DIY_EFI Digest Friday, January 28 2000 Volume 05 : Number 042 In this issue: Electro-magnetic valves Re: Electro-magnetic valves Re: Electro-magnetic valves Re: Electro-magnetic valves Re: [vw-power] Re: Engine choice.. HELP! Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors Dribbles, and drabbles yes EFI Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors Re: 105-160 #/Hr Low Impedance P&H Port Injectors Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors SMTP Delivery Error See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 16:51:11 +0200 From: Carlo Putter Subject: Electro-magnetic valves Has anybody ever had an idea to manufacture a cam less machine. Well I've got that dream, maybe somebody has tried it already. Here is my idea: Used normal valves with light springs. The valves can be closed and opened by electro-magnetic coils on it. This would then give the option to the engine tuner to design a infinitely variable camshaft! But this would only be day-dreaming until any-body tries it. I haven't got any metal work tools, but have some power-electronics experience. The internal combustion engine, as we know it was develop about a century ago, so why can't it be changed? Any ideas, maybe I am way off track. Enjoy the weekends, tuning! Carlo Putter Stellenbosch South Africa - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 10:11:45 -0500 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: Electro-magnetic valves Numerous attempts have been made at this. Some using two springs, and two coils, with valve parked 1/2 open. Some tried moving the rocker arm pivots, etc etc. Might try hunting around the patent office to see what's been done already Grumpy | Has anybody ever had an idea to manufacture a cam less machine. Well I've | got that dream, maybe somebody has tried it already. | | Here is my idea: | Used normal valves with light springs. The valves can be closed and opened | by electro-magnetic coils on it. This would then give the option to the | engine tuner to design a infinitely variable camshaft! But this would only | be day-dreaming until any-body tries it. I haven't got any metal work tools, | but have some power-electronics experience. | | The internal combustion engine, as we know it was develop about a century | ago, so why can't it be changed? | | Any ideas, maybe I am way off track. | | Enjoy the weekends, tuning! | Carlo Putter | Stellenbosch | South Africa | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - -- | To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) | in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org | - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 10:23:31 -0500 From: Rex Weatherford Subject: Re: Electro-magnetic valves Bruce Plecan wrote: > > Numerous attempts have been made at this. > Some using two springs, and two coils, with valve parked 1/2 open. Some > tried moving the rocker arm pivots, etc etc. > Might try hunting around the patent office to see what's been done already > Grumpy > How does the new Toyota VVTTi or whatever it's called work. I had heard that it used variable lift and duration... That could have been bad information though. I did drive a new Celica GT-S with it and I was only 1/2 impressed. The felt like a really wimpy 4 cyl until at least 5500 RPM. Then it opened up and had good power up to 8000 RPM. It has a nice soft rev limiter at about 82-8300 RPM. You need the 6 speed to keep the thing in the power band.. ;^) I don't think it was any faster than my old Quad4. Rex Weatherford 92 Beretta GTZ 15.531 @xxx.28 mph (stock) http://www.beretta.net http://www.mindspring.com/~rweatherford/rexw/rexhome.htm - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 08:28:06 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Electro-magnetic valves >Has anybody ever had an idea to manufacture a cam less machine. Well I've >got that dream, maybe somebody has tried it already. > >Here is my idea: >Used normal valves with light springs. The valves can be closed and opened >by electro-magnetic coils on it. This would then give the option to the >engine tuner to design a infinitely variable camshaft! But this would only >be day-dreaming until any-body tries it. I haven't got any metal work tools, >but have some power-electronics experience. > >The internal combustion engine, as we know it was develop about a century >ago, so why can't it be changed? > >Any ideas, maybe I am way off track. > >Enjoy the weekends, tuning! >Carlo Putter >Stellenbosch >South Africa Realize that you will need valve accelerations at least in the 500 g neighborhood to compete with what a modern camshaft can do!! Greg >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 08:55:56 -0700 From: vw@xxx.net Subject: Re: [vw-power] Re: Engine choice.. HELP! Check out SDS EFI at: http://www.sdsefi.com/index.html They sell what seems to be the perfect ECU to couple with some TWM or CB Throttle bodies. SDS also has some very helpful FAQs and tech articles. Try the Tech/FAQ page at the bottom of their main page. Steve We think that the next step is to just re-chip or outright replace > the *box* > with another ECU from another make of vehicle. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 08:55:03 -0800 (PST) From: Anthony Buccellato Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors > You are building a what?. 105 injectors?. > To get anywhere near an idle would take P+Hs > How big of motor is this?. 460 inch Big Block Chevy, twin turbo, liquid/air intercooler. 800 HP @ 6000 RPM currently, requires only 80 lb/hr. However, it is well within reason for this setup to put out 1000 - 1100 HP at 6500 RPM, requiring 105 lbs/hr. I don't think it is such a good idea to install injectors sufficient for current, unmodified, output levels, when I can simply turn up the boost, and make some other adjustments, to add HP. I want a reasonable amount of overhead to add HP over what I've already got. > Yes, P+H, perfered cycling 1-5 msec, Sat 2-10msec. You can verify in the > archives Thanks. That's what I'd heard. > Yes, there is a day and night difference in flow rates from brand to brand, > and style to style. Kinsler can plot things out for you. Sure, be nice if > some folks would share their injector flow charts for time on vs pressure. Can you recommend any mfg's that make a better product than others? - - Clay - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 09:06:17 -0800 (PST) From: Anthony Buccellato Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors > With an electromotive driver you will not have a snowball's chance where > the sun don't shine of getting those injectors to idle. I believe that if > you read the emotive literature (if they give you anything meaningful) that > the minimum incremental change you can make to injector pw with their ecu > is 64 us. I suggest that before spending ANY more money, you run some > calculations, and figure out what minimum % change in AF ratio you would be > making at idle!! (Even if the injectors would give repeatable flow at the > very short pw you will need. Pretty revealing! > Greg Good point. With large injectors pw resolution will be critical. Injector size is non-negotiable, of course, gotta feed the HP. I'll calculate what minimum pw will be needed, to effect AFR adjustment at idle. - - Clay - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 17:53:47 -0500 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Dribbles, and drabbles yes EFI This is what injectors look like when they fire. Notice the first large drop forming. The better the atonizationthe better the burn. As you increase the injecotr size this dribble gets larger in relationship to the total amount of fuel injected (since a smaller open duration). Hope that helps splain the big injector idle problem, not the only issue, but one of the major ones. Bruce http://neonjohn.4mg.com/files/car/mazbig.jpg - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 18:02:54 -0500 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors - ----- Original Message ----- From: Anthony Buccellato To: Sent: Friday, January 28, 2000 11:55 AM Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors | > You are building a what?. 105 injectors?. | > To get anywhere near an idle would take P+Hs | > How big of motor is this?. | | 460 inch Big Block Chevy, twin turbo, liquid/air intercooler. 800 HP @ | 6000 RPM currently, requires only 80 lb/hr. However, it is well within | reason for this setup to put out 1000 - 1100 HP at 6500 RPM, requiring 105 | lbs/hr. I don't think it is such a good idea to install injectors | sufficient for current, unmodified, output levels, when I can simply turn | up the boost, and make some other adjustments, to add HP. I want a | reasonable amount of overhead to add HP over what I've already got. | | > Yes, P+H, perfered cycling 1-5 msec, Sat 2-10msec. You can verify in | the | > archives | | Thanks. That's what I'd heard. | | > Yes, there is a day and night difference in flow rates from brand to | brand, | > and style to style. Kinsler can plot things out for you. Sure, be nice | if | > some folks would share their injector flow charts for time on vs | pressure. | | Can you recommend any mfg's that make a better product than others? | | - Clay | | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - -- | To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) | in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org | - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 18:09:10 -0500 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors Is this a boat or car?. If a car I'd really think about staged injectors. That way use you 80 for HO, and add a set of 30s for idle cruise. | 460 inch Big Block Chevy, twin turbo, liquid/air intercooler. 