From carriljc at cox.net Mon May 1 07:52:51 2006 From: carriljc at cox.net (jc home) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 05:52:51 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] LT1-16159278 O2 sensor readings?? Message-ID: <002501c66d1e$28852a20$a88f0444@oc.cox.net> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- QUESTION: Does the LT1 require both O2 sensors to read "good" in order to into "closed loop"? INFO: Reading a friend's LT1 using my Autoprom. The LT1 has 2 oxygen sensors, one of them was never going above ~450v, and the car never went into closed loop. We swapped leads, and then the opposite side sensor would never change, we checked continuity to the ECM and it appears the lead is good. At this point it would seem that the lead is fine, the sensors are fine, and that ends up making us think that perhaps the ECM is shot. I then burned him a chip with VATS turned off (just to eliminate the pro-made chip as a problem). Well, the problem is still there, one O2 sensor doesn't react, the sensors seem fine, the leads seem fine....do y'all suppose that the actual ECM could be shot? Hence the question: Does the LT1 need both O2 sensor sides to be "good" prior to going into closed loop? The one side that appears bad just hangs out at ~450v. When we swap the O2 sensor leads the opposite one looks bad. Continuity is sat from the sensor connection to the ECM. Even opened up the ECM to check that the connection at the terminals to the circuit board had continuity....that's sat. Looking more and more like the ECM, eh? I'm usually playing with my 730 ECM and it only has one O2 sensor; it goes into closed loop as soon as that one looks good.... I gather that the LT1 needs both O2 sensors to look SAT for it to go into closed loop? Anyone know if this is true? From red83brick at yahoo.com Mon May 1 09:23:39 2006 From: red83brick at yahoo.com (Chris Reynolds) Date: Mon, 1 May 2006 07:23:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] Corvette ECM 1226026 In-Reply-To: <44510584.3090100@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <20060501142339.30858.qmail@web31111.mail.mud.yahoo.com> The chip in that ECM is one time burn only. The processor is slower than a typical TBI ecm, making a switch to the 7747 or 8746 an easy decision for most. It takes much less time to rewire for a 7747 and use the already fully hacked ECM instead of finding a way to put a programable chip in the Vette ECM and hacking out the tables. William Lucke wrote: I don't know about the ECM, but I happened upon this a while back: http://www.x-ram.com/ Performance manifold for Crossfire injection. Will > From: "Mrfun71" > Subject: [Gmecm] Corvette ECM 1226026 > > Hello everybody, got a question for the group. I have been doing some searching and can't find much on the 1226026. It's out off an early eighties corvette with dual TBI. I've seen some people have done some ECM conversions to the 747 and the 8625, which I have in my 93 blazer. I've checked the Tunercat and Datamaster sites to find nobody has anything. Does anybody know of anything on this ECM to help me get it programmed. > > Thanks! > Andy > mrfun71 at chartermi.net _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail goes everywhere you do. Get it on your phone. From joshua.p.williams at hotmail.com Thu May 4 14:41:30 2006 From: joshua.p.williams at hotmail.com (Joshua Williams) Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 14:41:30 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Can I burn the eeprom using a picstart plus programmer from Microchip? Message-ID: Does anybody know if this is doable? If so can you point me in the right direction? I've got an 85 TA with the 305 TBI in it, and a picstart programmer. If this isn't doable, what's the "cheapest" direction hardware wise to get me going? _________________________________________________________________ Join the next generation of Hotmail and you could win the adventure of a lifetime http://www.imagine-msn.com/minisites/sweepstakes/mail/register.aspx From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Fri May 5 09:29:50 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Fri, 5 May 2006 09:29:50 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Can I burn the eeprom using a picstart plus programmer from Microchip? Message-ID: Joshua, if your picstart software has a setting for programming EPROMS then it will work. But if it's list of supported devices is only PICs, then it won't work. I suspect this will be the case. You can go to the gmecm page (www.diy-efi.org/gmecm) and read the FAQ to learn about burners and erasers. But before investing your money there, look into upgrading your computer to use a flash chip instead of an EPROM. Much easier and faster. There should be some info in the gmecm archives, if not search in the diy_prom section of thirdgen.org. --steve > -----Original Message----- > From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org > [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Joshua Williams > Sent: Thursday, May 04, 2006 2:42 PM > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Subject: [Gmecm] Can I burn the eeprom using a picstart plus > programmer from Microchip? > > Does anybody know if this is doable? If so can you point me > in the right direction? I've got an 85 TA with the 305 TBI > in it, and a picstart programmer. If this isn't doable, > what's the "cheapest" direction hardware wise to get me going? > _________________________________________________________________ -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Wed May 10 04:04:42 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 10:04:42 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com> Message-ID: <08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> After a couple of years of researching and playing with GMECM, I thought I was getting my head around it but, having started thinking about changing the code in my 16149396 (1227727 with SRAM) from $8D/ANHT to something possibly better hacked and easier for me to understand all the arrays/tables required in applying it to a 2 litre 4 cylinder naturally aspirated engine that will rev to 7000+RPM, I am now confused and need help/advice. I've read quite a lot recently about Turbo Sunbird code and it being identical to Sy/Ty code. What I've read tells me that both originally ran on 1227749 hardware, that they are part of the $58 family, and that the EPROM size fitted to this hardware was 16k, whereas 1227727 & 1227730 hardware came with 32k EPROMs fitted (what I have). Also, that it is possible to run $58 code on a 1227730/1227727 if a few ECM pins are wired differently. I don't have or want IAC or EGR or any transmission connections, so I think the only one that might matter here is the wire to connect to my injectors. Have I got the above correct? :-) So, if I am to do the switch from $8D/ANHT to $58/Sunbird code, and get back up to where I am now, I need a .BIN (I have something called Sunbird.bin, but no idea what 4 letter designation this relates to) and I need a commented hack - for ALDL monitoring, reference, and code modification (I've done a nifty change to ANHT that I really need to recreate with any new code). A .ECU would be nice, but I am capable and happy to generate one from the hack. I've looked at the .BINs and hacks on www.moates.net (which seems to be a copy of the www.diy-efi.org equivalent, but with hacks) and found 4 1227749 $58 4.3 Turbo .BINs (1576BBZA58, 1618BBZB58, 4175AYBN58, BBZB1580 - all 16k) and one $58 hack (AYBN - which is configured for 6cyl but mentions Turbo Sunbird in the header, and the accompanying .BIN is 32k !!! - This confused me, can anyone explain?) Could somebody with a good overview of GMECM put me straight, please. :-) Is the Turbo Sunbird code the best start point for a 2.0 4cyl NA engine? Is it the exact same code as the 6cyl 4.3 Turbos, but with different lookup values? Will Sunbird code run on 16149396/1227727 hardware (I'm in the UK, so getting new ECM hardware is not trivial) with a dizzy reluctor trigger feeding an 8 pin GM HEI? (I don't have/want EGR, IAC, or any transmission related stuff - just something that will run my NA engine's ignition and injection - after tuning (obviously) - but with clear visibility about what needs to be set, and what it actually does.) BTW: I have a WBO2 for tuning, and a MAP sensor with the following ID: 460 7236 (which I believe to be a 1 bar sensor, but this number does not match that on a web site of GM sensors!) If so, please advise which .BIN should I start with, and which hack? And can I reuse my MAP sensor (I believe the $58 code has an option for a 1 bar sensor)? Help! (Sorry for all the questions.) Robin From tsokorai at xperts.cl Wed May 10 08:28:29 2006 From: tsokorai at xperts.cl (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 09:28:29 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition Message-ID: <200605100928.30408.tsokorai@xperts.cl> I'm thinking of trying to simulate the crank trigger by using a software-generated waveform (the 6 x 60? + 10? sync trigger pulses) from my PC soundcard's output. Any ideas if this would work or wont? ... any other ideas of how bench testing such module? (without expensive DIS tester, of course ;) -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From dgilbert78 at juno.com Wed May 10 10:44:28 2006 From: dgilbert78 at juno.com (Darryl M Gilbert) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 11:44:28 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition Message-ID: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> Should work. but I would use a bit from the parallel port, write it in plain ole basic, should be easy. Can poke to the port and control any of the 8 bits. It is also bi directional so you can use it to sense stuff also Darryl.... On Wed, 10 May 2006 09:28:29 -0400 "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." writes: > I'm thinking of trying to simulate the crank trigger by using a > software-generated waveform (the 6 x 60? + 10? sync trigger pulses) > from my > PC soundcard's output. > Any ideas if this would work or wont? ... any other ideas of how > bench testing > such module? (without expensive DIS tester, of course ;) > > -- > Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > From squelch at ix.netcom.com Wed May 10 14:18:11 2006 From: squelch at ix.netcom.com (squelch at ix.netcom.com) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 14:18:11 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition Message-ID: <22401399.1147288692026.JavaMail.root@elwamui-rubis.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I was thinking of using some 555 timers but haven't gotten around to it yet. John -----Original Message----- >From: "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." >Sent: May 10, 2006 8:28 AM >To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition > >I'm thinking of trying to simulate the crank trigger by using a >software-generated waveform (the 6 x 60? + 10? sync trigger pulses) from my >PC soundcard's output. >Any ideas if this would work or wont? ... any other ideas of how bench testing >such module? (without expensive DIS tester, of course ;) > >-- >Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. >_______________________________________________ >Gmecm mailing list >Gmecm at diy-efi.org >http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm From davesnothereman at netscape.net Wed May 10 14:22:38 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 15:22:38 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one In-Reply-To: <08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com> <08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <8C8427E3BBBC017-2898-2D3C@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Hi. $58 for the 7749 will work in an NA application. It's going to expect the 2 BAR MAP sensor. To use the 1 BAR sensor you'll need to re-scale some of the tables. The turbo Sunbird was the first to use the $58 code. The Syclone and Typhoon were second. It's better to start with a calibration for a 4 cylinder car. The $58 calibration does not have tables which extend to 7000 rpm, although it does provide a means to adjust fuel and spark after rpm exceeds the maximum tables entries. It probably won't be an issue. At that engine speed you're not usually looking for high resolution tuning. Other people have used the 7749 calibration in a 7727 / 7730. I believe there's a page on the thirdgen.org site which details the correct pinout, but I might be wrong. The turbo Sunbird calibration is 16k large. It will fit on a 32k eprom and work. You will need to move it to the "top" of the chip. Look for instructions on "bin stacking" for one method to do this. The memcal must match the calibration in the number of cylinders it's designed for or else there will be a "cylinder select" error set. To make the "special secret super duper code modification" you'll probably need to learn the $58 code. There may not be an equivalent function in the $58 as you worked with in the $8D. HTH Zaphod -----Original Message----- From: Robin Handley To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Wed, 10 May 2006 10:04:42 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one After a couple of years of researching and playing with GMECM, I thought I was getting my head around it but, having started thinking about changing the code in my 16149396 (1227727 with SRAM) from $8D/ANHT to something possibly better