehicles with the exception of > > top speed limiters. > > All of the above plus sway bars, and on Chevy vehicles, a slightly > more aggressive cam. Key word is slight. Years ago, police motors > were often, not always, 4-bolt mains. > > What I find especially interesting is the Ford 3.8L V6 police motor. > Don't laugh, this exists! I found out a lot about this particular > motor when I cracked my cylinder heads due to the years of boosting > the engine, and pounding on the "go" pedal. Anyway, in 1993, the > differences between the "Regular" FWD 3.8L motor and the > "Police/Lincoln" FWD 3.8L motor are as follows, according to the local > Ford dealer's parts department in Bridgeport Connecticut. I am > regurgitating :) > > Intake valves are .2 larger in diameter. > Cam lobes have an additional .02" lobe length on the exhaust side. > The torque converter has a 100 RPM higher stall speed. > The idle is 50 RPM higher. > The struts are "Heavy Duty" on the Police Taurus, though my Lincoln > has air struts. > The idler pulley is mounted slightly differently (different part > number) > The water pump has a different part number. > The radiator has a different part number, and visually, it looks > "thicker". > The power steering pump has a different part number. > > There are some suspension differences like sway bars I'd imagine, but > I didn't research those, only the engine differences, because the head > castings on my Lincoln match the same year police motor, and I wanted > the new heads to flow the same way as the old heads. I ported them > with a dremel as I did the old heads, however in both cases I used the > stock "police package" valves that were already loaded. > > After all this research, I accidentally stumbled across a 1988 Taurus > with the same casting, valve diameter, and stem length as the heads on > my Lincoln, in shiny, new condition in a junkyard. The prior owner > apparently swapped in a motor just before it was bashed in the rear by > something significantly larger, so I yanked the heads and went on my > way. $80 a piece was much better than "$795 plus a 3 month backorder" > from the dealer. > > Sorry for the extra wind... I got on a roll. > > -- > > Frederic Breitwieser > Bridgeport CT 06606 > > 1993 Supercharged Lincoln Continental > 1989 HWMMV w/turbocharged 500cid Caddy > 1975 Dodge D200 Club Cab soon to have 431 stroker + turbos > 2000 (I hope) Buick GTP (Mid-Engined Sports Car) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 20:23:40 -0500 From: Steve Gorkowski Subject: Re: 10,000 RPM Street version is in the Mustang that can produce the same if not more HP with engines options and you can buy at you local Ford dealer. Steve Todd....!! wrote: > Oh? Are the cop cars available to the general public? > > I didn't think they were? > > Are ya sure? > > How much and where do we order one? > > LATER, > > Todd.... > > ------------- > eclark@xxx.com wrote: > > > > >From what I understand GM only does durability mods to thier police car > > engines. Like silicone hoses, oil cooler, things of that nature. Even > > still last I heard the Camaro still holds the title of fastest production > > police pursuit car. And the 96 Caprice still holds the title of the > > fastest production four door police vehicle. Although I think that may be > > in top speed only. > > > > On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Steve Gorkowski wrote: > > > > > Ford has a production V8 built Police cars and Mustangs to handle 7k > > > over and over all over the USA and puts a warranty on it. This engine > > > will go higher if you bypass EFI but then your on your own . I think in > > > the price range that can be considered a high rpm engine. It puts a high > > > RPM engine in the hands of the average person. The Chevy Police car must > > > do the same. > > > ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 21:40:51 -0400 From: "Knowlden and/or Eller" Subject: RE: 02 Sensors Could somebody supply the URL for the NTK ftp Bob - -----Original Message----- From: owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu [mailto:owner-diy_efi@xxx.edu]On Behalf Of Greg Hermann Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 3:24 PM To: diy_efi@xxx.edu Subject: Re: 02 Sensors >I missed which Honda model/year/motor uses the Honda/NTK sensors. If anyone >one knows a Honda part number could you please post it. 93--95 Civic VTEC--If ya ask nice Grumpy prolly has the part # handy. I only have it "somewhere"! Greg > >I noticed a Vout/AF graph