800 HP @ | 6000 RPM currently, requires only 80 lb/hr. However, it is well within | reason for this setup to put out 1000 - 1100 HP at 6500 RPM, requiring 105 | lbs/hr. I don't think it is such a good idea to install injectors | sufficient for current, unmodified, output levels, when I can simply turn | up the boost, and make some other adjustments, to add HP. I want a | reasonable amount of overhead to add HP over what I've already got. | > Yes, P+H, perfered cycling 1-5 msec, Sat 2-10msec. You can verify in | the archives | Thanks. That's what I'd heard. | > Yes, there is a day and night difference in flow rates from brand to | brand, | > and style to style. Kinsler can plot things out for you. Sure, be nice | if | > some folks would share their injector flow charts for time on vs | pressure. | Can you recommend any mfg's that make a better product than others? That's why I was asking if anyone had charts to share. I'd need to see more to be able to compare them to make any recommendations. The way I see it, for really hi HP applications, use like an oem size injector, and use some others for when the HP goes crazy, and/or a rising rate fuel pressure regulator (thou, not for you). | - Clay - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 20:33:11 -0800 From: "Walter Sherwin" Subject: Re: 105-160 #/Hr Low Impedance P&H Port Injectors Clay, Large injectors, on a BBC engine, are not quite as problematic as they are often made to sound. Lots of wive's tales, but you can ignore most of them, if you take the right precautions............. First, assuming that you intend port injection for your BBC project and that your BBC is to be artificially aspirated, your 105 #/Hr injector benchmark tells me that you are expecting roughly 1100'ish max HP on gasoline? If this is not the case, then please clearly state your assumptions and/or intended fuel. You will find that large'ish port style fuel injectors (typically beyond 50-70 #/Hr) are all of the low impedance variety regardless of manufacturerer, meaning that they are typically less than 4 ohms impedance each and that they will require an individual peak & hold current driver (typically 4/1 amp) for proper dynamic operation. This is pretty much a universal statement, no matter whether you examine large injectors from Bosch, Siemens, Rochester, etc. "Low Impedance" and "Peak & Hold" really describe the same end result, and are meant to denote that the injectors must be individually switched via a current controlled driver as opposed to the more common (cheaper) saturated voltage switch driver. The combination of an ECU current driver, together with the electromagnetics built into a typical low impedance injector/coil assembly, attempts to drive the injector harder & faster than normal in order to effectively extend both the low and high pulse width flow response of the injector. The result is a "wider" dynamic performance envelope for the injector(s). This translates into both a superior idle and more effective top-end liquid flow (relatively speaking). The DIY & GMECM archives contain a lot of interesting reading on this topic, if you seek more knowledge. When you contemplate the injector flow ranges that you have described, there are really only two manufacturers to consider 1) Rochester '96s [aka MSD, Holley, and others], and of course 2) Bosch '160s. Personally, I would select the Bosch injectors for the following reasons: quality, cost, spray pattern, linearity, heat tolerance, batch tolerance, and availability. Remember, that the Bosch injectors (in particular the 160's that you have mentioned) have been, and still are, the mainstay of racing venues from Indy down to NHRA & IHRA and even weekend bracketeers. By virtue of production volumes, and popularity, the Bosch 160's are far more prevalent and sometimes more cost effective. The Rochester 96's are slightly more difficult to source, and are not as precise. Kinsler, and others, can feed your cravings for either flavour of injector. A bunch of Pro & Otherwise racers around here use the Bosch 160's, and are able to produce clean/stable/reasonable idles with a variety of ECU hardware and software packages. The trick is to control each of the large injectors via its own P&H driver and to use ECU software that intentionally encompasses wide dynamic injector ranges and firing schemes. You should personally discuss your injector thoughts with Electromotive, in order