hacked and easier for me to understand all the arrays/tables required in applying it to a 2 litre 4 cylinder naturally aspirated engine that will rev to 7000+RPM, I am now confused and need help/advice. I've read quite a lot recently about Turbo Sunbird code and it being identical to Sy/Ty code. What I've read tells me that both originally ran on 1227749 hardware, that they are part of the $58 family, and that the EPROM size fitted to this hardware was 16k, whereas 1227727 & 1227730 hardware came with 32k EPROMs fitted (what I have). Also, that it is possible to run $58 code on a 1227730/1227727 if a few ECM pins are wired differently. I don't have or want IAC or EGR or any transmission connections, so I think the only one that might matter here is the wire to connect to my injectors. Have I got the above correct? :-) So, if I am to do the switch from $8D/ANHT to $58/Sunbird code, and get back up to where I am now, I need a .BIN (I have something called Sunbird.bin, but no idea what 4 letter designation this relates to) and I need a commented hack - for ALDL monitoring, reference, and code modification (I've done a nifty change to ANHT that I really need to recreate with any new code). A .ECU would be nice, but I am capable and happy to generate one from the hack. I've looked at the .BINs and hacks on www.moates.net (which seems to be a copy of the www.diy-efi.org equivalent, but with hacks) and found 4 1227749 $58 4.3 Turbo .BINs (1576BBZA58, 1618BBZB58, 4175AYBN58, BBZB1580 - all 16k) and one $58 hack (AYBN - which is configured for 6cyl but mentions Turbo Sunbird in the header, and the accompanying .BIN is 32k !!! - This confused me, can anyone explain?) Could somebody with a good overview of GMECM put me straight, please. :-) Is the Turbo Sunbird code the best start point for a 2.0 4cyl NA engine? Is it the exact same code as the 6cyl 4.3 Turbos, but with different lookup values? Will Sunbird code run on 16149396/1227727 hardware (I'm in the UK, so getting new ECM hardware is not trivial) with a dizzy reluctor trigger feeding an 8 pin GM HEI? (I don't have/want EGR, IAC, or any transmission related stuff - just something that will run my NA engine's ignition and injection - after tuning (obviously) - but with clear visibility about what needs to be set, and what it actually does.) BTW: I have a WBO2 for tuning, and a MAP sensor with the following ID: 460 7236 (which I believe to be a 1 bar sensor, but this number does not match that on a web site of GM sensors!) If so, please advise which .BIN should I start with, and which hack? And can I reuse my MAP sensor (I believe the $58 code has an option for a 1 bar sensor)? Help! (Sorry for all the questions.) Robin _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From tsokorai at xperts.cl Wed May 10 15:05:23 2006 From: tsokorai at xperts.cl (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 16:05:23 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition In-Reply-To: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> Message-ID: <200605101605.24328.tsokorai@xperts.cl> On Wednesday 10 May 2006 11:44, Darryl M Gilbert wrote: > Should work. but I would use a bit from the parallel port, write it in > plain ole basic, should be easy. Can poke to the port and control any of > the 8 bits. It is also bi directional so you can use it to sense stuff > also The problem with this, is that you need analog circuitry to make the AC signal crossing the 0V with each pulse, to fully emulate the variable reluctance sensor output. And the other problem is to get a real accurate timing from a program running on a multitasking operating system (unless you run your parallel program under real DOS or a hard realtime OS) to try to simulate the crank up to at least 6000 RPM. -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From dgilbert78 at juno.com Wed May 10 16:40:16 2006 From: dgilbert78 at juno.com (Darryl M Gilbert) Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 17:40:16 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition Message-ID: <20060510.174017.-172505.0.dgilbert78@juno.com> Hello: yes would have to be DOS or absolute code to take away any operating system. Probably a cap and a resistor network could make a differentiated outpus and closely mimick the sine you choose. Usually its crossover you are looking for, it just so happens a reluctor put sout a sine of sorts.I think its the crossover you are concerned about anyway. It would be a fun thing to play with. I use to do a lot of that stuff in control systems and CNC. anyway just a thought Good luck On Wed, 10 May 2006 16:05:23 -0400 "Tomas J. Sokorai Sch." writes: > On Wednesday 10 May 2006 11:44, Darryl M Gilbert wrote: > > Should work. but I would use a bit from the parallel port, write > it in > > plain ole basic, should be easy. Can poke to the port and control > any of > > the 8 bits. It is also bi directional so you can use it to sense > stuff > > also > > The problem with this, is that you need analog circuitry to make the > AC signal > crossing the 0V with each pulse, to fully emulate the variable > reluctance > sensor output. > And the other problem is to get a real accurate timing from a > program running > on a multitasking operating system (unless you run your parallel > program > under real DOS or a hard realtime OS) to try to simulate the crank > up to at > least 6000 RPM. > > -- > Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Thu May 11 04:31:43 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 10:31:43 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com><08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8427E3BBBC017-2898-2D3C@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <09ba01c674dd$b95815f0$020101c0@gandalf> > $58 for the 7749 will work in an NA application. It's going to expect the 2 BAR MAP sensor. To use the 1 BAR sensor you'll need to re-scale some of the tables. Doesn't %KAFOPT3% bit 5 tell the code whether a 1 or 2 bar MAP sensor is connected? Does this not cause everything to be scaled automatically? > The turbo Sunbird was the first to use the $58 code. The Syclone and Typhoon were second. It's better to start with a calibration for a 4 cylinder car. Agreed. So, could I take the AYBN commented hack for a 6cyl 4.3 Turbo Sy/Ty and overwrite the lookup values with those from a genuine 4cyl Sunbird .BIN? Are they a direct map? > The $58 calibration does not have tables which extend to 7000 rpm, although it does provide a means to adjust fuel and spark after rpm exceeds the maximum tables entries. It probably won't be an issue. At that engine speed you're not usually looking for high resolution tuning. Agreed. > Other people have used the 7749 calibration in a 7727 / 7730. I believe there's a page on the thirdgen.org site which details the correct pinout, but I might be wrong. This is where I found my pinout conversion info: http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/diy-prom/213539-58-frequently-asked-questi ons.html Is this the one you meant? I guess it just needs mapping from 730 to 727 pinout for my ECM. I was just looking for confirmation that I hadn't missed anything subtle, since the above (and other) discussions just talk about $58 code on a 730 (not a 727). > The turbo Sunbird calibration is 16k large. It will fit on a 32k eprom and work. You will need to move it to the "top" of the chip. Look for instructions on "bin stacking" for one method to do this. The memcal must match the calibration in the number of cylinders it's designed for or else there will be a "cylinder select" error set. No problems there. I've now looked at the AYBN hack and its associated .BIN. The hack is 16k and the .BIN has the first 16k padded with $FF - so already in the right format for my 32k EPROM. > To make the "special secret super duper code modification" you'll probably need to learn the $58 code. There may not be an equivalent function in the $58 as you worked with in the $8D. The 'not actually a quote from my Email' code modification allows OTF map changes from a laptop, so I'm pretty keen to be able to reproduce it! :-) I just wondered if there was a Sunbird specific hack that I've missed - that might make code changes easier. If not, am I right in thinking that AYBN is the best/most commented $58 hack to use? The comments with the AYBN code are a LOT sparser than ANHT :-( although the description of the lookup tables seems better - and the Sunbird document that I've seen is a massive help. :-) BTW: Is the Sunbird code/bin unique? Does it have a 4 letter name, like ANHT? Thanks, Robin > -----Original Message----- > From: Robin Handley > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Wed, 10 May 2006 10:04:42 +0100 > Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one > > > After a couple of years of researching and playing with GMECM, I thought I > was getting my head around it but, having started thinking about changing > the code in my 16149396 (1227727 with SRAM) from $8D/ANHT to something > possibly better hacked and easier for me to understand all the arrays/tables > required in applying it to a 2 litre 4 cylinder naturally aspirated engine > that will rev to 7000+RPM, I am now confused and need help/advice. > > I've read quite a lot recently about Turbo Sunbird code and it being > identical to Sy/Ty code. What I've read tells me that both originally ran on > 1227749 hardware, that they are part of the $58 family, and that the EPROM > size fitted to this hardware was 16k, whereas 1227727 & 1227730 hardware > came with 32k EPROMs fitted (what I have). Also, that it is possible to run > $58 code on a 1227730/1227727 if a few ECM pins are wired differently. I > don't have or want IAC or EGR or any transmission connections, so I think > the only one that might matter here is the wire to connect to my injectors. > Have I got the above correct? :-) > > So, if I am to do the switch from $8D/ANHT to $58/Sunbird code, and get back > up to where I am now, I need a .BIN (I have something called Sunbird.bin, > but no idea what 4 letter designation this relates to) and I need a > commented hack - for ALDL monitoring, reference, and code modification (I've > done a nifty change to ANHT that I really need to recreate with any new > code). A .ECU would be nice, but I am capable and happy to generate one from > the hack. > > I've looked at the .BINs and hacks on www.moates.net (which seems to be a > copy of the www.diy-efi.org equivalent, but with hacks) and found 4 1227749 > $58 4.3 Turbo .BINs (1576BBZA58, 1618BBZB58, 4175AYBN58, BBZB1580 - all 16k) > and one $58 hack (AYBN - which is configured for 6cyl but mentions Turbo > Sunbird in the header, and the accompanying .BIN is 32k !!! - This confused > me, can anyone explain?) > > Could somebody with a good overview of GMECM put me straight, please. :-) Is > the Turbo Sunbird code the best start point for a 2.0 4cyl NA engine? Is it > the exact same code as the 6cyl 4.3 Turbos, but with different lookup > values? Will Sunbird code run on 16149396/1227727 hardware (I'm in the UK, > so getting new ECM hardware is not trivial) with a dizzy reluctor trigger > feeding an 8 pin GM HEI? (I don't have/want EGR, IAC, or any transmission > related stuff - just something that will run my NA engine's ignition and > injection - after tuning (obviously) - but with clear visibility about what > needs to be set, and what it actually does.) BTW: I have a WBO2 for tuning, > and a MAP sensor with the following ID: 460 7236 (which I believe to be a 1 > bar sensor, but this number does not match that on a web site of GM > sensors!) > > If so, please advise which .BIN should I start with, and which hack? And can > I reuse my MAP sensor (I believe the $58 code has an option for a 1 bar > sensor)? > > Help! (Sorry for all the questions.) > > Robin From donsauman at cythera.net Thu May 11 05:45:46 2006 From: donsauman at cythera.net (Don Sauman) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 18:45:46 +0800 Subject: [Gmecm] Information needed In-Reply-To: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> Message-ID: <446315DA.7070600@cythera.net> Gents I have gradually put together the parts I need to install a 4L80E transmission into my Jeep wagon. The transmission is a 1996 and the controller I have obtained is from an ex Chevy ambulance NA diesel. It is a 16147609 with BACT ROM. Does anyone have any any progam info for this unit? Thanks Don -- Don Sauman 35 Asteroid Way Carlisle 6101 Western Australia P: 08 9361 0337 F: 08 9361 0581 M: 0427 389 547 From efi at dyakron.com Thu May 11 07:13:01 2006 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 08:13:01 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition In-Reply-To: <200605101605.24328.tsokorai@xperts.cl> References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com> > > >The problem with this, is that you need analog circuitry to make the AC >signal >crossing the 0V with each pulse, to fully emulate the variable reluctance >sensor output. >And the other problem is to get a real accurate timing from a program running >on a multitasking operating system (unless you run your parallel program >under real DOS or a hard realtime OS) to try to simulate the crank up to at >least 6000 RPM. If you have a scope capture of what the sensor output roughly looks like, I can grab some sensors of the scrap engine pile and you could easily cobble something mechanical that is powered by a small electric motor or Befored you so kindly helped me with my project, I was ready to go that