DIY_EFI Digest Monday, January 31 2000 Volume 05 : Number 047 In this issue: Dual exhaust on a 4.3 BMW Motronic (3.??) question Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #45 New Mustang Injectors Re: Water Injection RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #45 RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #42 Aspin engine RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #45 RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #42 camless engine Re: Aspin engine Re: Electro-magnetic valves Re: peak and hold injectors Re: camless engine 105 injectors Re: Electro-magnetic valves Re: 2 bar map sensor Re: Dual exhaust on a 4.3 Re: 2 bar map sensor I need the ignition pulse on a Honda B16A engine. Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #45 Injector drive circuit mods? Re: Injector drive circuit mods? re: Lots of snips from BBC with 160 lb injectors Re: Injector drive circuit mods? See the end of the digest for information on subscribing to the DIY_EFI or DIY_EFI-Digest mailing lists. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 08:08:39 -0500 From: Darren Floen Subject: Dual exhaust on a 4.3 Hi all,I'm almost finished my TBI 4.3 swap in my Toy.I want to run dual 2 1/4" exhaust,with Flowmaster mufflers.I'd be willing to run a single system,but in my truck it'd be kinda hard to fab a y pipe. Will the decrease in back pressure affect the O2 sensor,or will it confuse the computer in any way?I don't think it will,but it doesn't hurt to ask,eh? ;-) Thanks - -- Darren Floen Thunderbay,Ontario 85 Toyota Xtra cab 4x4 5" custom YJ/Mazda lift,4.3,TH350,5.29's,Detroit rear,True-Trac front,and lotsa other stuff... - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:25:56 +0100 From: Joeri de Haas Subject: BMW Motronic (3.??) question - ------ =_NextPart_000_01BF6BFF.789C1270 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable HI guys, Two questions on a 1991 BMW 525i (E34) 24V (M50 engine) non Vanos : When slightly blipping the throttle of this engine, it stalls slightly = and only than it revs up. This makes pulling up quite messy (with MT). = The engine runs perfect and also has a very good idle. I checked TPS = which was ok. While messing around with the TPS connector I noticed that = the engine never displayed a check engine light. In fact there is = something called an EML light and a separate check engine light. Both = also don't light after key on. I already switched bulbs but with no = succes. Now I understand why I could not get my light to display any = diagnostics. Can anybody shed some light on these problems ? If to far of topic = please excuse me. Kind Regards Joeri de Haas - ------ =_NextPart_000_01BF6BFF.789C1270 Content-Type: application/ms-tnef Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 eJ8+IjkOAQaQCAAEAAAAAAABAAEAAQeQBgAIAAAA5AQAAAAAAADoAAEIgAcAGAAAAElQTS5NaWNy b3NvZnQgTWFpbC5Ob3RlADEIAQ2ABAACAAAAAgACAAEEkAYAHAEAAAEAAAAMAAAAAwAAMAIAAAAL AA8OAAAAAAIB/w8BAAAARQAAAAAAAACBKx+kvqMQGZ1uAN0BD1QCAAAAAGRpeV9lZmlAZGl5LWVm aS5vcmcAU01UUABkaXlfZWZpQGRpeS1lZmkub3JnAAAAAB4AAjABAAAABQAAAFNNVFAAAAAAHgAD MAEAAAAUAAAAZGl5X2VmaUBkaXktZWZpLm9yZwADABUMAQAAAAMA/g8GAAAAHgABMAEAAAAWAAAA J2RpeV9lZmlAZGl5LWVmaS5vcmcnAAAAAgELMAEAAAAZAAAAU01UUDpESVlfRUZJQERJWS1FRkku T1JHAAAAAAMAADkAAAAACwBAOgEAAAACAfYPAQAAAAQAAAAAAAACEDIBBIABAB0AAABCTVcgTW90 cm9uaWMgKDMuPz8pIHF1ZXN0aW9uADkJAQWAAwAOAAAA0AcBAB8ADwAZADgAAQBYAQEggAMADgAA ANAHAQAfAA8ADwAmAAEAPAEBCYABACEAAAAzQzczNjE5M0IyRDdEMzExOTlFMjAwMDhDNzVBOEZG QgAiBwEDkAYAkAQAABQAAAALACMAAAAAAAMAJgAAAAAACwApAAAAAAADAC4AAAAAAAMANgAAAAAA QAA5APCSFRb3a78BHgBwAAEAAAAdAAAAQk1XIE1vdHJvbmljICgzLj8/KSBxdWVzdGlvbgAAAAAC AXEAAQAAABYAAAABv2v3FhCTYXM917IR05niAAjHWo/7AAAeAB4MAQAAAAUAAABTTVRQAAAAAB4A HwwBAAAADwAAAEhhYXNAd3QudG5vLm5sAAADAAYQqzh2JgMABxBeAgAAHgAIEAEAAABlAAAASElH VVlTLFRXT1FVRVNUSU9OU09OQTE5OTFCTVc1MjVJKEUzNCkyNFYoTTUwRU5HSU5FKU5PTlZBTk9T OldIRU5TTElHSFRMWUJMSVBQSU5HVEhFVEhST1RUTEVPRlRISVNFTgAAAAACAQkQAQAAAAYDAAAC AwAALAQAAExaRnWiueoA/wAKAQ8CFQKkA+QF6wKDAFATA1QCAGNoCsBzZXTuMgYABsMCgzIDxgcT AoMiMw96aGVsAyBEbBpnAoM0A8UCAHBycfsSIBOFfQqACM8J2QKACoGDDbELYG5nMTA0FCAXCwoV wgwBYw3gIEhJwCBndXlzLAqFCoUgVHdvIHEKUHN0DmkCIAQgAiAgYSAxADk5MSBCTVcgADUyNWkg KEUzQDQpIDI0Vh7wTVY1G3AJ8GcLgGUfQG5VHdFWAHBvBCA6HBxXAxTwA6BzbGlnaHRYbHkgAmAF IHALgGe8IHQU8CNhA2ACQGwjkBxvZiNhBAAf5SwgaXcFQB1gB0BsBCAiVwBwZL8dwSKxI3ADkSVB GAB2BCC4dXAuHOAkggDAaweR/HB1FRAjMifQHSElQCOQdQeBcyLAKAPwI3AF0FReKSfyI5Af9Cdw dQYxcL0EkGYFkAVAJnIHQHMdEDcRwAQgHgB2BJAiwGdv+wRwJTBkJBAn8BugEbAFkNMogCaQVFAF 8HckgBGw8y8gLQFvayfwIgADECm0/yMyCsAIYCaBKkMjci7yBaB+biAwLDAFsRugIHAdcGN/LsEn AQVAI3IrJSAwLVEg9mQEAAtReS7BHgAucysW9yJjLjEDoGYA0DOjGAAlMN8lwQNwEgAkgCNBYyWR