on the ftp for a NTK should I use this graph for >the Honda sensor as well? > >Thanks in advance. > >Kevin Yachimec ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 21:37:37 -0400 From: "David A. Cooley" Subject: Re: New Microchip PIC processor. At 05:16 PM 6/8/99 -0700, you wrote: > >really? that's interesting. i guess i didn't think that they could hack it >b/c >they run at about 2MHz, don't have a lot of I/0 lines (unless you get the 52 >pin), >and were generally pretty old. i guess that's my fault. i figured that >there were >better out there. >so, let me rephrase that, HC11's could hack it, but they can be improved upon. GM's use in 93 and up is the HC11F1... Lots of A/D, IO, address space etc... they run the external clock and 12.something MHZ... internal is 4MHz at that external rate... Up until OBD_II, data I/O from the HC11 based PCM's was 8192 baud... OBD_II is 10.4KBPS VPW. Most of the later PCM's have 2 CPU's (Both HC11F1's).. I believe one is dedicated to nothing but spark control. =========================================================== 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: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 21:39:39 -0400 From: "David A. Cooley" Subject: Re: Topic scan tool bin files Hmm... Got any info on the EEC-V in the 97 Explorer 4.0L OHV? Wanting to play with mine... Finding a lot on the EEC-IV, but coming up dry on the EEC-V At 06:01 PM 6/8/99 -0500, you wrote: >Hello group, > I am currently using a Hickok NGS New Generation Star Tester for my EEC IV >and EEC V work. Since I work for Ford, I am using the Ford specific version of >software. Since Ford announced this month that NGS is now no longer the "Ford >Specific" scan tool starting with the new LS 2000 Lincoln introduced this >month. >So Ford will no longer support the NGS tool starting July 1st. That means no >more >software updates will be provided on a monthly basis on the SBTS update disk. >Instead Ford will be introducing the WDS (World Diagnostic System) next month. > Here is my problem, I would like to make a couple of backup PCMCIA program >cards for my NGS in case my personal cards get lost or damaged. So far I have >been >able to copy the bin files from the program card to a floppy disk. However I >run >into problems when i try to load these files on to a generic PCMCIA flash >card.I >get a JEDIA-OP error. I am using the same CardTalk software that the SBST >uses to >upgrade >the Hickok cards. What I would like to find out is if anyone knows if there is >software available to decode bin files so I can identify the programs on the >card. Or any other suggestions that may enable me to transfer these files. =========================================================== 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: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 18:49:40 -0700 From: "Mike Pilkenton" Subject: o2 price? What's a reasonable price for a typical O2 sensor (one-wire)? Mike ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 19:00:24 -0700 From: garfield@xxx.com (Gar Willis) Subject: Public & Private Groups Compared On Tue, 08 Jun 1999 10:40:26 -0700, Sandy Ganz wrote: >Gar good to see that you back by the way! Now if we could get people to >stop BS'ing about traction devices and other non related topics this list >might become useful again... this was the DIYEFI list or something. > >Sandy Uh, thanks, Sandy. But don't hold back, tell us how you REALLY feel. B) Seriously, dood, the "chat phenom" in public newsgroups and newslists, IMO, is a necessary lesson to be learned from cyberspace. We have the SAME problem in the aviation community, and I'm sure it's no different in any other "arena" of special interest. The public forums almost always decay into chat groups, sooner or later. I'm sure it's the same EVERYWHERE. Make a public place, and the bums eventually 'occupy' and pee in every nookNcranny. That's why in XA (eXperimental Aviation), most of the serious stuff goes on via private newslists, which can establish a set of rules and maintain focus. Instead of the boogieman "censorship" that the chat-monkeys always bandy about, you usually end up with a much nicer environment. After all, IF it were to happen that someone(s) became Hitlerian on some private forum, everyone DOES have the option of bailing out, and even forming a NEW list of their own in protest. So the end result is, if you wanna get something serious done, you pull together a group of founders (hopefully well-known from the