to determine the best software control strategy and selection (kinda surprised they did not want to sell you an injector set to match your application at the time of sale???). If you are interested, I can forward you photo images of both the Bosch '160 and the Rochester '96 injector spray patterns as photographed on my flow bench, during rated psig operation. As you will note, each is different and satisfies differing needs in terms of desired injector targeting and wall wetting parameters. In theory for multiport operation, you want to target the injector spray directly toward the backside of the intake valve face from 3-4 inches distance away. However, the physical dimensions of a BBC make this difficult/impossible. Practical theory reveals that if a person can somewhat incline the injector spray plume into the cylinder head runner tract, then the resultant distribution and effect should be okay. Good luck with your project, and remember that many of the injector and/or ECU companies often have "1-800" numbers. Don't feel bad about asking them a zillion questions. It's their dime.............. Walt. >Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 14:32:07 -0800 (PST) >From: Anthony Buccellato >Subject: Peak and hold vs. Saturated injectors > >It's finally time to buy the injectors. Horsepower, boost, and RPM >requirements (plus a bit of overhead) dictate 105 lbs/hr units. I believe >these will be low impedance units. Does this correlate to peak and hold, >or saturated style injectors? > >I'm using an electromotive driver, so low impedance isn't a problem. What >I'm primarily concerned with is idle quality with the large injectors. >I've heard that saturated style have a longer minimum pulse width, >relative to peak and hold style. Anyone have info on this? > >Also, what is the best angle to weld the injector bosses into the manifold >at? Within the mechanical limitations of a Chevy big block, should I be >aiming as close to the back of the valve as possible? > >Are there any injector mfg's that do a better job than others at >atomisation? I've located 160 lb/hr units, but would prefer to get closer >to my actual requirements, so as not to compromise idle too badly. > >- - Clay - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 18:43:32 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors >Is this a boat or car?. >If a car I'd really think about staged injectors. That way use you 80 for >HO, and add a set of 30s for idle cruise. > >| 460 inch Big Block Chevy, twin turbo, liquid/air intercooler. 800 HP @ >| 6000 RPM currently, requires only 80 lb/hr. However, it is well within >| reason for this setup to put out 1000 - 1100 HP at 6500 RPM, requiring 105 >| lbs/hr. I don't think it is such a good idea to install injectors >| sufficient for current, unmodified, output levels, when I can simply turn >| up the boost, and make some other adjustments, to add HP. I want a >| reasonable amount of overhead to add HP over what I've already got. > >| > Yes, P+H, perfered cycling 1-5 msec, Sat 2-10msec. You can verify in >| the archives >| Thanks. That's what I'd heard. >| > Yes, there is a day and night difference in flow rates from brand to >| brand, >| > and style to style. Kinsler can plot things out for you. Sure, be nice >| if >| > some folks would share their injector flow charts for time on vs >| pressure. >| Can you recommend any mfg's that make a better product than others? > >That's why I was asking if anyone had charts to share. I'd need to see more >to be able to compare them to make any recommendations. > The way I see it, for really hi HP applications, use like an oem size >injector, and use some others for when the HP goes crazy, and/or a rising >rate fuel pressure regulator (thou, not for you). > And--furthermore--ditch the Electromotive, and check out Autronics. There is a link to them on www.turbofast.com.au (Ray Hall). LOTS of the Autronics ecu's on engines like what you have, and they are MUCH better suited for doing what you will need to keep the thing together. Richard Lee, Lee Performance, in Lake Elsinore, CA also does lots of this sort of stuff, at least for boats. He deals the Autronics, but I doubt if for the best deal. Greg >| - Clay > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) >in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 18:46:34 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors >----- Original Message ----- >From: Anthony Buccellato >To: >Sent: Friday, January 28, 2000 11:55 AM >Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. saturated injectors > > >| > You are building a what?. 105 injectors?. >| > To get anywhere near an idle would take P+Hs >| > How big of motor is this?. >| >| 460 inch Big Block Chevy, twin turbo, liquid/air intercooler. 