route. Mechanical solutions to generate test signals aren't always a bad thing, they are just lower tech. MV From tsokorai at xperts.cl Fri May 12 09:49:29 2006 From: tsokorai at xperts.cl (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 10:49:29 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com> References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com> Message-ID: <200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> On Thursday 11 May 2006 08:13, Mike V wrote: > cobble something mechanical that is powered by a small electric motor or > Befored you so kindly helped me with my project, I was ready to go that I'm glad I could help, and please do tell if you need any further help :) > route. Mechanical solutions to generate test signals aren't always a bad > thing, they are just lower tech. Mechanical solutions are my last resort, as I'm a bit fabrication-skill impaired ;) I'm getting frustrated with this DIS setup. The used DIS module I had, was in fact dead (I opened it, and found one of the circuit wires on the clear gel burnt open), so I bought a completely new module. And I still can't get it to fire :( I made some captures of the crank sensor waveform, and it looks right and clean now that I changed to resistive ignition wires. My only hope is that the sensor output is too low for the module to fire. The BMW sensor has only 80 Ohm impedance, comprared to the 800 from a GM crank sensor ... so the amount of coil wire difference is pretty hefty. In fact with my voltmeter on AC scale, I can't get readings, but for what I read, the GM sensor should put out some average volts that way. If I can't get it to fire with the soundcard idea, I'm tossing the DIS and keeping the crappy distributor that I can't get a rotor for. -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From Steve.Ravet at arm.com Fri May 12 12:31:28 2006 From: Steve.Ravet at arm.com (Steve Ravet) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 12:31:28 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition Message-ID: > My only hope is that the sensor output is too low for the > module to fire. > The BMW sensor has only 80 Ohm impedance, comprared to the > 800 from a GM crank sensor ... so the amount of coil wire > difference is pretty hefty. In fact with my voltmeter on AC > scale, I can't get readings, but for what I read, the GM > sensor should put out some average volts that way. > If I can't get it to fire with the soundcard idea, I'm > tossing the DIS and keeping the crappy distributor that I > can't get a rotor for. So your choices are non functional DIS, or rotorless distributor? That's a tough one... Is the rotor something that's available in the US? I think in this case putting a crank wheel on your drill, the drill in a vise, and the sensor zip tied to a piece of wood screwed to your workbench would be an easy way to test the module. Do you have the bypass line to the module asserted so it will fire the coil on it's own? --steve -- IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. From efi at dyakron.com Fri May 12 12:45:29 2006 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 13:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition In-Reply-To: <200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com> <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20060512133908.02d90be0@dyakron.com> I have Cam & Crank sensors, as well as coilpak from a later 3800 Series II (2000 Impla) that are yours if you want them. It looks like a more intricate set up than the older P4 stuff. Maybe I can spin the remains of the shortblock and sample the sensor output with the scope. It has no pistons or rods, so probably pretty easy to spin. Mike At 10:49 AM 5/12/2006 -0400, you wrote: >My only hope is that the sensor output is too low for the module to fire. >The BMW sensor has only 80 Ohm impedance, comprared to the 800 from a GM >crank >sensor ... so the amount of coil wire difference is pretty hefty. In fact >with my voltmeter on AC scale, I can't get readings, but for what I read, the >GM sensor should put out some average volts that way. >If I can't get it to fire with the soundcard idea, I'm tossing the DIS and >keeping the crappy distributor that I can't get a rotor for. From tsokorai at xperts.cl Fri May 12 16:27:01 2006 From: tsokorai at xperts.cl (Tomas J. Sokorai Sch.) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 17:27:01 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200605121727.02155.tsokorai@xperts.cl> On Friday 12 May 2006 13:31, Steve Ravet wrote: > So your choices are non functional DIS, or rotorless distributor? > That's a tough one... It's not completely "rotorless", as It's running now, but with a rotor from 1982 that's now *very* corroded on the tip and the contact to the cap's graphite is not in very good shape. It's a rotor that has a centrifugal contact to earth, so that it works as a rev limiter. Talk about overengineering a rotor ;) > > Is the rotor something that's available in the US? I don't think it's available over there, as it's a BMW from the old E21 "3" series, that was imported only in the 4cyl versions to the US, and mine is the 2.3 6cyl, k-jetronic mech. FI :( Well, if the DIS setup doesen't work out, I will try to ask the BMW dealership if they can get it from Germany or somewhere else, but I try to avoid "bend-over" prices, specially regarding a car that has a market value of less than the value of 95% of the cars on the street here :D > workbench would be an easy way to test the module. Do you have the > bypass line to the module asserted so it will fire the coil on it's own? asserted as in "5V applied"? I thought that the bypass line was kept at 0V first, and then when the ECM got over X RPM, the line was brought to 5V ? -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. From Terminal_Crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk Fri May 12 18:16:44 2006 From: Terminal_Crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk (Terminal Crazy) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 00:16:44 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition In-Reply-To: <200605121727.02155.tsokorai@xperts.cl> References: <200605121727.02155.tsokorai@xperts.cl> Message-ID: <4e26168a1eTerminal_Crazy@sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk> On 12 May, Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. wrote: > On Friday 12 May 2006 13:31, Steve Ravet wrote: > > So your choices are non functional DIS, or rotorless distributor? > > That's a tough one... > It's not completely "rotorless", as It's running now, but with a rotor from > 1982 that's now *very* corroded on the tip and the contact to the cap's > graphite is not in very good shape. > It's a rotor that has a centrifugal contact to earth, so that it works as a > rev limiter. Talk about overengineering a rotor ;) > > > > Is the rotor something that's available in the US? > I don't think it's available over there, as it's a BMW from the old E21 "3" > series, that was imported only in the 4cyl versions to the US, and mine is > the 2.3 6cyl, k-jetronic mech. FI :( This sounds similar to the rotor on my old Mercedes 280CE (motors around 1973 - 78 ). They had a spring loaded slide on the top which shorted to ground at around 7000 rpm.. As an aside (going back 12 years) when i ordered a dizzy cap. The cap that came arrived with the big flat (cable comes out horizontal) fittings not the smaller ones like a spark plug(vertical output). This was also listed as fitting BMW 6pot motor. These all ran various versions of Bosch FI, so it might be worth checking out Mercedes dealers for similar parts. At a guess Porsches would have similar Bosch FI from around the same time and also made 4Cylinder engines. HTH -- Mitch - 1995 Z28 LT1 M6 terminal_crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk Lancashire England From OneOccy at hotmail.com Fri May 12 18:39:42 2006 From: OneOccy at hotmail.com (Occy) Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 16:39:42 -0700 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition References: <200605121727.02155.tsokorai@xperts.cl> <4e26168a1eTerminal_Crazy@sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk> Message-ID: VW datsun nissan also of vintage, I once working at a datsun dealer had an efi problem, my number one rule was to check the brain as it was called in those days, and it had a vw brain in the datsun and as normal that wasn't the problem, this case was a fuel filter... they must all be the same. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Terminal Crazy" > On 12 May, Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. wrote: > > On Friday 12 May 2006 13:31, Steve Ravet wrote: > > > So your choices are non functional DIS, or rotorless distributor? > > > That's a tough one... > > > It's not completely "rotorless", as It's running now, but with a rotor > > from > > 1982 that's now *very* corroded on the tip and the contact to the cap's > > graphite is not in very good shape. > > It's a rotor that has a centrifugal contact to earth, so that it works > > as a > > rev limiter. Talk about overengineering a rotor ;) > > > > > > > Is the rotor something that's available in the US? > > > I don't think it's available over there, as it's a BMW from the old E21 > > "3" > > series, that was imported only in the 4cyl versions to the US, and mine > > is > > the 2.3 6cyl, k-jetronic mech. FI :( > > This sounds similar to the rotor on my old Mercedes 280CE (motors around > 1973 - 78 ). They had a spring loaded slide on the top which shorted to > ground at around 7000 rpm.. As an aside (going back 12 years) when i > ordered a dizzy cap. The cap that came arrived with the big flat (cable > comes out horizontal) fittings not the smaller ones like a spark > plug(vertical output). This was also listed as fitting BMW 6pot motor. > These all ran various versions of Bosch FI, so it might be worth checking > out Mercedes dealers for similar parts. At a guess Porsches would have > similar Bosch FI from around the same time and also made 4Cylinder > engines. > > HTH > > -- > Mitch - 1995 Z28 LT1 M6 > terminal_crazy at sand-hill.freeserve.co.uk > Lancashire England > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > From davesnothereman at netscape.net Fri May 12 23:16:01 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 00:16:01 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one In-Reply-To: <09ba01c674dd$b95815f0$020101c0@gandalf> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com><08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8427E3BBBC017-2898-2D3C@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> <09ba01c674dd$b95815f0$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <8C8445B14414D25-23F4-3D2E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> The main VE tables cover up to 1 BAR. In 2 BAR mode, higher pressures use a fuel multiplier against the 100 kPa entry for the appropriate rpm. Spark tables cover the range from 30 kPa to 200 kPa. I haven't looked through the code to see if flipping the 1 BAR bit forces the code to use the 20 to 100 kPa entries, or if it rescales the table for 100 kPa max with 2x the resolution. If it's the latter, then the values in the timing tables would be incorrect for the MAP range they apply to. What I can say with certainty is that flipping the bit to 1 BAR and connecting to a 1 BAR sensor produced poor idle and driveability in my car. I had no desire to chase the reason, I simply switched to a 2 BAR sensor. I valued the time spent more than the potential for education. Wasn't making fun of you on the code modification. I hope it didn't read that way. That's just the way I talk sometimes. There used to be a turbo Sunbird calibration in the .bin library. I'm not sure where they disappeared to. Are you using a manual or automatic transmission? If you want to send your mystery sunbird.bin calibration I can probably identify it for you. There are several factory calibrations for the 'Birds. You can load the 4 cylinder calibration directly onto the memcal. There's no need to play with the 6 cylinder version. Yes, the information you linked to on Thirdgen.org looks like what I was thinking of. Ludis Langens made a nice equivalency chart for 7727 <-> 7730 pin functions. Sorry, I don't have a direct link. I just use Google. The AYBN hac which is floating around was likely authored by the same person who wrote the 8D hack. It's not complete, nor is it completely accurate. But it is a decent starting point. It's acceptable for use with the Sunbird code, although certain minor functions differ between the two applications. Zaphod -----Original Message----- From: Robin Handley To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Thu, 11 May 2006 10:31:43 +0100 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Back to square one > $58 for the 7749 will work in an NA application. It's going to expect the 2 BAR MAP sensor. To use the 1 BAR sensor you'll need to re-scale some of the tables. Doesn't %KAFOPT3% bit 5 tell the code whether a 1 or 2 bar MAP sensor is connected? Does this not cause everything to be scaled automatically? > The turbo Sunbird was the first to use the $58 code. The Syclone and Typhoon were second. It's better to start with a calibration for a 4 cylinder car. Agreed. So, could I take the AYBN commented hack for a 6cyl 4.3 Turbo Sy/Ty and overwrite the lookup values with those from a genuine 4cyl Sunbird .BIN? Are they a direct map? > The $58 calibration does not have tables which