public forum), establish a private newslist via one of the many free services for doing so, and go about yer merry way. Sure, keep the public meeting place for "concerts" and even an intentional place for the transients to alight, but if you need to focus, there's nuthin like a private venue. The group I'm affiliated with, an XA group whose special interest is experimental engines/powerplants for small aircraft, has been in existence now for three years, and as I've alluded to before, we finally last year decided to incorporate as a non-profit corporation, and now are even leasing a building that the corp's shop occupies. There is NO reason why the same thang cain't be done by a group of pals working in ANY special interest area, including automotive DIY_EFI. If you don't like the diffuse "shop chat" or in our case, the "hanger prattle", then you get yerself a meeting place that's got a door on it. Funny thing is, all it takes is the most minimal screening/governance policy, and most all the rabble just disappear into thin air. The thing about the PUBLIC internet is that is attracts transients and wackos like you-know-what attracts flies. Put a simple door on the building, and have a gatekeeper who requires everyone to announce themselves and their applicable interests upon entry, and loNbehold, most all the transients give it a miss. I think of it as the cockroach phenomenon. :) Bottom line is, I've learned it's truly futile to expect these public forums to be anything but a public park, where ANYONE can drop in and blather away to their heart's content. As you can tell, I'm not a fan of total anarchy for every venue. Public parks are fine for public gatherings or meetings, announcements, and so-forth. If I wanna enjoy a productive collaboration between friends/pals, I look for a private meeting place with a door or gate on it. Cuz the fact is, there ARE alot of noisy bums in the world. And they're EVERYWHERE! The internet is one perfect existence proof of that. So if you're discontented, Sandy, consider testing the waters for a private/governed newslist. You'll find as we have, that although the numbers of "members" diminishes dramatically, the productivity also increases pretty astoundingly. Not saying there shouldn't be a DIY_EFI as presently constituted, so don't let's hear THAT accusation, please; but just tryna answer Sandy's laments about the inevitable lack of focus in a totally pubic group. Whoops, I meant public, of course. :) Gar P.S. As a vendor, I'm now more sensitive to the need to maintain a diplomatic profile, as you can see from the above. Heh. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 19:01:11 -0700 From: "Mike Pilkenton" Subject: vacuum hose help I have a 3.1L GM V6 from a 92 Camaro that I need help reconnecting all the vacuum circuits. Could someone contact me off-list to assist me? Mike ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 19:17:05 -0700 From: garfield@xxx.com (Gar Willis) Subject: Re: 02 Sensors On Tue, 8 Jun 1999 11:34:53 -0600, "Kevin Yachimec" wrote: >I noticed a Vout/AF graph on the ftp for a NTK should I use this graph for >the Honda sensor as well? Steve's got the particulars nailed down, just one thing I'd like to reiterate. The Vout/AFR graph in the dropbox is a graph for the TOTAL combo of NTK sensor AND their proprietary NTK interface box/circuitry. It is NOT, I repeat once more with *feeling*, it is NOT a graph of the Vout/AFR curve of the SENSOR all by itself. Gar ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 20:22:42 -0600 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Injectors >> What computer could I use for multiple(dual) port injector setup like >> that? > >Well, I wouldn't want to design or build a system based on one or two >big-ass 100lb injectors. If one gets stuck closed, you'd lose 1/2 >your fuel and lean out. Underboost, you'd detonate something fierce. >If the reverse happened, where one injector got stuck open, you'd have >a flood, possibly a fire if the engine even runs at all. > >This is one of the things I do like about multiple injectors, spread >around the intake runners, i.e. one injector per cylinder. Fire 'em >sequentially, batch, a combination of the two, whatever, however if >one injector goes bad, on a V8 engine you could in theory limp home >with crappy performance. But, you more than likely could get home. > >Also, if you calculated out that you need two (see dual above) 100lb >injectors, that's 200lbs worth of injector performance at an 