800 HP @ >| 6000 RPM currently, requires only 80 lb/hr. However, it is well within >| reason for this setup to put out 1000 - 1100 HP at 6500 RPM, requiring 105 >| lbs/hr. I don't think it is such a good idea to install injectors >| sufficient for current, unmodified, output levels, when I can simply turn >| up the boost, and make some other adjustments, to add HP. I want a >| reasonable amount of overhead to add HP over what I've already got. >| >| > Yes, P+H, perfered cycling 1-5 msec, Sat 2-10msec. You can verify in >| the >| > archives >| >| Thanks. That's what I'd heard. >| >| > Yes, there is a day and night difference in flow rates from brand to >| brand, >| > and style to style. Kinsler can plot things out for you. Sure, be nice >| if >| > some folks would share their injector flow charts for time on vs >| pressure. >| >| Can you recommend any mfg's that make a better product than others? >| >| - Clay MSD fuel injection injectors (blueprinted Rochesters) are purported to work the best for this sort of stuff--supposedly have better dynamic range than the big Bosch stuff. You WILL need good dynamic range. I AM with Bruce on this, staged, 1/3 primary, 2/3 secondary is the best way to go. Greg - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ Date: 28 Jan 2000 21:50:58 EDT From: MAILER-DAEMON@xxx.com Subject: SMTP Delivery Error An error occured while delivering this message. The error is stated below: 550 Mailbox not found: Excerpt of original message: To: shanen@xxx.com Resent-From: Shannen@xxx.com Resent-Date: 28 Jan 2000 21:49:58 EDT From: diy_efi@xxx.org To: shanen@xxx.com Date: 28 Jan 2000 08:45:00 EDT Subject: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #41 DIY_EFI Digest Friday, January 28 2000 Volume 05 : Number 041 In this issue: Correcting subject when replying Re: toyota o2 Re: basic tuning Peak and hold vs. Saturated injectors RE: J.C. Whitney AFR meter Re: J.C. Whitney AFR meter Re: Peak and hold vs. Saturated injectors Re: J.C. Whitney AFR meter Tech 1 Questions RE: J.C. Whitney AFR meter Re: Peak and hold vs. Saturated injectors 727+LT1Conectr.jpg RE: alky/water inj Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #40 See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000 20:00:16 +0000 From: Ade + Lamb Chop Subject: Correcting subject when replying Hi All, Just a quick request. Those of you who are still using the Digest could you make sure you change the subject line to from eg, Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #39 To the subject you are actually replying to please. Thanx, Ade - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 09:39:44 -0800 From: garwillis@xxx.com (Garfield Willis) Subject: Re: toyota o2 On Wed, 26 Jan 2000 10:51:17 -0500 Scott_Hay@xxx.com >The Toyota sensor can in fact measure a broad range of a/f ratios but so far, >there is little information we have in the US as to how it actually works. Um guys, I've had a look at the pictures of this GReedy gizmo now, Bruce pointed me to: www.suprastore.com/supra/gredairfuelK.html but have a look Scott at that sensor, and see if it's the one you've been testing. I have a Toyota WB O2 sensor (cost me nearly $300 just for the sensor! argh), and it's definitely not the same animal as this one. Look carefully at the body shape and the probe tip openings. Judging from the description, I'd have to guess this is actually a conventional 4-wire heated sensor they've attempted to pull a calibration curve for, on the rich side. If so, it's AFR accuracy is gonna be pretty sloppy. >The sensor does have 4 wires, B+ for heater, ground for heater - controlled by >ecm (pwm), afr+ which supplies +3.3v from the ecm to one side of the sensor, and >afr- which the ecm supplies +3.0v to the other side of the sensor. > >We do see a variable voltage when using a scanner tool but when you measure the >sensor itself, voltage is not moving with major shifts in afr???? The general >thought is that it monitors the amperage and the direction of current flow to >determine the afr. The scan tool voltage is a calculated # to give diagnostic >functions. Yup, you're seeing there the behavior of all current-pump style sensors; you won't see much variation in Vs because there's a feedback loop in the interface that's intentionally attempting to hold Vs at a fixed value, while the current thru the pump is varied. It's the oxygen pump current that reflects the AFR, just as you surmise. In this case, it's the same two terminals +-afr, so the voltage across them is the Vs while the current thru them is the pump current. You've gotta be right about the scanner readout as well; that's AFTER the interface's pump current is read by the ECU and converted