extend to 7000 rpm, although it does provide a means to adjust fuel and spark after rpm exceeds the maximum tables entries. It probably won't be an issue. At that engine speed you're not usually looking for high resolution tuning. Agreed. > Other people have used the 7749 calibration in a 7727 / 7730. I believe there's a page on the thirdgen.org site which details the correct pinout, but I might be wrong. This is where I found my pinout conversion info: http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/diy-prom/213539-58-frequently-asked-que sti ons.html Is this the one you meant? I guess it just needs mapping from 730 to 727 pinout for my ECM. I was just looking for confirmation that I hadn't missed anything subtle, since the above (and other) discussions just talk about $58 code on a 730 (not a 727). > The turbo Sunbird calibration is 16k large. It will fit on a 32k eprom and work. You will need to move it to the "top" of the chip. Look for instructions on "bin stacking" for one method to do this. The memcal must match the calibration in the number of cylinders it's designed for or else there will be a "cylinder select" error set. No problems there. I've now looked at the AYBN hack and its associated .BIN. The hack is 16k and the .BIN has the first 16k padded with $FF - so already in the right format for my 32k EPROM. > To make the "special secret super duper code modification" you'll probably need to learn the $58 code. There may not be an equivalent function in the $58 as you worked with in the $8D. The 'not actually a quote from my Email' code modification allows OTF map changes from a laptop, so I'm pretty keen to be able to reproduce it! :-) I just wondered if there was a Sunbird specific hack that I've missed - that might make code changes easier. If not, am I right in thinking that AYBN is the best/most commented $58 hack to use? The comments with the AYBN code are a LOT sparser than ANHT :-( although the description of the lookup tables seems better - and the Sunbird document that I've seen is a massive help. :-) BTW: Is the Sunbird code/bin unique? Does it have a 4 letter name, like ANHT? Thanks, Robin > -----Original Message----- > From: Robin Handley > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Wed, 10 May 2006 10:04:42 +0100 > Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one > > > After a couple of years of researching and playing with GMECM, I thought I > was getting my head around it but, having started thinking about changing > the code in my 16149396 (1227727 with SRAM) from $8D/ANHT to something > possibly better hacked and easier for me to understand all the arrays/tables > required in applying it to a 2 litre 4 cylinder naturally aspirated engine > that will rev to 7000+RPM, I am now confused and need help/advice. > > I've read quite a lot recently about Turbo Sunbird code and it being > identical to Sy/Ty code. What I've read tells me that both originally ran on > 1227749 hardware, that they are part of the $58 family, and that the EPROM > size fitted to this hardware was 16k, whereas 1227727 & 1227730 hardware > came with 32k EPROMs fitted (what I have). Also, that it is possible to run > $58 code on a 1227730/1227727 if a few ECM pins are wired differently. I > don't have or want IAC or EGR or any transmission connections, so I think > the only one that might matter here is the wire to connect to my injectors. > Have I got the above correct? :-) > > So, if I am to do the switch from $8D/ANHT to $58/Sunbird code, and get back > up to where I am now, I need a .BIN (I have something called Sunbird.bin, > but no idea what 4 letter designation this relates to) and I need a > commented hack - for ALDL monitoring, reference, and code modification (I've > done a nifty change to ANHT that I really need to recreate with any new > code). A .ECU would be nice, but I am capable and happy to generate one from > the hack. > > I've looked at the .BINs and hacks on www.moates.net (which seems to be a > copy of the www.diy-efi.org equivalent, but with hacks) and found 4 1227749 > $58 4.3 Turbo .BINs (1576BBZA58, 1618BBZB58, 4175AYBN58, BBZB1580 - all 16k) > and one $58 hack (AYBN - which is configured for 6cyl but mentions Turbo > Sunbird in the header, and the accompanying .BIN is 32k !!! - This confused > me, can anyone explain?) > > Could somebody with a good overview of GMECM put me straight, please. :-) Is > the Turbo Sunbird code the best start point for a 2.0 4cyl NA engine? Is it > the exact same code as the 6cyl 4.3 Turbos, but with different lookup > values? Will Sunbird code run on 16149396/1227727 hardware (I'm in the UK, > so getting new ECM hardware is not trivial) with a dizzy reluctor trigger > feeding an 8 pin GM HEI? (I don't have/want EGR, IAC, or any transmission > related stuff - just something that will run my NA engine's ignition and > injection - after tuning (obviously) - but with clear visibility about what > needs to be set, and what it actually does.) BTW: I have a WBO2 for tuning, > and a MAP sensor with the following ID: 460 7236 (which I believe to be a 1 > bar sensor, but this number does not match that on a web site of GM > sensors!) > > If so, please advise which .BIN should I start with, and which hack? And can > I reuse my MAP sensor (I believe the $58 code has an option for a 1 bar > sensor)? > > Help! (Sorry for all the questions.) > > Robin _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From davesnothereman at netscape.net Fri May 12 23:35:34 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 00:35:34 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition In-Reply-To: <200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com> <200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> Message-ID: <8C8445DCF1DD61B-23F4-3D71@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> If you're fabrication skill impaired, are you able to trigger the GM DIS module correctly? Bosch trigger wheels which I've seen are typically not the 6+1 pulse design used by GM USA. I'd be working to match sensor and module. You should be seeing A/C signals from the sensor during cranking. The 7 pin DIS system typically fires at rpm as low as 300. An old power steering pump or water pump could be used as a test trigger wheel. Use a tape measure around the circumference to mark notch positions. In desperation one could use a hand file to make the notches. Spinning the wheel by hand will cause the module to fire coils. The 7th pulse, or "synch" signal, must occur every rotation of the crank or the module will not triger the coils. Zaphod -----Original Message----- From: Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Fri, 12 May 2006 10:49:29 -0400 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Bench testing a GM waste-spark DIS ignition On Thursday 11 May 2006 08:13, Mike V wrote: > cobble something mechanical that is powered by a small electric motor or > Befored you so kindly helped me with my project, I was ready to go that I'm glad I could help, and please do tell if you need any further help :) > route. Mechanical solutions to generate test signals aren't always a bad > thing, they are just lower tech. Mechanical solutions are my last resort, as I'm a bit fabrication-skill impaired ;) I'm getting frustrated with this DIS setup. The used DIS module I had, was in fact dead (I opened it, and found one of the circuit wires on the clear gel burnt open), so I bought a completely new module. And I still can't get it to fire :( I made some captures of the crank sensor waveform, and it looks right and clean now that I changed to resistive ignition wires. My only hope is that the sensor output is too low for the module to fire. The BMW sensor has only 80 Ohm impedance, comprared to the 800 from a GM crank sensor ... so the amount of coil wire difference is pretty hefty. In fact with my voltmeter on AC scale, I can't get readings, but for what I read, the GM sensor should put out some average volts that way. If I can't get it to fire with the soundcard idea, I'm tossing the DIS and keeping the crappy distributor that I can't get a rotor for. -- Tomas J. Sokorai Sch. _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sat May 13 13:53:22 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:53:22 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com><200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> <8C8445DCF1DD61B-23F4-3D71@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <0db601c676be$840f3210$020101c0@gandalf> I've been scratching my head over this for a while. Could somebody tell me if I've got these right: TBI = TPI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all cylinders/ports, and one great big injector at the body PFI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all cylinders/ports, and one injector near the engine end of each inlet runner (i.e. one injector per cylinder) What do you call a system which has multiple throttle bodies/butterflies (i.e. one throttle body/butterfly for each cylinder/port) and multiple injectors (i.e. one injector for each cylinder)? Robin From davesnothereman at netscape.net Sat May 13 14:23:31 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:23:31 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms In-Reply-To: <0db601c676be$840f3210$020101c0@gandalf> References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com><200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> <8C8445DCF1DD61B-23F4-3D71@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> <0db601c676be$840f3210$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <8C844D9DAA1F090-A6C-47A4@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> TBI = injection on the atmospheric side of the throttle butterflies. PFI = port fuel injection, injection on the engine side of the butterflies MPI = Mult- port injection, marketing name for PFI MPFI, same as MPI TPI, Tuned Port Injection, marketing name for specific intake system using PFI and curved, tuned length runners. DFI, Direct Fuel injection, fuel is injected directly into the cylinder. Look to exotic car makers for marketing names for multiple butterfly manifolds. As far as the injection type, use the position of the injectors relative to the throttle butterflies to determine injection type. Zaphod -----Original Message----- From: Robin Handley To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:53:22 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms I've been scratching my head over this for a while. Could somebody tell me if I've got these right: TBI = TPI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all cylinders/ports, and one great big injector at the body PFI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all cylinders/ports, and one injector near the engine end of each inlet runner (i.e. one injector per cylinder) What do you call a system which has multiple throttle bodies/butterflies (i.e. one throttle body/butterfly for each cylinder/port) and multiple injectors (i.e. one injector for each cylinder)? Robin _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From efi at dyakron.com Sat May 13 14:25:59 2006 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:25:59 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] 3800 sensor wiring ? In-Reply-To: <0db601c676be$840f3210$020101c0@gandalf> References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com> <200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> <8C8445DCF1DD61B-23F4-3D71@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20060513151814.02e21990@dyakron.com> I'm spinning a piston-less 2000MY 3800 series II V6 with a scope attached just for educational info. She's not giving me much info! I'm thinking I need to feed 5V somewhere, then watch the results. Does anyone have wiring pin-outs for the cam & crank sensors? Crank Sensor - 4 wires o Black / Wht stripe o White / Blk Stripe o Yellow o Blue Cam Sensor is 3 wires o Yellow / Blk Stripe o Brown / Wht Stripe o Black / Wht Stripe TIA - Mike V From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sat May 13 14:40:29 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 20:40:29 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com><08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8427E3BBBC017-2898-2D3C@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><09ba01c674dd$b95815f0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8445B14414D25-23F4-3D2E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <0dc901c676c5$195f51f0$020101c0@gandalf> > The main VE tables cover up to 1 BAR. In 2 BAR mode, higher pressures > use a fuel multiplier against the 100 kPa entry for the appropriate > rpm. Spark tables cover the range from 30 kPa to 200 kPa. I haven't > looked through the code to see if flipping the 1 BAR bit forces the > code to use the 20 to 100 kPa entries, or if it rescales the table for > 100 kPa max with 2x the resolution. If it's the latter, then the > values in the timing tables would be incorrect for the MAP range they > apply to. According to PROMgrammer (which I can only assume is correct as it's a well constructed tool), it is the latter. Not an issue, I know I have to completely repopulate the SA and VE tables. :-) > What I can say with certainty is that flipping the bit to 1 BAR and > connecting to a 1 BAR sensor produced poor idle and driveability in my > car. I had no desire to chase the reason, I simply switched to a 2 BAR > sensor. I valued the time spent more than the potential for education. I'm in a different boat. I