NUJxA6BFTUw2VCxUIkBl3wqxM5AjkDWfNqFCI+AqcPUso2QCICcFQDllAYA0oT8ogCLAAiAuMgdA GABhZFsiwAPhdC5xJpBiKNBiPwQgP2AFQCpDIHAiQHVj5TMwcyfwTm8H4BugMSF3BJAlcTEyaCLA LlEIYGz/JpAy8RuwEgAoUCLAOWQykM80xiZhIsA00GFnINEzEftA0BwcQwORRJEG4D6iPyL/N+I5 VR3RI3ER8CiwA2ACYPRlbQQgPy5AJFEdEDcA6wXAJEJvIyBjKLAkEC0AcSsBeGN1SJEHgEWNS6ML gCaQUmVnCxFzHBycSm8GcTTAI5BIYS0ACwqFFyEAT7AAAAMAEBAAAAAAAwAREAAAAABAAAcwACgt pvVrvwFAAAgwACgtpvVrvwEeAD0AAQAAAAEAAAAAAAAAAwANNP03AADjNg== - ------ =_NextPart_000_01BF6BFF.789C1270-- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 06:30:45 -0800 (PST) From: Jim Davies Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #45 On Sun, 30 Jan 2000, DIY_EFI Digest wrote: > Subject: Re: Non-Cam Valves > > At 06:58 29/01/00 -0500, Frederic Breitwieser wrote: > >Hey Carl, > > > >> Has anybody ever had an idea to manufacture a cam less machine. Well I've > >> got that dream, maybe somebody has tried it already. > > For anyone interested in this subject, USPTO website or the IBM patent server is the place to look. Type in a few key words then sit back, and read about it. Forever. Too bad they only go back to the mid 1970s. For the rest, you have to go to a library. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:10:34 -0600 From: gabe Subject: New Mustang Injectors Does anyone know what the lb/hr rating of new Y2K Mustang V8 injectors is, and are they of the same design as (will they fit) older Mustang or TPI injectors??? Thanks Gabe - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 08:33:56 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Water Injection >Hi all > >Have been reading a lot about water injection and how >it reduces detonation. To run high boost I think >water injection is the way to go, but as stated it >must be in atomised form and not produce steam. > >So where is the best place to inject it and just one >injector or one per cylinder ? > >Before or after the turbo ? > >If after the turbo would it be best before or after >the fuel injectors ? A lot of this is open to heated discussion and careful experimentation. Good execution vs bad could leave a very wrong impression as to how well one approach or another works! What I would be inclined to try first would be one water nozzle in each port, in about the same location as the injector. Lots of pressure to the nozzles for good atomization. Pay attention to the timing of the squirts so as to have the best chance of getting the water mist into the cylinders unevaporated. Spraying water on the COOLING AIR side of an intercooler can be very helpful too, with NO bad effects on engine performance--will greatly increase the efficiency of the intercooler. (This approach will evaporatively cool --just like a swamp cooler--the cooling air for the IC. With care, some before the turbo can be very effective and perhaps the simplest--reduce the work the turbo compressor has to do, and therefore also reduce the cooling the intercooler has to do. This has the potential to improve spooling rate if done properly. You woould not want to go beyond the amount of water that would saturate the air coming out of the IC (with respect to water vapor), and after the intercooler, the air stream would be foggy--as the cooling would leave it supersaturated--so you would have to watch out for condensation traps in the duct work after the IC. 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:33:00 -0500 From: Hunt David Subject: RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #45 Just lettin' Grumpy relax-- You have pretty well defined the hydraulic system necessary to squirt about 0.06 grams of diesel fuel into a chamber in each cylinder of the Navistar V-8 26 times a second. And--remember, it only has to squirt the diesel in one direction. Now--double the frequency (suspecting that you want to do this on an engine that turns more than 3200 rpm). Then, increase the mass that you have to move by a factor of at least three thousand (for a 180 gram valve?), and last of all, actuate it in both directions. For a little extra fun, realize that no impact at the end of the stroke is acceptable. Last of all, consider the amount of work Navistar did to develop the injection system! Be kind of a fun problem, I would think! Greg Yeah, but since the diesel fires each revolution the frequency is the same...right? And, .06 * 3200 is about 192 grams/ second. Pretty impressive, eh! Also, I don't thing that atomizing .06 grams of diesel fuel (pushing it through a small orifice) is necessarily less work than accelerating (and decelerating) a 180 gram valve. I say this because of the size of the pump. Can anyone do the math? I