to AFR. >Very good and incredibly accurate sensor which operates in a linear fashion to >afr. > >This will probably add more questions than it answers but it is a start. If this is the sensor GReddy is using, at $285 for the complete system, it would indeed be a miracle deal. Doubtful, tho; check out the sensor. If someone can get a look at one of these, the Toyota part number should be right on the O2 sensor's metal outer jacket. Betcha a donut it's a conventional 4-wire heated sensor. :) Gar - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 09:54:05 -0800 From: "Greg Moore" Subject: Re: basic tuning > At the FTP site > Tuning.doc > Grumpy If anyone else is looking for the file it's TuneTip1.doc It's a good start. Thanks Grumpy. Cheers, Greg - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 14:32:07 -0800 (PST) From: Anthony Buccellato Subject: Peak and hold vs. Saturated injectors It's finally time to buy the injectors. Horsepower, boost, and RPM requirements (plus a bit of overhead) dictate 105 lbs/hr units. I believe these will be low impedance units. Does this correlate to peak and hold, or saturated style injectors? I'm using an electromotive driver, so low impedance isn't a problem. What I'm primarily concerned with is idle quality with the large injectors. I've heard that saturated style have a longer minimum pulse width, relative to peak and hold style. Anyone have info on this? Also, what is the best angle to weld the injector bosses into the manifold at? Within the mechanical limitations of a Chevy big block, should I be aiming as close to the back of the valve as possible? Are there any injector mfg's that do a better job than others at atomisation? I've located 160 lb/hr units, but would prefer to get closer to my actual requirements, so as not to compromise idle too badly. - - - Clay - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 14:59:25 -0800 From: "Randall" Subject: RE: J.C. Whitney AFR meter Rex Weatherford wrote : > > I was looking at the schematic for Dave's meter and had a few > questions. > > What is the LM3914? It's an integrated circuit made by National Semiconductor, designed to create a bar graph display with a minimum of external components. National's data sheet is at http://www.national.com/pf/LM/LM3914.html . The part should be available from most full-line electronics supply houses (which leaves out Radio Shaft). > > It says I can buy a meter like this from JC whitney for $20? Is that > true? Not quite. Current price is $36. See http://www.jcwhitney.com/product.jhtml?CATID=4571 . > > How are these used... I know that my ECM looks for values > between .100v > and 1.1v. And that my EGO sensor has to warm up before this means > anything. Correct? Basically. The LM3914 uses 1.2v as the reference (full scale), I assume the Whitney meter does the same. I believe the EGO sensor output is basically meaningless above about 0.9v. Randall - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 18:16:28 -0500 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: J.C. Whitney AFR meter May I suggest you check the achives about O2 sensor, and EGOR so at least you have a clue about what your doing here. While you might consider it's output over .9 as useless, I say below that is about as meaningful, in general the <$100 sensors are designed to function as a switch with the on/off point at 14.7:1 Grumpy | Rex Weatherford wrote : | > I was looking at the schematic for Dave's meter and had a few | > questions. > What is the LM3914? It's an integrated circuit made by National Semiconductor, designed to | create a bar graph display with a minimum of external components. | National's data sheet is at http://www.national.com/pf/LM/LM3914.html . The | part should be available from most full-line electronics supply houses | (which leaves out Radio Shaft). | > It says I can buy a meter like this from JC whitney for $20? Is that | > true? | Not quite. Current price is $36. See | http://www.jcwhitney.com/product.jhtml?CATID=4571 . | > How are these used... I know that my ECM looks for values | > between .100v | > and 1.1v. And that my EGO sensor has to warm up before this means | > anything. Correct? | Basically. The LM3914 uses 1.2v as the reference (full scale), I assume the | Whitney meter does the same. I believe the EGO sensor output is basically | meaningless above about 0.9v. | Randall - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 18:23:25 -0500 From: "Bruce Plecan" Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. Saturated injectors | It's finally time to buy the injectors. Horsepower, boost, and RPM | requirements (plus a bit of overhead) dictate 105 lbs/hr units. I believe | these will be low impedance units. Does this