am applying GMECM hardware and software to an engine that never used it - so I know I've got mapping to do - but the saving grace is that I intend to keep things simple. Many 'tweak' arrays will get set to zero to make life bearable. After all, the GMECM has about 10x the number of adjustments that an aftermarket ECM provides (e.g. MegaSquirt, Emerald M3D) and plenty of people are blatting around with those running their engine's fuel and sparks. > Wasn't making fun of you on the code modification. I hope it didn't > read that way. That's just the way I talk sometimes. No offence taken. :-) > There used to be a turbo Sunbird calibration in the .bin library. I'm > not sure where they disappeared to. Are you using a manual or > automatic transmission? If you want to send your mystery sunbird.bin > calibration I can probably identify it for you. There are several > factory calibrations for the 'Birds. Happy to send you the .BIN (in fact I have ended up with 2 over the years - that have come from different sources, but they appear identical). I'm curious what, in the .BIN, tells you which calibration is. Is the following enough:? PROMID = $0D53 DATECODE = $0D2A SEQNUMB = $058C KKPGMID = $58 > You can load the 4 cylinder calibration directly onto the memcal. > There's no need to play with the 6 cylinder version. Thanks. > Yes, the information you linked to on Thirdgen.org looks like what I > was thinking of. Ludis Langens made a nice equivalency chart for 7727 > <-> 7730 pin functions. Sorry, I don't have a direct link. I just use > Google. This one: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/triplugecm.html ? > The AYBN hac which is floating around was likely authored by the same > person who wrote the 8D hack. It's not complete, nor is it completely > accurate. But it is a decent starting point. It's acceptable for use > with the Sunbird code, although certain minor functions differ between > the two applications. I've spent all day going through a document that was brought to my attention recently by another helpful lister, which was called Sunbird.doc. It seems to be a differently formatted version of this: http://www.sunflower.com/~leroy/P4/ I've been matching the calibration variables in that document with a text export of my Sunbird .BIN from PROMgrammer. There is a massive amount of agreement, but a few differences - which I wasn't expecting if the document and the .BIN are Sunbird. I'd love to understand how that document fits in with Sunbird and Sy/Ty $58 code. Can you help? Thanks, Robin > -----Original Message----- > From: Robin Handley > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Thu, 11 May 2006 10:31:43 +0100 > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Back to square one > > > $58 for the 7749 will work in an NA application. It's going to > expect the > 2 BAR MAP sensor. To use the 1 BAR sensor you'll need to re-scale some > of > the tables. > > Doesn't %KAFOPT3% bit 5 tell the code whether a 1 or 2 bar MAP sensor is > connected? Does this not cause everything to be scaled automatically? > > > The turbo Sunbird was the first to use the $58 code. The Syclone and > Typhoon were second. It's better to start with a calibration for a 4 > cylinder car. > > Agreed. So, could I take the AYBN commented hack for a 6cyl 4.3 Turbo > Sy/Ty > and overwrite the lookup values with those from a genuine 4cyl Sunbird > .BIN? > Are they a direct map? > > > The $58 calibration does not have tables which extend to 7000 rpm, > although it does provide a means to adjust fuel and spark after rpm > exceeds > the maximum tables entries. It probably won't be an issue. At that > engine > speed you're not usually looking for high resolution tuning. > > Agreed. > > > Other people have used the 7749 calibration in a 7727 / 7730. I > believe > there's a page on the thirdgen.org site which details the correct > pinout, > but I might be wrong. > > This is where I found my pinout conversion info: > http://www.thirdgen.org/techboard/diy-prom/213539-58-frequently-asked-que > sti > ons.html > > Is this the one you meant? I guess it just needs mapping from 730 to 727 > pinout for my ECM. I was just looking for confirmation that I hadn't > missed > anything subtle, since the above (and other) discussions just talk > about $58 > code on a 730 (not a 727). > > > The turbo Sunbird calibration is 16k large. It will fit on a 32k > eprom > and work. You will need to move it to the "top" of the chip. Look for > instructions on "bin stacking" for one method to do this. The memcal > must > match the calibration in the number of cylinders it's designed for or > else > there will be a "cylinder select" error set. > > No problems there. I've now looked at the AYBN hack and its associated > .BIN. > The hack is 16k and the .BIN has the first 16k padded with $FF - so > already > in the right format for my 32k EPROM. > > > To make the "special secret super duper code modification" you'll > probably > need to learn the $58 code. There may not be an equivalent function in > the > $58 as you worked with in the $8D. > > The 'not actually a quote from my Email' code modification allows OTF > map > changes from a laptop, so I'm pretty keen to be able to reproduce it! > :-) I > just wondered if there was a Sunbird specific hack that I've missed - > that > might make code changes easier. If not, am I right in thinking that > AYBN is > the best/most commented $58 hack to use? The comments with the AYBN > code are > a LOT sparser than ANHT :-( although the description of the lookup > tables > seems better - and the Sunbird document that I've seen is a massive > help. > :-) > > BTW: Is the Sunbird code/bin unique? Does it have a 4 letter name, like > ANHT? > > Thanks, > > Robin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robin Handley > > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > > Sent: Wed, 10 May 2006 10:04:42 +0100 > > Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one > > > > > > After a couple of years of researching and playing with GMECM, I > thought I > > was getting my head around it but, having started thinking about > changing > > the code in my 16149396 (1227727 with SRAM) from $8D/ANHT to something > > possibly better hacked and easier for me to understand all the > arrays/tables > > required in applying it to a 2 litre 4 cylinder naturally aspirated > engine > > that will rev to 7000+RPM, I am now confused and need help/advice. > > > > I've read quite a lot recently about Turbo Sunbird code and it being > > identical to Sy/Ty code. What I've read tells me that both originally > ran > on > > 1227749 hardware, that they are part of the $58 family, and that the > EPROM > > size fitted to this hardware was 16k, whereas 1227727 & 1227730 > hardware > > came with 32k EPROMs fitted (what I have). Also, that it is possible > to > run > > $58 code on a 1227730/1227727 if a few ECM pins are wired > differently. I > > don't have or want IAC or EGR or any transmission connections, so I > think > > the only one that might matter here is the wire to connect to my > injectors. > > Have I got the above correct? :-) > > > > So, if I am to do the switch from $8D/ANHT to $58/Sunbird code, and > get > back > > up to where I am now, I need a .BIN (I have something called > Sunbird.bin, > > but no idea what 4 letter designation this relates to) and I need a > > commented hack - for ALDL monitoring, reference, and code modification > (I've > > done a nifty change to ANHT that I really need to recreate with any > new > > code). A .ECU would be nice, but I am capable and happy to generate > one > from > > the hack. > > > > I've looked at the .BINs and hacks on www.moates.net (which seems to > be a > > copy of the www.diy-efi.org equivalent, but with hacks) and found 4 > 1227749 > > $58 4.3 Turbo .BINs (1576BBZA58, 1618BBZB58, 4175AYBN58, BBZB1580 - > all > 16k) > > and one $58 hack (AYBN - which is configured for 6cyl but mentions > Turbo > > Sunbird in the header, and the accompanying .BIN is 32k !!! - This > confused > > me, can anyone explain?) > > > > Could somebody with a good overview of GMECM put me straight, please. > :-) > Is > > the Turbo Sunbird code the best start point for a 2.0 4cyl NA engine? > Is > it > > the exact same code as the 6cyl 4.3 Turbos, but with different lookup > > values? Will Sunbird code run on 16149396/1227727 hardware (I'm in > the UK, > > so getting new ECM hardware is not trivial) with a dizzy reluctor > trigger > > feeding an 8 pin GM HEI? (I don't have/want EGR, IAC, or any > transmission > > related stuff - just something that will run my NA engine's ignition > and > > injection - after tuning (obviously) - but with clear visibility about > what > > needs to be set, and what it actually does.) BTW: I have a WBO2 for > tuning, > > and a MAP sensor with the following ID: 460 7236 (which I believe to > be a > 1 > > bar sensor, but this number does not match that on a web site of GM > > sensors!) > > > > If so, please advise which .BIN should I start with, and which hack? > And > can > > I reuse my MAP sensor (I believe the $58 code has an option for a 1 > bar > > sensor)? > > > > Help! (Sorry for all the questions.) > > > > Robin > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > > ___________________________________________________ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sat May 13 15:47:58 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 21:47:58 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com><200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> <8C8445DCF1DD61B-23F4-3D71@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><0db601c676be$840f3210$020101c0@gandalf> <8C844D9DAA1F090-A6C-47A4@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <0dd201c676ce$af31b9d0$020101c0@gandalf> Ah, so there can be multiple throttles/butterflies in all of them(?) Reason for asking is that the one throttle/butterfly and injector per cylinder is v. common amongst my fellow car builders, and I have been planning to go that way (replacing my DCOE 40s) with GMECM. Thanks, Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: 13 May 2006 20:23 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > TBI = injection on the atmospheric side of the throttle butterflies. > > PFI = port fuel injection, injection on the engine side of the > butterflies > > MPI = Mult- port injection, marketing name for PFI > > MPFI, same as MPI > > TPI, Tuned Port Injection, marketing name for specific intake system > using PFI and curved, tuned length runners. > > DFI, Direct Fuel injection, fuel is injected directly into the cylinder. > > Look to exotic car makers for marketing names for multiple butterfly > manifolds. As far as the injection type, use the position of the > injectors relative to the throttle butterflies to determine injection > type. > > Zaphod > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robin Handley > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:53:22 +0100 > Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > > I've been scratching my head over this for a while. Could somebody > tell me > if I've got these right: > > TBI = TPI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all > cylinders/ports, and one great big injector at the body > PFI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all > cylinders/ports, > and one injector near the engine end of each inlet runner (i.e. one > injector > per cylinder) > > What do you call a system which has multiple throttle bodies/butterflies > (i.e. one throttle body/butterfly for each cylinder/port) and multiple > injectors (i.e. one injector for each cylinder)? > > Robin > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > > ___________________________________________________ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > From stevie_g at swampfoxcustoms.com Sat May 13 16:28:35 2006 From: stevie_g at swampfoxcustoms.com (Swamp Fox) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 17:28:35 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] voltage regulators In-Reply-To: <0dd201c676ce$af31b9d0$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <000001c676d4$31291c80$0101a8c0@matrix22> Working on a '92 Saturn with a charging problem. Alternator puts out 14.5 volts on test stand but sends zero to battery when car is running. Less than one ohm resistance from alternator to battery terminal. I'm guessing the voltage regulator is somehow integrated into the PCM on these? From galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net Sat May 13 16:55:50 2006 From: galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net (Jason M.) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 17:55:50 -0400 Subject: [Bulk] [Gmecm] voltage regulators References: <000001c676d4$31291c80$0101a8c0@matrix22> Message-ID: <004d01c676d8$078d92d0$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB> Just looked up the alternator online, standard 105 amp CS series alternator (looks like a CS121). Voltage regulator is built in, it's the part you plug the wiring harness into. I work at a parts store and have seen a few times where the plug was ether not plugged in at all or packed full of grease from the engine bay causing a poor connection. Will the car start at all on the battery? If it does your problem is with the cars wiring. http://www.alternatorparts.com/cs130_sbpage1.htm -- here are some instructions, page 4 has a fairly terrible picture that shows the regulator. btw, I have the CS 130 alternator torn down from my '92 caprice right now to replace the rectifier, brushes and bearings. Also powder coated it with single stage chrome on the case and mirror black with irredecent emerald on the fan and pulley, looks really good. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Swamp Fox" To: Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 5:28 PM Subject: [Bulk] [Gmecm] voltage regulators Working on a '92 Saturn with a charging problem. Alternator puts out 14.5 volts on test stand but sends zero to battery when car is running. Less than one ohm resistance from alternator to battery terminal. I'm guessing the voltage regulator is somehow integrated into the PCM on these? _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm From bcroe at juno.com Sat May 13 17:22:37 2006 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 17:22:37 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] voltage regulators Message-ID: <20060513.172238.764.0.bcroe@juno.com> I wouldn't replace the rectifiers unless they had failed. The solid state parts don't "wear out", the originals have demonstrated survival ability, and a replacement may be a cheap no name part with a considerably greater chance of failure. Bruce Roe 13 May 2006 "Jason M." writes: > btw, I have the CS 130 alternator torn down from my '92 caprice > right now to > replace the rectifier, brushes and bearings. From mdill12 at yahoo.com Sat May 13 17:48:12 2006 From: mdill12 at yahoo.com (MD) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:48:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] 16197427 Engine swap. Message-ID: <20060513224812.22257.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Hey guys, its been a long time since I was part of the the early DIY list. I have started working on a project that I need to see if there is some info on. Project discription AMC-360 V8 (GM TBI) -> 4L60E (1998 1500)-> NV241 transfercase into a Jeep Grand wagoneer. The hope is I can use a 1995-1996 ?? 16197427 ECU to control the show (TBI and 4L60E) Is this possable ? Does the 16197427 have the tranny smarts also. or is the tranny controlled by another box ? Has anyone figured out the table addresses for this ECU > Is there a better choice ? Any sugestions ? Thanks Mike D. --------------------------------- Blab-away for as little as 1?/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Sat May 13 18:32:38 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:32:38 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms Message-ID: <44666C96.7040405@highspeedlink.net> I have acquired two sets of 98-99 Suzuki GSXR 750 throttle bodies in order to go throttle per cylinder on my Cadillac Northstar. Sport bike throttles are very handy because they already include injector bosses and vacuum ports as well as a way to integrate them into a single actuation mechanism. The 98-99 GSXR 750's have the biggest per cylinder sport bike throttles (46mm). Suzuki GSXR 1300R (Hayabusa) throttles are much more common and are around 42mm. Beware that many of the most modern sport bikes use ECM controlled secondary throttles behind the rider controlled primary throttles to smooth the power delivery. You'll either need to chose a set without or remove the secondaries and plug the shaft holes if you buy a set with. Also check out: http://www.msefi.com/viewtopic.php?t=6627 for motorcycle throttle info. In extreme racing engines, particularly dragsters, it is possible to run both PFI and TBI at the same time... PFI supplies fuel at idle and low throttle and when the PFI injectors get maxed out, the larger TBI injectors start spraying. This allows the latent heat of vaporization of the fuel to cool the intake charge and supplants the need for intercooling in alcohol fueled forced induction cars. Will > From: "Robin Handley" > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > > Ah, so there can be multiple throttles/butterflies in all of them(?) > > Reason for asking is that the one throttle/butterfly and injector per > cylinder is v. common amongst my fellow car builders, and I have been > planning to go that way (replacing my DCOE 40s) with GMECM. > > Thanks, > > Robin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: 13 May 2006 20:23 > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > > >> TBI = injection on the atmospheric side of the throttle butterflies. >> >> PFI = port fuel injection, injection on the engine side of the >> butterflies >> >> MPI = Mult- port injection, marketing name for PFI >> >> MPFI, same as MPI >> >> TPI, Tuned Port Injection, marketing name for specific intake system >> using PFI and curved, tuned length runners. >> >> DFI, Direct Fuel injection, fuel is injected directly into the cylinder. >> >> Look to exotic car makers for marketing names for multiple butterfly >> manifolds. As far as the injection type, use the position of the >> injectors relative to the throttle butterflies to determine injection >> type. >> >> Zaphod >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Robin Handley >> To: gmecm at diy-efi.org >> Sent: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:53:22 +0100 >> Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms >> >> I've been scratching my head over this for a while. Could somebody >> tell me >> if I've got these right: >> >> TBI = TPI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all >> cylinders/ports, and one great big injector at the body >> PFI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all >> cylinders/ports, >> and one injector near the engine end of each inlet runner (i.e. one >> injector >> per cylinder) >> >> What do you call a system which has multiple throttle bodies/butterflies >> (i.e. one throttle body/butterfly for each cylinder/port) and multiple >> injectors (i.e. one injector for each cylinder)? >> >> Robin From davesnothereman at netscape.net Sat May 13 18:42:02 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:42:02 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms In-Reply-To: <0dd201c676ce$af31b9d0$020101c0@gandalf> References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com><200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> <8C8445DCF1DD61B-23F4-3D71@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><0db601c676be$840f3210$020101c0@gandalf> <8C844D9DAA1F090-A6C-47A4@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> <0dd201c676ce$af31b9d0$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <8C844FDF7FF84C9-A6C-4C3B@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> Yep. Injection type depends on placement of injectors, not number of throttle plates. Diesels have either indirect or direct injection and no throttle plates. Individual throttle barrels may need a common connection for MAP reference to work with a speed density system. Zaphod -----Original Message----- From: Robin Handley To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sat, 13 May 2006 21:47:58 +0100 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms Ah, so there can be multiple throttles/butterflies in all of them(?) Reason for asking is that the one throttle/butterfly and injector per cylinder is v. common amongst my fellow car builders, and I have been planning to go that way (replacing my DCOE 40s) with GMECM. Thanks, Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: 13 May 2006 20:23 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > TBI = injection on the atmospheric side of the throttle butterflies. > > PFI = port fuel injection, injection on the engine side of the > butterflies > > MPI = Mult- port injection, marketing name for PFI > > MPFI, same as MPI > > TPI, Tuned Port Injection, marketing name for specific intake system > using PFI and curved, tuned length runners. > > DFI, Direct Fuel injection, fuel is injected directly into the cylinder. > > Look to exotic car makers for marketing names for multiple butterfly > manifolds. As far as the injection type, use the position of the > injectors relative to the throttle butterflies to determine injection > type. > > Zaphod > > -----Original Message----- > From: Robin Handley > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:53:22 +0100 > Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > > I've been scratching my head over this for a while. Could somebody > tell me > if I've got these right: > > TBI = TPI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all > cylinders/ports, and one great big injector at the body > PFI = just one big throttle body/butterfly that feeds all > cylinders/ports, > and one injector near the engine end of each inlet runner (i.e. one > injector > per cylinder) > > What do you call a system which has multiple throttle bodies/butterflies > (i.e. one throttle body/butterfly for each cylinder/port) and multiple > injectors (i.e. one injector for each cylinder)? > > Robin > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > > > ___________________________________________________ > Try the New Netscape Mail Today! > Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List > http://mail.netscape.com > > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From davesnothereman at netscape.net Sat May 13 18:45:47 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:45:47 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms In-Reply-To: <44666C96.7040405@highspeedlink.net> References: <44666C96.7040405@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <8C844FE7E788E98-A6C-4C4B@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> -----Original Message----- From: William Lucke To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:32:38 -0400 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms In extreme racing engines, particularly dragsters, it is possible to run both PFI and TBI at the same time... PFI supplies fuel at idle and low throttle and when the PFI injectors get maxed out, the larger TBI injectors start spraying. This allows the latent heat of vaporization of the fuel to cool the intake charge and supplants the need for intercooling in alcohol fueled forced induction cars. It's not just extreme racing engines. The ricer crowd will add injectors pre TB when adding a turbocharger to a N. A. engine. New cars, old tricks. Zaphod ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sat May 13 18:53:44 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 00:53:44 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms References: <20060510.114429.-113103.1.dgilbert78@juno.com> <5.1.0.14.0.20060511080552.02c397e0@dyakron.com><200605121049.30365.tsokorai@xperts.cl> <8C8445DCF1DD61B-23F4-3D71@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><0db601c676be$840f3210$020101c0@gandalf> <8C844D9DAA1F090-A6C-47A4@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com><0dd201c676ce$af31b9d0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C844FDF7FF84C9-A6C-4C3B@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <0df101c676e8$c7d17100$020101c0@gandalf> > Individual throttle barrels may need a common connection for MAP > reference to work with a speed density system. I currently 'T' together drillings just on the engine side of my DCOE butterflies to provide the MAP signal. Thanks, Robin From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sat May 13 18:55:54 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 00:55:54 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms References: <44666C96.7040405@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <0df201c676e8$c8149480$020101c0@gandalf> I'm currently looking for 2000-3 GSXR 750/1000 TBs ! :-) Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Lucke" To: Sent: 14 May 2006 00:32 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > I have acquired two sets of 98-99 Suzuki GSXR 750 throttle bodies in > order to go throttle per cylinder on my Cadillac Northstar. Sport bike > throttles are very handy because they already include injector bosses > and vacuum ports as well as a way to integrate them into a single > actuation mechanism. The 98-99 GSXR 750's have the biggest per cylinder > sport bike throttles (46mm). Suzuki GSXR 1300R (Hayabusa) throttles are > much more common and are around 42mm. Beware that many of the most > modern sport bikes use ECM controlled secondary throttles behind the > rider controlled primary throttles to smooth the power delivery. You'll > either need to chose a set without or remove the secondaries and plug > the shaft holes if you buy a set with. > > Also check out: http://www.msefi.com/viewtopic.php?t=6627 for motorcycle > throttle info. > > In extreme racing engines, particularly dragsters, it is possible to run > both PFI and TBI at the same time... PFI supplies fuel at idle and low > throttle and when the PFI injectors get maxed out, the larger TBI > injectors start spraying. This allows the latent heat of vaporization of > the fuel to cool the intake charge and supplants the need for > intercooling in alcohol fueled forced induction cars. > > > Will From davesnothereman at netscape.net Sat May 13 19:01:20 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 20:01:20 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one In-Reply-To: <0dc901c676c5$195f51f0$020101c0@gandalf> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com><08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8427E3BBBC017-2898-2D3C@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><09ba01c674dd$b95815f0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8445B14414D25-23F4-3D2E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> <0dc901c676c5$195f51f0$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <8C84500AA1104B9-A6C-4C8C@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> -----Original