may have the numbers for the viscosity, but don't know how to do the math. P.S. Anything Navistar can do in production we should be able to do better as one-off projects. Never underestimate the amount of engineering that is necessary to create a product that can be made on a production line! dh - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:49:44 -0600 From: Brandon@xxx.edu Subject: RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #42 This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BF6C0B.2D5E2D50 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I have talked to several GM engineers and the solenoid replacement of camshafts has been and is in the development stages. The major stumbling block is the fact that to operate the solenoids they need about 32 volts and the car companies do not want the expense of changing all the electrical systems in the car . - ------_=_NextPart_001_01BF6C0B.2D5E2D50 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #42

I have talked to several GM engineers and the = solenoid replacement of camshafts has been and is in the development = stages.  The major stumbling block is the fact that to operate the = solenoids they need about 32 volts and the car companies do not want = the expense of changing all the electrical systems in the car = .

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01BF6C0B.2D5E2D50-- - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 08:53:00 -0800 From: Laura & Neil Subject: Aspin engine > My two cents worth: > Aren't we missing something? If we do away with the camshaft, why not > do away with the valves as we know them? How about an Iris? Or maybe > some sort of sliding/rotating window? Would seem to do away with the > problems of valve inertia when changing direction 180 degrees (up/down). > And would reduce the problems with overcoming cylinder pressures? And > then we could change port shape to something more useful. Like maybe > a crescent moon shape instead of round? Or many little triangles over > the whole cylinder diameter, with alternate triangles being intake and > exhaust? > Or maybe just one huge port in the head used by both intake and exhaust, > with redirection of intake and exhaust being done OUTSIDE of the > combustion chamber? > Just a few off-the-wall thoughts. If we're going to re-think things, > and using the old valve configuration doesn't seem to work, then let's > throw out the valves, too! > > BitWrangler Check on the web for the Aspin engine. It used a rotating cone arrangement for a combustion chamber, with a hole cut in the cone that aligned with first the inlet then the exhaust at half crank RPM. From what I remember it gave a near perfect stratification to the intake charge with low emmissions and excellent fuel consumption. Only problem was sealing the cone. Neil - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:59:46 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #45 > >Yeah, but since the diesel fires each revolution the frequency is the >same...right? And, .06 * 3200 is about 192 grams/ second. Pretty >impressive, eh! > Nope--the Navistar diesel is a four stroke, fires once every other rev. So are all Cummins engines, and even the newer series 40, 50, and 60 GM's and all of the Cats. 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:05:33 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: RE: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #42 >I have talked to several GM engineers and the solenoid replacement of >camshafts has been and is in the development stages. The major stumbling >block is the fact that to operate the solenoids they need about 32 volts and >the car companies do not want the expense of changing all the electrical >systems in the car . > The 32 volt--or higher-electrical systems are coming, and soon. Betcha they happen LONG before solenoid operated engine valves! Also betcha that the first engines with anything resembling solenoid operated valves are about as long lived and popular as the Vega engines were! 