DIY_EFI Digest Tuesday, November 23 1999 Volume 04 : Number 657 In this issue: TRD Supercharger RE: simulation of data rec.diy.efi OT: ignition kill Private News Server NOT:rec.efi.diy RE: a little newsgroup response Aldl Communication RE: DIS See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 15:40:16 -0500 From: Ed.Wong@xxx.com Subject: TRD Supercharger >> This assumes a fuel rail pressure of 60-65psi. Is this correct? << It was my understanding that EFI pressure ratios were lower - like closer to 45psi. I may be wrong as I am more familiar with the 22RE than the later V6 engines. >> 2) Is there a way to determine when airflow will exceed the MAF and ECU's ability to maintain the proper A/F mixture at stock fuel pressure? I would like to have some idea when (RPM @WOT) to begin boosting fuel pressure prior to installing the supercharger. << Im curious if the later EFI systems still use the Vf trim signal. If so - this will give you a real close look at what the OEM EFI thinks is going on and how much adjustment is still avail (or NOT avail as the case may be). See if there is a connector marked "Vf" in the check connector box next tothe fuse box in the engine compartment >> 3) Is there a simple way to increase fuel pressure based on boost pressure and engine rpm? I would like to avoid running overly rich, due to increasing fuel pressure based strictly on boost, while still within the MAF control range. << I think there is a "Kenne Bell" "Boost a Pump" device that does this. Most people on this list appear to want to build their own decives from chips though. >> I guess if I'm really lucky, one of the list's readers will have installed and "dialed in" one of these TRD superchargers. << Check out the 4Runner Webring. There was at least one site that had a TRD "dial in" description. Try starting at the bottom of this page - fascianting Toyota stuff There is a 4Runner specific ring but I cant find it right now Ewong TIA, Bob Wimmer ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 13:01:30 -0800 From: "Al Lipper" Subject: RE: simulation of data Dan, I'll try to answer your questions about ECU6. > could i ask how do you get the simulated data for the various > cars? is it a software package? The data for the 78 Trans Am and the Pontiac 6000 was gathered by testing on those actual vehicles. In addition, I simulated test conditions for those which could not easily be obtained on a real vehicle by using variable resistors to create input signals in place of the MAP, Temp, TPS and EGO sensors. While using this test setup, I used a function generator to make a pulse that was equivalent to the SP from the ignition coil (to simulate the RPM input). I will try to post more info on the simulator setup I used when I get the chance. > and if its possible to use the crankshaft sensor instead of an inductive > pick up of the spark pulse. the crankshaft sensor is a hall effect sensor > used in rover cars. Yes, I don't see why not. Of course, you probably would not need much of the ignition pulse contitioning circuitry if you did that. > by the way for the resistors there were some i could not find a > exact value, > like C5 which is .1UF 6.6V , the closest i could find is 0.1uF 6.3V. > would it make a great difference? No. 6.3v would be fine since that only operates on a 5v circuit. Capacitor voltages are maximum ratings. You could use a 25v or 50v cap. if you wanted (though it would physically be a bit large). The tough-to-find resistors can be substituted with values that are within 5% usually. The .5ohm or .1ohm resistors may be substituted with a piece of wire that has that resistance (though electronic supply stores usually sell these, as does digi-key). Good luck. Al ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 16:26:18 -0600 (CST) From: Eric Clark Subject: rec.diy.efi I still think usenet sucks, but if we had our own private news server it would be trivial to have as many groups as we want, would not have to worry about slow delivery, or lost messages (ala usenet). The problems with usenet are not with NNTP but they are specific to a network of servers as large and cumbersome as usenet. I doubt spam harvestors would even be a problem. Netscape, Outlook express, and Unix netscape have no problem with multiple news servers. I have not used rn, trn or elm in a long time so I cant speak of those. - -Eric ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 19:20:43 -0500 From: Paul Tholey Subject: OT: ignition kill In a message dated 11/22/99 3:21:25 AM Mountain Standard Time, DIY_EFI-Digest-Owner@xxx.edu writes: << im adding a micro switch to mine, so when the clutch is depressed the ignition cuts so i dont have to lift the throttle(race only car) >> - ------------------------------ Subject: Private