80% duty >cycle, divided by "banks" or "cylinders" depending how you want to >fire them, and you have smaller, less costly injectors. > IF you are going to go with staged injectors, the best plan is to size the primaries for 1/3 of the fuel flow, and the secondaries for two thirds of it-- If you need 90 lb. injectors to feed the engine--use 30 lb primaries and 60 lb. secondaries. This will give you by far the most stable control, with the widest dynamic range. A decent definition of dynamic range for these purposes is maximum fuel flow rate divided by minimum fuel flow rate (per unit time). If your engine is going to make 1000 HP at full throttle, and say requires maybe 8 HP to idle and run its accessories at idle, the turndown ratio, or dynamic range you will need on your injection system is 1000/8, or 125 : 1. If you don't have that much turndown ratio available, the engine won't idle worth $#%!! Too much bandwidth involved to explain why this stuff works this way, suggest consulting a text on control theory if curious beyond just doing it as described on a cookbook basis. Control of Boilers, by Sam Dukelow, published by Intrument Society of America is a good place to start on basic control theory for any interested, Sam's book is heavy on description and pretty light on math--for those who feel math deprived, there are LOTS of control theory texts that would cure your math craving in about five pages! There is a Brit outfit (DCA????? or something like that) that makes an ecu that can be optioned to run two injectors per hole on a V-8. And its price is under $2000, I think fairly far under--just don't recall HOW far. (That price is before you get the wide band O2 option for it.) Regards, Greg ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 19:35:36 -0700 From: "K. Toyofuku" Subject: Re: New Microchip PIC processor. okay. 68HC11's will work, my mistake. i didn't know GM used them. from my experience w/ the HC11, they're fun and useful, but slow and they have their limits. on the other hand, they make a great learning tool if you want to learna bout microcontrollers, prototyping, memory maps, interrupts, and uarts.. Shannen Durphey wrote: > K. Toyofuku wrote: > > > i'm new to this diy dfi thing, so what do you recomemd to look for in > > microcontrollers when building your own dfi. i've used motorola's 68hc11's (i > > don't think that they could hack it..) > > This is ironic. I'm learning about 68hc11's because that's what GM > uses in their ECMs > Shannen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 8 Jun 1999 23:23:21 -0400 From: Raymond C Drouillard Subject: Re: Tricolor LED You can pick them up at Radio Shack. I believe they have the two-wire version, but they may also have the three-wire version. It's been a while since I have looked at them. Ray On Tue, 08 Jun 1999 08:51:21 -0500 Clarence Wood writes: > Can anyone direct me to a distributor of the tricolor LED? I have >tried Digikey and Tech America. > >IZCC #3426 > 1982 280ZX Turbo GL > 1966 El Camino > 1982 Yamaha Maxim XJ-1101J Motorcycle > 1975 Honda CB750 SS (black engine) > 1986 Snapper Comet lawn mower >Clarence Wood >Software&Such... >clarencewood@xxx.net >Savannah, TN. ___________________________________________________________________ Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 20:12:27 PDT From: Bill the arcstarter Subject: Re: New Microchip PIC processor. "K. Toyofuku" wrote: >>The important thing here is that uchip has finally done two things to >>their >>flash parts: >>1) Included enough space (8K) to use useful >>2) Allowed the processor to read/write the program space at runtime. This >>would be very useful for fuel maps and the like. Prior to this processor >>- >>that sort of thing would have required addition components. >> > >i thought that there was another chip out there that did all of that >already...hmm.. i can't remember which one it was.... Its possible. One of the main advantages with this new family is the speed and cheapness of doing in-circuit code development! :) If you have enough money to buy the in-circuit emulators and whatnot for the other processors - most anything will do. PICs are cheap to work with and fairly powerful. Atmel (one of microchip's competitors) has had fully flash parts for years. Scenix is another candidate. >i do. i'm new to this diy dfi thing, so what do you recomemd to look for >in microcontrollers when building your own dfi. i've used motorola's >68hc11's (i don't think that they could hack it..) and some