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:07:03 -0800 From: Laura & Neil Subject: camless engine > Just lettin' Grumpy relax-- > > You have pretty well defined the hydraulic system necessary to squirt about > 0.06 grams of diesel fuel into a chamber in each cylinder of the Navistar > V-8 26 times a second. And--remember, it only has to squirt the diesel in > one direction. > > Now--double the frequency (suspecting that you want to do this on an engine > that turns more than 3200 rpm). Then, increase the mass that you have to > move by a factor of at least three thousand (for a 180 gram valve?), and > last of all, actuate it in both directions. For a little extra fun, realize > that no impact at the end of the stroke is acceptable. Last of all, > consider the amount of work Navistar did to develop the injection system! > > Be kind of a fun problem, I would think! > > Greg > > > Geez, you outta see me when I get onna roll, that was humor.. > You mentioned using a solenoid for valve action, that means a very specific > volume of hydralic fluid in a very precise moment, Maybe Livermore or > Scandia have something like that, but nothing even close for general use. > Vast difference, IMHO between fuel and valve actuation. With fuel (speaking > of diesels), the opening timing is the critical number, and then guantity > (yes both closely related, and critical). But the mechanical pumps you > mention have been refined for decades. 2000 PSI is also on the lower side, > the Bosch run at 25-28K.. > Grumpy > Hope that was easy enough > Thanks for the break Grumpy. I was just throwing the powerstroke idea around as a starting point. My thoughts had no respect for the laws of physics. But how about a solenoid controlled valve to allow high pressure fluid into a hydraulic ram that opened the valve. A position sensor on the valve somewhere and an identical set-up to slow the opening and then close the valve. Similar to the Ducati desmo gear set up where the camshaft opened and closed the valves( I have no idea how to spell desdromonic and my spell checker fainted when I tried) Neil - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:13:36 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Aspin engine >Check on the web for the Aspin engine. >It used a rotating cone arrangement for a combustion chamber, with a hole >cut in the >cone that aligned with first the inlet then the exhaust at half crank RPM. >From what >I remember it gave a near perfect stratification to the intake charge with low >emmissions and excellent fuel consumption. Only problem was sealing the cone. > >Neil > You slip the word "ONLY" in there so casually, Neil! Done the way an investment banker trying to sell stock in the thing would do it!! :-) 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 08:34:38 -0800 From: Mac McClanahan Subject: Re: Electro-magnetic valves Yamaha has a prototype 250 cc. with 4 (2 inlet 2 exhaust) electromagnetic valves being dyno tested at the University of California at Riverside. It's an interesting idea but it takes quite a control system to manage the valves and a large (150V 30A) DC power supply. I think there's an SAE paper on this but I can't find the reference at the moment. Hope this helps, Mac - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 09:24:42 -0800 (PST) From: Anthony Buccellato Subject: Re: peak and hold injectors Hey Walt, Thanks for the info. I don't need 160 lbs/hr units, not sure how that ended up in the thread. I calculate I currently need 76 lbs/hr with a high BSFC, as I understand boosted applications sometimes exhibit. I would prefer to get closer to 100 lbs/hr to allow some room for future improvement. Checking with the injector companies has shown me it's either Rochester or Bosch Motorsport. Rochester is appealing, due to low cost, I've found them for $62 for 82 lb units. I've heard Bosch is better, and some of their units are even offered in stainless steel, big plus for us boaters. I really want to avoid staged injection, at this point. Cost, complexity, etc. High PW resolution should do me fine at an idle, I figure. If you've got injector pattern pics, please send them. Any further insight on Bosch vs. Rochester would be welcome, as well as suggestions for reasonably priced suppliers, would be great. Thanks. - - Clay Oh yeah, please comment on "Rochester isn't as precise" - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:30:27 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: camless engine >> > >Thanks for the break Grumpy. > >I was just throwing the powerstroke idea around as a starting point. My >thoughts had >no respect for the laws of physics. But how about a solenoid controlled >valve to >allow high pressure fluid into a hydraulic ram that opened the valve. A >position >sensor on the valve somewhere and an identical set-up to slow the opening >and then >close the valve. >Similar to the Ducati desmo gear set up where the camshaft opened and >closed the >valves( I have no idea how to spell desdromonic and my spell checker >fainted when I >tried) > >Neil > Long ago, had the fun of talking to a guy who had worked for Thompson Valve (now the "T" in TRW) about the hydraulic pressures that are encountered in hydraulic (self-adjusting) lifters. These are not only the sort of pressures you would be dealing with, but trying to switch on and off and start and stop the flow--consider the inertia in the fluid itself, as well as the weight of the valve. They are easily comparable the the higher range of diesel fuel injection pressures--2000 BARs!! (About 30,000 psi). Not saying it is not possible, just not too likely any time soon. Variable valve LIFT is not to important. Variable valve timing and duration has a LOT of potential. As is already being done, the most likely practical way of achieving it is with hydraulic/mechanical adjustment of the cam timing, and possibly next with multiple cam lobes per valve. Variable lift can be achieved on a practical basis with variable rocker geometry--and this is already being done, although not on a mass production basis. I strongly suspect that all the talk about 32 V. solenoids is directed more toward controlling the actuation of this kind of hardware, and possibly toward control over variable inlet tract geometry (which is also already a reality) than toward actual hydraulic actuation of the valves themselves. The good old fashioned poppet valve is a VERY well developed and durable part, and it flows far better, particularly for intermittent flow, compared to other schemes than a lot of folks give it credit for! Back to our regularly un-scheduled efi programming--- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 11:23:42 -0600 From: "Christian J. Knudstrup" Subject: 105 injectors To give you my two cents Go with a second set of 8 - 80lb/hr injectors which can be set to turn on at a certain boost level. This is what most major (over 1000 hp) blower motors have setup on them Christian - ----- Original Message ----- > 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 > > ------------------------------ - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 10:37:45 -0700 From: bearbvd@xxx.net (Greg Hermann) Subject: Re: Electro-magnetic valves >Yamaha has a prototype 250 cc. with 4 (2 inlet 2 exhaust) >electromagnetic valves being dyno tested at the University of California >at Riverside. It's an interesting idea but it takes quite a control >system to manage the valves and a large (150V 30A) DC power supply. I >think there's an SAE paper on this but I can't find the reference at the >moment. > >Hope this helps, > >Mac Gee--4500 watts to run the valves. That's about 5.5 HP. A pretty significant portion of a 250 cc's output, But it takes a significant amount of power to drive a camshaft, too. What is more significant is that the efficiency losses in the generator and the solenoids are probably at least 1.5 HP! 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:06:32 EST From: ECMnut@xxx.com Subject: Re: 2 bar map sensor > > GM 2 bar sensors came in: > > 87-90 Pontiac Sunbird Turbo 2.0 > > Plus 84-86 Sunbird (actually any J-car) turbo 1.8. > Thanks Ludis, my brain was on ch. 749 Mike V - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:08:08 EST From: ECMnut@xxx.com Subject: Re: Dual exhaust on a 4.3 As long as it gets up to temp, it should read things okay. Sounds fine to me. MV > Hi all,I'm almost finished my TBI 4.3 swap in my Toy.I want to run > dual 2 1/4" exhaust,with Flowmaster mufflers.I'd be willing to run a > single system,but in my truck it'd be kinda hard to fab a y pipe. > Will the decrease in back pressure affect the O2 sensor,or will it > confuse the computer in any way?I don't think it will,but it doesn't > hurt to ask,eh? ;-) > - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 12:18:59 -0600 From: steve ravet Subject: Re: 2 bar map sensor FYI, I did some work on the GMECM page this weekend. There's a page on GM sensors, their ranges, etc. Right now the 3 GM Map sensors are the only things there but I'm going to go thru my private stash of GMECM posts and add temp sensors, pickups, etc. There's also going to be a page for each ECM, with bins, ecu files, other things that are specific to each ECM. right now only the 747 one is complete. Anyway people are always asking about MAP sensors, part numbers, and applications, it's all there now, go to www.diy-efi.org, click on GMECM, then click on "GM sensors". - --steve nacelp wrote: > > You ordered the right part, got the wrong one. At standard baro should be > at 2.5ish volts > Grumpy > BTW, 90-91 syclones, and typhoons had em > > > I am trying to get a 2 bar map sensor for my accel dfi anyone know which > car came > > with a 2 bar map sensor . I got one for a GN but when I plugged it in it > read an > > incorrect 2bar at atmoshperic pressure . > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > > 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 - -- Steve Ravet steve.ravet@xxx.com Advanced Risc Machines, Inc. www.arm.com - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 18:42:32 +0100 From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?J=F6rgen_Karlsson?