News Server NOT:rec.efi.diy I mis-titled my last post. I was trying to suggest that if we set up a news server on a private machine, not connected to Usenet, we will avoid all of the problems of Usenet (speed, reliability, accessibility to spammers), while getting the usability, ease of administration, and low I/O requirements of news. By all means let's keep our list off of Usenet... - -- Mark Wilcutts > > No problem with software, but news is FAR less reliable...as in, our 100% > > unfiltered usenet news feed is missing at least half the posts. It's also > > very common to get replies before you get the original message (due to > > the distribution method). > > The lists will live, newsgroup or none. Newsgroups are just too > slow and unreliable. However, it might be good to gateway > the list to a newsgroup as is done with the telecom digest > which also appears on comp.dcom.telecom. ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 22 Nov 1999 13:27:39 -0800 From: "Randall Young" Subject: RE: a little newsgroup response Ken Kelley wrote : > > Although, I do admit it makes it easier for spammers to get your address; > isn't it pretty easy for them to get it in the first place? (Even without > being in a newsgroup?) My experience has been that spammers are _much_ less likely to harvest your name from a mail list. The first hurdle is that they have to find out about the list, and subscribe to it. The second is that now someone (the list manager) has an accurate e-mail address for them. Most spammers prefer to remain as anonymous as possible, to keep the mobs with pitchforks and torches from the door Randall ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 13:57:22 +1100 From: Andrew Wakeling Subject: Aldl Communication Hi all, Just if anybody's interested, I've laid my hands on the BUA chip. It was a while ago, but it was in demand then so e-mail me if you want it and I can send it to you. Now, my current problem is very interesting. I have three proms, BUA, ABTD and AANM all which suit a corvette... either '87 or '86. Anyhow, I wanted to write my own little program to get the aldl stream because I wanted to manipulate the data a bit more just to try some things. I know that the procedure to link to this type of prom is a little wierd. This is the procedure that I'm going through. ECM is initially in 160 baud 10k resistor to put prom in ALDL mode Prom starts to put out a 25 item 160 baud stream At the end of the stream the ECM listens for 50ms for a 8192 request Once a request is sent, the ECM stays in 8192 baud and everything is sweet. RIGHT, everything seems to work perfectly in Diacom for all three chips, however when I use my device it only links with ABTD. I've tried everything possible and I've narrowed things down a little. I've used Diacom to put all three proms in 8192 baud and after that I have no problem linking with my device, so that must mean that the stream requests and reads are a.o.k. Then I thought, maybe the resistor value was wrong, so instead of plugging Diacom's resistor lead into the plug, I substituted my resistor. Diacom worked perfectly, that means that my resistor was also ok. I then checked to see if Diacom was sending anything else... I didn't pick up anything at 8192, except a 0xFF... maybe a falling/raising edge or something? I think THIS is my problem. One more thing, that Diacom worked perfectly with all proms also indicating that my ECM, loom, computer and other stuff was ok. So, is my presumption correct that Diacom is sending something else? Or is my device faulty or something? I can't seem to figure this one out... Too many late nights. If only I could swap get proms to the 8192 polling mode, then everything would be ok. One more thing was that I was unsure about the VATs having to be bypassed. Diacom didn't have a problem, and also that fact that Diacom doesn't put anything into B6 (VAT pin) means that it should also be ok to get the stream while VAT is looking for that startup signal. If anybody could give me any hints to my problem that would be great. Andrew Wakeling. ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 23 Nov 1999 00:18:46 -0500 From: "Posea, David G, SITS" Subject: RE: DIS MSD does indeed make a DIS-2 and DIS-4. I have a DIS-4 on my car. The problem is there is no provision for advance/retard based on a MAP reading. Crane makes a HI-6D2, which will fire two coils, and has an optional boost (MAP) retard box. Does your airplane engine already have an ignition, or do you need to build one from scratch? I'm looking at building a retard box for use with my stock Ford DIS/MSD DIS-4. David Posea ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V4 #657 ***************************** 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".