Re: P&H Injector Interface

[Len sabatine <sabatine@epix.net>]

At 04:37 PM 5/19/00 -0700, you wrote:
> On Fri, 19 May 2000 16:49:21 -0400, Len
> sabatine <sabatine@epix.net>
> wrote:
>
> >The General Routinely piggybacks various "Modules" on
> Vehicles circa late 
> >80's,
> >  Early 90's, Like 4 out Buffers, D.R.A.C. etc. This Area would
> most likely be
> >  less obtrusive, easier,less costly and have improved heat
> dissipation 
> >qualities.
>
> I missed it. What "Area" are you speaking of? Fender well by
> any chance?
>
> >  The most recent splice/shrink and seal connectors , plus
> metripacks,etc 
> >appear effective and durable.
> >  IMHO,If one is going to place ckt in the engine real estate,
> flex Circuit 
> >hi temp
> >  material may be a good plan, however this won't fit the
> K.I.S.S. rule you 
> >are appearing
> >  to employ. Merely My 2c. Plug and Play beats Plug and Prey,
> hands down.
>
> Ahh, yup, and the circuitry is gonna be very small, so not much
> board
> area to expand/contract and stress the interconnect. But I still
> can't
> make out which method you're voting for; firewall-forward modules
> possibly near/atop the engine but plugNplay, or
> firewall-back/in-cabin
> with a hard splice in the ECU harness? Plus the area you
> mention/suggest
> above?
>
> Pardon the obdurance.
>
> Gar
> No Prob, Mentioned the "Factory" Scheme, which is in the
> Passenger compartment on
non Sealed Ecm's. I would think that
The Passenger Compartment also offers enhanced
"Noise immunity" for any non hardened device. Exposure  to
increased noise level and
possible 300 deg F under hood  ambient temps, plus "Hot
Soak"effect under hood are other
issues. I vote for In Passenger Compartment to Uncomplicate matters,
Piggy back on ECM.
IMHO.

Len



> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without
> the quotes)
> in the body of a message (not the subject) to
> majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org