= Subject: I need the ignition pulse on a Honda B16A engine. I need it before the power stage as I will modify the ignition signal. It would be nice to get the pin number on the ECU. I haven't been able to get a schematic, I know a tech at a dealer but he is on vacation and I can't wait for him to return. Thanks! Jörgen Karlsson Gothenburg, Sweden. - ----- End of forwarded message from owner-diy_efi@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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:01:29 -0600 From: "Christian J. Knudstrup" Subject: Re: DIY_EFI Digest V5 #45 - ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2000 15:10:57 -0600 From: mark koenig Subject: Re: Electro valves Carlo Putter wrote: > > Has anybody ever had an idea to manufacture a cam less machine. Well I've > got that dream, maybe somebody has tried it already. > My two cents worth: Aren't we missing something? If we do away with the camshaft, why not do away with the valves as we know them? How about an Iris? Or maybe some sort of sliding/rotating window? Would seem to do away with the problems of valve inertia when changing direction 180 degrees (up/down). And would reduce the problems with overcoming cylinder pressures? And then we could change port shape to something more useful. Like maybe a crescent moon shape instead of round? Or many little triangles over the whole cylinder diameter, with alternate triangles being intake and exhaust? Or maybe just one huge port in the head used by both intake and exhaust, with redirection of intake and exhaust being done OUTSIDE of the combustion chamber? Just a few off-the-wall thoughts. If we're going to re-think things, and using the old valve configuration doesn't seem to work, then let's throw out the valves, too! BitWrangler mrkkatexecpcNOHAMdotcom ------------------------------------------------------------------------- He is right why not get rid of the valves?? why not a rotating circle on the top of a cylinder with a window to intake and exhaust airwould be much less restriction than a valve is now and each cylinder can be controlled individually for timing. Besides the quench area for combustion could be greatly reduced and no more domed pistons and no valve clearances needed. It just might work and could even work as a retro kit on most older cars even if done right. Christian - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 22:09:27 +0200 From: "John Andrianakis" Subject: Injector drive circuit mods? Dear all, I have a Weber ecu :W45.06/L20_67. It drives 4 2.5 Ohm injectors. I want to add another four injectors. I am aware of the special chips by Cherry and Motorolla that can drive peak and hold injectors correctly but I do not have the time to source them at this moment. The injectors are driven by BDX53M power darlingtons with some smaller transistors all controlled by some ICs I cant recognize.(This might be not correct, I just figured it out looking at the pcb.) I think I could possibly try two options : 1)Install the secondary injectors(they are peak and hold too) in line with the primaries thus doubling the resistance and inductance seen by each output transitor. Probably would have to add inductive kickback protection.Could anyone guess how thta would change the range of the injectors? 2)Use another set of four same spec output transistors(BDX53M) to drive the injectors. Connecting the bases of the additional transistors in parallel with the ones in the ecu. I have no idea how that would effect the driving IC and or the current regulation. I am mechanical engineering student so my understanding of electronics is basic. I would appreciate it if someone could help me out correcting my thoughts or pointing out a different-better way. Thank you very much. John Andrianakis. - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:18:03 -0500 From: "nacelp" Subject: Re: Injector drive circuit mods? Talk to the guys over at EFI332, they have boards for drivers, Grumpy > Dear all, > I have a Weber ecu :W45.06/L20_67. It drives 4 2.5 Ohm injectors. I want to > add another four injectors. I am aware of the special chips by Cherry and > Motorolla that can drive peak and hold injectors correctly but I do not have > the time to source them at this moment. The injectors are driven by BDX53M > power darlingtons with some smaller transistors all controlled by some ICs I > cant recognize.