correlate to peak and hold, | or saturated style injectors? You are building a what?. 105 injectors?. To get anywhere near an idle would take P+Hs How big of motor is this?. | I'm using an electromotive driver, so low impedance isn't a problem. What | I'm primarily concerned with is idle quality with the large injectors. | I've heard that saturated style have a longer minimum pulse width, | relative to peak and hold style. Anyone have info on this? Yes, P+H, perfered cycling 1-5 msec, Sat 2-10msec. You can verify in the archives | Also, what is the best angle to weld the injector bosses into the manifold | at? Within the mechanical limitations of a Chevy big block, should I be | aiming as close to the back of the valve as possible? | | Are there any injector mfg's that do a better job than others at | atomisation? Yes, there is a day and night difference in flow rates from brand to brand, and style to style. Kinsler can plot things out for you. Sure, be nice if some folks would share their injector flow charts for time on vs pressure. I've located 160 lb/hr units, but would prefer to get closer | to my actual requirements, so as not to compromise idle too badly. 105-160?. BZZZZZTTTT, assuming you initial calilation is right the other is way off. Grumpy | | - Clay | | -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - -- | To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) | in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org | - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 15:26:53 -0800 (PST) From: Orin Subject: Re: J.C. Whitney AFR meter > Basically. The LM3914 uses 1.2v as the reference (full scale), I assume the > Whitney meter does the same. I believe the EGO sensor output is basically > meaningless above about 0.9v. LM3914 doesn't need to do 0 to 1.2V, it's easy enough to set scale and limits using a couple of resistors per LM3914. I use two LM3914s and set the first to do 0 to 0.5 V and the second 0.5 to 1V, using just one of the 1.2V references. Orin. - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2000 10:49:40 +1100 From: Richard Wakeling Subject: Tech 1 Questions Hi all, I am looking closer at the old "Tech 1" scan tool and have a few questions. 1) When "Tech 1" is connected to a VR commodore V8 is the cable that is used between "Tech 1" and ALDL the same cable (part number TA01299) that is used on the VN commodore but with an adaptor to suit the OBDII syle plug on the VR or do they use a different cable? 2) If a different cable is used for the VR commodore can someone give me the connections between the 15 pin D connector on the "Tech 1" and the 16 pin OBDII style plug. 3) Has anybody tried to reconstruct the circuit of the "Tech 1" or knows which pin of the 15 D pin plug uses the 8192 Data? 4) Does the "Tech 1" scan tool have various models depending on which country they are used in or is it just the Moduals for each vehicle that are different? The model of the "Tech 1" I am looking at here in Australia is 94-012 Thanks in advance Cheers Richard. - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 18:19:25 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: J.C. Whitney AFR meter > >Basically. The LM3914 uses 1.2v as the reference (full scale), I assume the >Whitney meter does the same. I believe the EGO sensor output is basically >meaningless above about 0.9v. > It is also basically meaningless if you are more than about 0.4 A/F ratio away from stoich! Greg - - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org - ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 18:27:26 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Peak and hold vs. Saturated injectors >It's finally time to buy the injectors. Horsepower, boost, and RPM >requirements (plus a bit of overhead) dictate 105 lbs/hr units. I believe >these will be low impedance units. Does this correlate to peak and hold, >or saturated style injectors? > >I'm using an electromotive driver, so low impedance isn't a problem. What >I'm primarily concerned with is idle quality with the large injectors. >I've heard that saturated style have a longer minimum pulse width, >relative to peak and hold style. Anyone have info on this? > >Also, what is the best angle to weld the injector bosses into the manifold >at? Within the mechanical limitations of a Chevy big block, should I be >aiming as close to the back of the valve as possible? > >Are there - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from diy_efi, send "unsubscribe diy_efi" (without the quotes) in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@xxx.org ------------------------------ End of DIY_EFI Digest V5 #42 **************************** 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".