strong arm >stuff to build dataloggers and other non-car related devices. is there an >advantage to using PIC? "Advantage" is hard to quantify. I suppose it's mostly what you are familiar with. This 16F874 part looks a LOT like an HC11 rip-off. Even some of the port names are the same. I'm sure there are 100s of processors up to the task. >i figured a microcontroller that had lots of I/0 lines @ 10 to 15bits of >resolution, decent processor speed, lots of RAM and EEPROM, and uart. >what else? Yea, I/O lines are nice. Timers to run injectors are nice. A/D converters are very nice to read sensors, etc. But the basic fuel tables are rather small. I've heard that the common GM ecu's use a fuel table only (at most) 16x16 points in size. Thats a max of 512 bytes, even at two bytes per cell. Not much memory needed for the fuel tables. (Somebody correct me if my impression here is incorrect) I suppose the basic routine would be: 1)Read the MAP, or MAF or whatever sensor. (A to D converter) Measure engine RPM (timer functions or input capture pins on an HC11) 2)Read the air charge temp (A to D) 3)Do a 2-D table lookup, possibly with interpolation. 4)Compensate for air temp, cold start etc (gets slightly complicated here) 5)Send this injection duration to the injector drive hardware. 6) Do it again! I think thats about it. You will also need some sort of "background" process/program to let you mod the table on the fly, or whatever you are planning on doing for data acquisition, etc. Not sure why you'd need a lot of ram either. Granted - PICs are rather weak in the RAM department, and are not easily extendable (unlike an HC11 would be). But for the above steps you don't need more than a few bytes of ram IMO. One of these days I'll try rolling my own after I get familiar with the system I presently have. My $0.02. - -Bill _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 23:52:01 -0400 From: Shannen Durphey Subject: Re: Edelbrock TBI conversion to PI David Sagers wrote: > > Last night I was looking thru the new Jeg’s catalog and saw the Edelbrock > kit for converting a GM TBI to a port injection system, includes manifold, > injectors, fuel pump... > > The description says that it uses the TBI computer. Now Edelbrock makes > some fine intake manifolds, but the total cost on the kit is some $1100. > > Since I already own most of the parts for a TPI intake, I am wondering how > to make the TBI computer for my ‘92 SBC Suburban fire all eight injectors if > I install the TPI. Is it as simple as a harness that plugs into the > existing TBI harness or is there more to it? > > Seems that a computer designed to drive two TBI injectors would lack > something necessary to drive eight TPI injectors, maybe that’s why the kit > is $1,000. > > What else to I need to change to make the TPI conversion? Would I be better > off buying the Painless Wiring harness and using a TPI computer instead of > the TBI computer? There might be some information in the archives, I've looked into this a little. Edelbrock uses a stock ECM, but they will send a new Eprom. There isn't much changed in their calibration from the factory cal's I've looked at. These were for the 91 and older 747 ecm. I was told the injectors plug into the factory harness. They are driven by the stock injector drivers. I suspect they are the same as the parts used in the Pro-flo system. I was told the Pro-flo injectors are Marelli units, and measure 17 ohms each. If I remember the formula, that should work out to around 4 1/4 ohms/bank of 4. What is the resistance of the TBI injectors? Fuel pump from a pfi vehicle should be sufficient for the conversion. Edelbrock tech help has been somewhat friendly to a couple of people I've spoken with, so you might give them a call. I'd use a complete TPI setup, including the ECM. I really think the long runner TPI manifold should be used in the trucks. If it were combined with a Crane Compucam designed for torque, that would make a really strong tow vehicle. Shannen ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 08 Jun 1999 23:04:51 -0500 From: Bill Kibbe Subject: Re: Topic scan tool bin files I'm sure I can find some, what did you have in mind? David A. Cooley wrote: > Hmm... > Got any info on the EEC-V in the 97 Explorer 4.0L OHV? > Wanting to play with mine... Finding a lot on the EEC-IV, but coming up dry > on the EEC-V > > At 06:01 PM 6/8/99 -0500, you wrote: > >Hello group, > > I am currently using a Hickok NGS New Generation Star Tester for my > EEC IV > >and EEC V work. Since I work for Ford, I am using the Ford specific version of > >software. Since Ford announced this month that NGS is now no longer the "Ford > >Specific" scan tool starting with the new LS 2000 Lincoln introduced this > >month. > >So Ford will no longer support the NGS tool starting July 1st. That means no > >more > >software updates will be provided on a monthly basis on the SBTS update disk. > >Instead Ford will be introducing the WDS (World Diagnostic System) next month. > > Here is my problem, I would like to make a couple of backup PCMCIA program > >cards for my NGS in case my personal cards get lost or damaged. So far I have > >been > >able to copy the bin files from the program card to a floppy disk. However I > >run > >into problems when i try to load these files on to a generic PCMCIA flash > >card.I > >get a JEDIA-OP error. I am using the same CardTalk software that the SBST > >uses to > >upgrade > >the Hickok cards. What I would like to find out is if anyone knows if > there is > >software available to decode bin files so I can identify the programs on the > >card. Or any other suggestions that may enable me to transfer these files. > > =========================================================== > 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, 9 Jun 1999 00:04:02 EDT From: Regnirps@xxx.com Subject: Re: metric In a message dated 6/8/99 8:32:32 AM, peter@xxx.au writes: >Charlie Springer wrote: > >> I agree completely, until you start working with E&M. >> Electricity and magnetism is a mess. > >You want to explain what you're saying here? > >-- >Peter Gargano If you look at MKS and CGS version of stuff you might be surprised to find they DO NOT differ by a power of 10. Statvolts convert to volts with a funny fractional value and others differ by amounts that are obviously related to the speed of light so you get factors of 300 (299.x) or 3x10^9. IIRC it is because the permeativity and permeability (epsilon and mu) of free space can be made to vanish if you choose the right dimensional constants, and the units of both MKS (SI I guess these days) and CGS leave you with these extra numbers to drag around through all your calculations. Charlie Springer ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 00:12:21 -0400 From: "David A. Cooley" Subject: Re: Topic scan tool bin files At 11:04 PM 6/8/99 -0500, you wrote: >I'm sure I can find some, what did you have in mind? > Wanting to get pinouts of the connectors, any info on the guts and/or OBD_II protocols for getting in and re-programming/modifying the cal's... played a LOT with GM stuff, but never ford... Now I own a 97 explorer and can't leave it alone! Thanks, Dave =========================================================== 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, 9 Jun 1999 17:38:21 +1000 From: "Geffro" Subject: Re: dummy >Usually means a microcomputer device from Microchip > >See http://www.microchip.com/ > Thanx Pete where u after info on the coil over plug design ? I had crash and lost heaps of addresses I have a faxed w/shop manual page that u wanted there's not a lot of info though :( let me know your fax and I'll send it If this is not u justr ignore :) Cheers Geoff ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 01:06:39 -0800 From: Ludis Langens Subject: Re: New Microchip PIC processor. Bill the arcstarter wrote: > Microchip has just put into production an intesting fully flash processor > which might be just about right for DIY_EFI applications: > > http://www.microchip.com/10/Lit/PICmicro/16F87X/index.htm These chips are proposed for the PIC based EPROM emulator over on gmecm. (BTW, drawing my proposed schematic for the emulator is bubbling up to the top of my priority queue.) > i/o out the wazoo 33 I/O lines maximum isn't a lot, especially with the way that Microchip scatters the built-in peripherals onto these pins. > 2) Allowed the processor to read/write the program space at runtime. This > would be very useful for fuel maps and the like. Prior to this processor - > that sort of thing would have required addition components. AFAIK, every PIC has been able to have data tables in the built-in "ROM" - - using the "return and load W" opcode. - -- Ludis Langens ludis (at) cruzers (dot) com Mac, Fiero, & engine controller goodies: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/ ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #347 ***************************** 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".