(This might be not correct, I just figured it out looking at > the pcb.) > I think I could possibly try two options : > 1)Install the secondary injectors(they are peak and hold too) in line with > the primaries thus doubling the resistance and inductance seen by each > output transitor. Probably would have to add inductive kickback > protection.Could anyone guess how thta would change the range of the > injectors? > 2)Use another set of four same spec output transistors(BDX53M) to drive the > injectors. Connecting the bases of the additional transistors in parallel > with the ones in the ecu. I have no idea how that would effect the driving > IC and or the current regulation. > > I am mechanical engineering student so my understanding of electronics is > basic. > I would appreciate it if someone could help me out correcting my thoughts or > pointing out a different-better way. > Thank you very much. > John Andrianakis. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- - -- > 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:21:21 -0800 (PST) From: Anthony Buccellato Subject: re: Lots of snips from BBC with 160 lb injectors Hi Carl, I didn't mention 160 lb. I need 80 - 100 lb. I currently produce "only" 800 HP, but plan to purchase injectors capable of 1000 - 1100 HP. Gotta look ahead. I plan to run both pump and aviation gasoline, depending on the occasion. Would like stainless steel due to the marine environment. Walt says the Rochester units may have a little better sensitivity at short pulse widths, a big bonus for idle quality. If I can locate a good supplier at a reasonable price, I'll try and find a 90 lb model to purchase. If you have any input re: BBC application, fire away, I would be glad to hear it. Once concern I have is finding good weld-in fittings for my manifold. I would like to find a "positive" retention system to hold the injectors secure against boost, initially 8 - 15 psi, but potential for up to 20 psi down the road. Thanks, - - Clay Maybe some of us have forgotten our math??? 160lb x 8 cyl / .5 bsfc = 2560HP....so lets forget about math and try some real world...I have programmed an Autronics box with 8, 96 lb injectors twin turbo's water/air intercooler and ran out of injector at 1639HP at 13.1:1 AFR at 5500 rpm so I'm a little lost on why you need bigger than the 80's to make 1000hp unless you are planning on something I'm unaware of...This was gasoline...were you planning on Alcohol???? BTW the Autronics is a great box with great software, the only thing it could use is some better AE stuff....Lost in Wonderland?????? - - -Carl Summers - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 13:40:27 -0800 From: Mike R Brown Subject: Re: Injector drive circuit mods? John Andrianakis wrote: > Dear all, > I have a Weber ecu :W45.06/L20_67. It drives 4 2.5 Ohm injectors. I want to > add another four injectors. I am aware of the special chips by Cherry and > Motorolla that can drive peak and hold injectors correctly but I do not have > the time to source them at this moment. The injectors are driven by BDX53M > power darlingtons with some smaller transistors all controlled by some ICs I > cant recognize.(This might be not correct, I just figured it out looking at > the pcb.) > I think I could possibly try two options : > 1)Install the secondary injectors(they are peak and hold too) in line with > the primaries thus doubling the resistance and inductance seen by each > output transitor. Probably would have to add inductive kickback > protection.Could anyone guess how thta would change the range of the > injectors? > 2)Use another set of four same spec output transistors(BDX53M) to drive the > injectors. Connecting the bases of the additional transistors in parallel > with the ones in the ecu. I have no idea how that would effect the driving > IC and or the current regulation. > > I am mechanical engineering student so my understanding of electronics is > basic. > I would appreciate it if someone could help me out correcting my thoughts or > pointing out a different-better way. > Thank you very much. > John Andrianakis. > John, Have been doing a lot of work with my Edelbrock Pro-Flo. It uses a Weber IAW4W6 ECM. The output stages in your unit sound a lot like the ones in mine. Take a look at http://www.sonic.net/~mikebr/ecu_hdwr.html I've got schematics of my unit I've created. Might help you in figuring out what you have in yours. Mike - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 #47 **************************** 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".