Message----- From: Robin Handley To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sat, 13 May 2006 20:40:29 +0100 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Back to square one "I'm in a different boat. I am applying GMECM hardware and software to an engine that never used it - so I know I've got mapping to do - but the saving grace is that I intend to keep things simple. Many 'tweak' arrays will get set to zero to make life bearable. After all, the GMECM has about 10x the number of adjustments that an aftermarket ECM provides (e.g. MegaSquirt, Emerald M3D) and plenty of people are blatting around with those running their engine's fuel and sparks." You're right, of course. There is a relatively large margin in the conditions that will allow an engine to run. When the sophistication of the driver is not so high, or the conditions under which the engine is expected to run at its best are significantly narrowed, it's fairly easy to obtain acceptable results with even primitive systems. I should probably know this... you've been around for a while. What engine are you working on? Is this a Ford engine? Vauxhall? "Happy to send you the .BIN (in fact I have ended up with 2 over the years - that have come from different sources, but they appear identical). I'm curious what, in the .BIN, tells you which calibration is. Is the following enough:? PROMID = $0D53 DATECODE = $0D2A SEQNUMB = $058C KKPGMID = $58" The promid will usually work, but I can compare the checksum to the values in the calibration and sometimes come up with a proper ID. Promid 3411 is AUWR3607, 1987 Sunbird GT 2.0 Turbo, manual trans. > Yes, the information you linked to on Thirdgen.org looks like what I > was thinking of. Ludis Langens made a nice equivalency chart for 7727 > <-> 7730 pin functions. Sorry, I don't have a direct link. I just use > Google. This one: http://www.cruzers.com/~ludis/triplugecm.html ? Yes. > The AYBN hac which is floating around was likely authored by the same > person who wrote the 8D hack. It's not complete, nor is it completely > accurate. But it is a decent starting point. It's acceptable for use > with the Sunbird code, although certain minor functions differ between > the two applications. I've spent all day going through a document that was brought to my attention recently by another helpful lister, which was called Sunbird.doc. It seems to be a differently formatted version of this: http://www.sunflower.com/~leroy/P4/ Ahh, yes. The turbo P4 paper. It's been the starting point for years. :) I've been matching the calibration variables in that document with a text export of my Sunbird .BIN from PROMgrammer. There is a massive amount of agreement, but a few differences - which I wasn't expecting if the document and the .BIN are Sunbird. I'd love to understand how that document fits in with Sunbird and Sy/Ty $58 code. Can you help? Possibly. I would guess that the P4 document was written by someone close to, but directly involved with, the GM $58 code. Some of the functions are described incorrectly, some of the described functions do not exist in the $58 calibration, and some of the important functions are missing altogether. The GMECM world has been a detective's paradise for years. And the turbo P4 document is akin to clues based on hearsay. I may not have knowledge of specific issues in that document, but I'll try to help with any you've found. Zaphod ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From davesnothereman at netscape.net Sat May 13 19:09:01 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 20:09:01 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] 16197427 Engine swap. In-Reply-To: <20060513224812.22257.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20060513224812.22257.qmail@web52602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8C84501BD4A06A9-A6C-4CC4@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> Hi, Mike D. 16197427 is used with TBI and CFI v6 Vortec engines. It's used with 4L60E and 4L80E transmissions. There is a Tunercat definition file as well as a documentd $0D hac on ecmguy's site. Hopefully this will whip that Wagoneer into submission. Zaphod -----Original Message----- From: MD To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sat, 13 May 2006 15:48:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Gmecm] 16197427 Engine swap. Hey guys, its been a long time since I was part of the the early DIY list. I have started working on a project that I need to see if there is some info on. Project discription AMC-360 V8 (GM TBI) -> 4L60E (1998 1500)-> NV241 transfercase into a Jeep Grand wagoneer. The hope is I can use a 1995-1996 ?? 16197427 ECU to control the show (TBI and 4L60E) Is this possable ? Does the 16197427 have the tranny smarts also. or is the tranny controlled by another box ? Has anyone figured out the table addresses for this ECU > Is there a better choice ? Any sugestions ? Thanks Mike D. --------------------------------- Blab-away for as little as 1?/min. Make PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net Sat May 13 20:50:20 2006 From: galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net (Jason M.) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 21:50:20 -0400 Subject: [Bulk] [Gmecm] voltage regulators References: <20060513.172238.764.0.bcroe@juno.com> Message-ID: <005c01c676f9$a42e9b90$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB> I have the alternator apart to replace the failed rectifier. To get the alternator apart you pretty much end up breaking the brushes, and the bearings didn't look so good/had a lot of play. It's mostly back together. Got the wrong size front bearing, so have to wait until monday to finish up. btw, this is the original alternator, 14 years and 75,000 miles... ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 6:22 PM Subject: [Bulk] [Gmecm] voltage regulators >I wouldn't replace the rectifiers unless they had failed. The > solid state parts don't "wear out", the originals have demonstrated > survival ability, and a replacement may be a cheap no name > part with a considerably greater chance of failure. Bruce Roe > > 13 May 2006 "Jason M." writes: > >> btw, I have the CS 130 alternator torn down from my '92 caprice >> right now to >> replace the rectifier, brushes and bearings. > _______________________________________________ > Gmecm mailing list > Gmecm at diy-efi.org > http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm > From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Sat May 13 21:22:03 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 22:22:03 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: injection acronyms, injector placement Message-ID: <4466944B.7020905@highspeedlink.net> I've never heard of a diesel that didn't have direct injection... I thought that was a staple of diesel operation in order to ensure that the combustion event occured at the proper time... like spark timing on a spark ignition engine. Which ones weren't direct? > From: davesnothereman at netscape.net > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > > Yep. Injection type depends on placement of injectors, not number of > throttle plates. Diesels have either indirect or direct injection and > no throttle plates. > > Individual throttle barrels may need a common connection for MAP > reference to work with a speed density system. > > Zaphod > I'm aware that the ricers do it... It's my opinion that extra injectors with a turbo kit are just a bandaid because the turbo kits that include extra injectors do not include correct engine management (this applies no matter how pretty the billet aluminum housing is... it's still a billet aluminum bandaid). I was referring to well setup and correctly managed engines that are just too big for single injector per cylinder (like 3,000 HP alcohol burners running 40# of boost on 10:1 compression). > From: davesnothereman at netscape.net > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > > -----Original Message----- > From: William Lucke > To: gmecm at diy-efi.org > Sent: Sat, 13 May 2006 19:32:38 -0400 > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > > > In extreme racing engines, particularly dragsters, it is possible to > run both PFI and TBI at the same time... PFI supplies fuel at idle and > low throttle and when the PFI injectors get maxed out, the larger TBI > injectors start spraying. This allows the latent heat of vaporization > of the fuel to cool the intake charge and supplants the need for > intercooling in alcohol fueled forced induction cars. > > It's not just extreme racing engines. The ricer crowd will add > injectors pre TB when adding a turbocharger to a N. A. engine. New > cars, old tricks. > > Zaphod From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Sat May 13 21:24:32 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 22:24:32 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Gmecm Digest, Vol 15, Issue 8 Message-ID: <446694E0.8000000@highspeedlink.net> Don't they have the ECM controlled secondaries? Are you just going to remove them? I think that was the reason I didn't want the 00-03 throttles. The 98-99's were also the biggest I heard about... Will > From: "Robin Handley" > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > > I'm currently looking for 2000-3 GSXR 750/1000 TBs ! :-) > > Robin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "William Lucke" > To: > Sent: 14 May 2006 00:32 > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Understanding injection system acronyms > > >> I have acquired two sets of 98-99 Suzuki GSXR 750 throttle bodies in >> order to go throttle per cylinder on my Cadillac Northstar. Sport bike >> throttles are very handy because they already include injector bosses >> and vacuum ports as well as a way to integrate them into a single >> actuation mechanism. The 98-99 GSXR 750's have the biggest per cylinder >> sport bike throttles (46mm). Suzuki GSXR 1300R (Hayabusa) throttles are >> much more common and are around 42mm. Beware that many of the most >> modern sport bikes use ECM controlled secondary throttles behind the >> rider controlled primary throttles to smooth the power delivery. You'll >> either need to chose a set without or remove the secondaries and plug >> the shaft holes if you buy a set with. >> >> Also check out: http://www.msefi.com/viewtopic.php?t=6627 for motorcycle >> throttle info. >> >> In extreme racing engines, particularly dragsters, it is possible to run >> both PFI and TBI at the same time... PFI supplies fuel at idle and low >> throttle and when the PFI injectors get maxed out, the larger TBI >> injectors start spraying. This allows the latent heat of vaporization of >> the fuel to cool the intake charge and supplants the need for >> intercooling in alcohol fueled forced induction cars. >> >> >> Will From jryan at caminofx.org Sat May 13 21:30:04 2006 From: jryan at caminofx.org (Jared Ryan) Date: Sat, 13 May 2006 21:30:04 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: injection acronyms, injector placement In-Reply-To: <4466944B.7020905@highspeedlink.net> References: <4466944B.7020905@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <7b0ade89b71d7f6730ae6ea9e8ab917e@caminofx.org> Many Diesel engines have a "prechamber" separate from the main combustion chamber into which the fuel is injected. This is most common on small automotive-type engines. The VW TDI (Turbo Direct Injection) Diesel is unusual in that it is very small and has direct injection ---> Jared Ryan <--- jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org On May 13, 2006, at 9:22 PM, William Lucke wrote: > I've never heard of a diesel that didn't have direct injection... I > thought that was a staple of diesel operation in order to ensure that > the combustion event occured at the proper time... like spark timing > on a spark ignition engine. Which ones weren't direct? From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun May 14 00:33:27 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 06:33:27 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Gmecm Digest, Vol 15, Issue 8 References: <446694E0.8000000@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <0e2a01c67719$7c528b70$020101c0@gandalf> Yes - but the secondaries can be removed easily and the holes filled up, I believe. I had heard that the pre 2000 ones had a solid fuel rail, which is no good for my application. Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: "William Lucke" To: Sent: 14 May 2006 03:24 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Gmecm Digest, Vol 15, Issue 8 > Don't they have the ECM controlled secondaries? Are you just going to > remove them? > I think that was the reason I didn't want the 00-03 throttles. The > 98-99's were also the biggest I heard about... > > > Will From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun May 14 00:44:57 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 06:44:57 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com><08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8427E3BBBC017-2898-2D3C@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><09ba01c674dd$b95815f0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8445B14414D25-23F4-3D2E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><0dc901c676c5$195f51f0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C84500AA1104B9-A6C-4C8C@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <0e2b01c67719$8aa90be0$020101c0@gandalf> > I should probably know this... you've been around for a while. What > engine are you working on? Is this a Ford engine? Vauxhall? My GMECM was running the ignition on a Ford (Kent) Crossflow (highly tweaked 1600cc) but I replaced with with a Vauxhall 2.0XE (cylinder head design by Cosworth). > The promid will usually work, but I can compare the checksum to the > values in the calibration and sometimes come up with a proper ID. > Promid 3411 is AUWR3607, 1987 Sunbird GT 2.0 Turbo, manual trans. The checksum is $D1EE in all the versions that I have. That would be great. Thanks. :-) > Possibly. I would guess that the P4 document was written by someone > close to, but directly involved with, the GM $58 code. Some of the > functions are described incorrectly, some of the described functions do > not exist in the $58 calibration, and some of the important functions > are missing altogether. The GMECM world has been a detective's > paradise for years. And the turbo P4 document is akin to clues based > on hearsay. I may not have knowledge of specific issues in that > document, but I'll try to help with any you've found. Where I am now, the doc appears to be 'paradise' compared to how I was with ANHT - but I haven't yet done the trawl through the PROMgrammer export to see what's missing from the doc. That's next on my list. I suppose my other option is to try and use what I've learned and apply it to ANHT - when I've learned all I can I will have to make a decision about whether it's actually worth the effort to switch from ANHT to the Sunbird code. More homework to do... Thanks for all your continued help. :-) Robin From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun May 14 00:49:22 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 06:49:22 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one Message-ID: <0e3001c6771a$27f4d690$020101c0@gandalf> BTW: I'm working on the assumption that PROMgrammer has a 100% accurate and complete list of the Sunbird and Sy/Ty calibration values and tables. Is this fair? Thanks, Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robin Handley" To: Sent: 14 May 2006 06:44 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Back to square one > > I should probably know this... you've been around for a while. What > > engine are you working on? Is this a Ford engine? Vauxhall? > > My GMECM was running the ignition on a Ford (Kent) Crossflow (highly tweaked > 1600cc) but I replaced with with a Vauxhall 2.0XE (cylinder head design by > Cosworth). > > > The promid will usually work, but I can compare the checksum to the > > values in the calibration and sometimes come up with a proper ID. > > Promid 3411 is AUWR3607, 1987 Sunbird GT 2.0 Turbo, manual trans. > > The checksum is $D1EE in all the versions that I have. That would be great. > Thanks. :-) > > > Possibly. I would guess that the P4 document was written by someone > > close to, but directly involved with, the GM $58 code. Some of the > > functions are described incorrectly, some of the described functions do > > not exist in the $58 calibration, and some of the important functions > > are missing altogether. The GMECM world has been a detective's > > paradise for years. And the turbo P4 document is akin to clues based > > on hearsay. I may not have knowledge of specific issues in that > > document, but I'll try to help with any you've found. > > Where I am now, the doc appears to be 'paradise' compared to how I was with > ANHT - but I haven't yet done the trawl through the PROMgrammer export to > see what's missing from the doc. That's next on my list. I suppose my other > option is to try and use what I've learned and apply it to ANHT - when I've > learned all I can I will have to make a decision about whether it's actually > worth the effort to switch from ANHT to the Sunbird code. More homework to > do... > > Thanks for all your continued help. :-) > > Robin > From bcroe at juno.com Sun May 14 01:33:55 2006 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 01:33:55 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] voltage regulators Message-ID: <20060514.013355.288.0.bcroe@juno.com> I replace the front bearing at 60,000, the rear and the brushes at 120,000. My expectation is that this will avoid failures, but things like diodes or regulators can happen. I never had a problem with brushes breaking, but a rusted/stripped shaft nut or a front bearing that won't slide off can happen. Bruce Roe 13 May 06 "Jason M." writes: > I have the alternator apart to replace the failed rectifier. To > get the alternator apart you pretty much end up breaking > the brushes, and the > bearings didn't look so good/had a lot of play. > > It's mostly back together. Got the wrong size front bearing, > so have to wait until monday to finish up. > > btw, this is the original alternator, 14 years and 75,000 miles... > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: May 13, 2006 6:22 PM > >I wouldn't replace the rectifiers unless they had failed. The > > solid state parts don't "wear out", the originals have > demonstrated > > survival ability, and a replacement may be a cheap no name > > part with a considerably greater chance of failure. Bruce Roe From efi at dyakron.com Sun May 14 06:29:08 2006 From: efi at dyakron.com (Mike V) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 07:29:08 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one In-Reply-To: <0e3001c6771a$27f4d690$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20060514071156.02ea39c0@dyakron.com> What version do you have? Some of the early versions had an issue with changing the cyl-select-byte, but that was a quite a while ago. Richard Tomlinson (London) originally wrote it, then Bill Calgano (Maryland, US) did some major clean-up and added to the editdable parameters. Bill has released several updates. . MV At 06:49 AM 5/14/2006 +0100, you wrote: >BTW: I'm working on the assumption that PROMgrammer has a 100% accurate and >complete list of the Sunbird and Sy/Ty calibration values and tables. Is >this fair? > >Thanks, > >Robin From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun May 14 06:42:47 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 12:42:47 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Saturated/P&H injection References: <446694E0.8000000@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <0e3b01c6774b$87f39d20$020101c0@gandalf> Something else that's been puzzling me recently, from the reading that I've been doing, is what's the difference between: 'saturated injector driver' (Syclone?) and 'dual Peak&Hold' (Sunbird?). Can anyone help? Robin From galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net Sun May 14 07:33:44 2006 From: galaxiecustom500 at sbcglobal.net (Jason M.) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 08:33:44 -0400 Subject: [Bulk] [Gmecm] voltage regulators References: <20060514.013355.288.0.bcroe@juno.com> Message-ID: <001c01c67752$b5b0e310$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB> Any tips for taking it apart with out breaking the brushes? I've had a couple of the smaller CS alternators apart before to fix little problems, like the charging post coming loose. They would just slide apart. What actually broke the brushes on this one was a plastic bearing retainer. Both of the bearings were stuck on this one (rust). Cut some notches in the outer race of the rear bearing to get a puller on it then cranked hard with a 1/2'' rachet. Felt about the same as an over tightened lug nut. The Front bearing I tried the same thing on but eneded up cutting it off. On the inner race I ground it 3/4 the way through then cracked it with a chisel. So far I've had 3 alternator failures on different GM products. 1st was brushes/contacts worn down to nothing on a camaro with 200,000 miles. 2nd was a voltage regulator, don't know the complete history of the car but appeared the alternator was on there for a while, car had 220,000 and the junkyard 1973 olds engine was put in ~1984 when the car had ~10,000 miles. 3rd, the diodes on the one I'm messing with now. Jason. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 2:33 AM Subject: [Bulk] [Gmecm] voltage regulators >I replace the front bearing at 60,000, the rear and the brushes > at 120,000. My expectation is that this will avoid failures, but > things like diodes or regulators can happen. I never had a > problem with brushes breaking, but a rusted/stripped shaft > nut or a front bearing that won't slide off can happen. > > Bruce Roe From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun May 14 07:44:39 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:44:39 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060514071156.02ea39c0@dyakron.com> Message-ID: <0e4801c67755$dd816c90$020101c0@gandalf> > What version do you have? > Some of the early versions had an issue with changing the cyl-select-byte, > but that was a quite a while ago. Richard Tomlinson (London) originally wrote > it, then Bill Calgano (Maryland, US) did some major clean-up and added to > the editdable parameters. Bill has released several updates. . > MV Version 1.0-eval. I downloaded it 2 days ago. Is this the latest? Robin From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Sun May 14 10:48:12 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 11:48:12 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: direct injection Message-ID: <4467513C.6080908@highspeedlink.net> I have heard of pre-chambers, although I've never seen pictures or examples of real ones, just conceptual diagrams. The new Solstice turbo will have direct injection. Anyone want to take a stab at that software? Will > From: Jared Ryan > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Re: injection acronyms, injector placement > > Many Diesel engines have a "prechamber" separate from the main > combustion chamber into which the fuel is injected. This is most > common on small automotive-type engines. The VW TDI (Turbo Direct > Injection) Diesel is unusual in that it is very small and has direct > injection > > ---> Jared Ryan <--- > jryan at caminofx.org | http://www.caminofx.org > > On May 13, 2006, at 9:22 PM, William Lucke wrote: > >> I've never heard of a diesel that didn't have direct injection... I >> thought that was a staple of diesel operation in order to ensure that >> the combustion event occured at the proper time... like spark timing >> on a spark ignition engine. Which ones weren't direct? From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Sun May 14 10:51:17 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 11:51:17 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Gmecm Digest, Vol 15, Issue 9 Message-ID: <446751F5.6050908@highspeedlink.net> I thought it looked like they'd be easy to deal with... but with a little patience I found two sets that didn't need that extra work and my project got that much easier. Just machined some of the last pieces I need to space them out from 80 mm bore centers to 102 mm bore centers. By solid, do you mean one piece? Yes, my sets do have one piece throttle bodies. I had resigned myself to making new fuel rails with the new injector spacing, Buuut.... maybe I should look at the 2000+ fuel rails if they're not one piece... maybe they're adaptable to my 98/99 throttles... Hmm... Thanks for the brainfood. Will > From: "Robin Handley" > Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Re: Gmecm Digest, Vol 15, Issue 8 > > Yes - but the secondaries can be removed easily and the holes filled up, I > believe. I had heard that the pre 2000 ones had a solid fuel rail, which is > no good for my application. > > Robin > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "William Lucke" > To: > Sent: 14 May 2006 03:24 > Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Gmecm Digest, Vol 15, Issue 8 > > >> Don't they have the ECM controlled secondaries? Are you just going to >> remove them? >> I think that was the reason I didn't want the 00-03 throttles. The >> 98-99's were also the biggest I heard about... >> >> >> Will From stevie_g at swampfoxcustoms.com Sun May 14 10:58:45 2006 From: stevie_g at swampfoxcustoms.com (Swamp Fox) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 11:58:45 -0400 Subject: [Bulk] [Gmecm] voltage regulators In-Reply-To: <004d01c676d8$078d92d0$4101a8c0@BILLYBOB> Message-ID: <001301c6776f$47868030$0101a8c0@matrix22> -----Original Message----- From: gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org [mailto:gmecm-bounces at diy-efi.org] On Behalf Of Jason M. Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 5:56 PM To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Subject: Re: [Bulk] [Gmecm] voltage regulators Just looked up the alternator online, standard 105 amp CS series alternator (looks like a CS121). Voltage regulator is built in, it's the part you plug the wiring harness into. I work at a parts store and have seen a few times where the plug was ether not plugged in at all or packed full of grease from the engine bay causing a poor connection. Will the car start at all on the battery? If it does your problem is with the cars wiring. http://www.alternatorparts.com/cs130_sbpage1.htm -- here are some instructions, page 4 has a fairly terrible picture that shows the regulator. Okay, so from what I can see, odds are something is wrong with the wire to the 'S' post or 'L'. For some reason no power to field. Time to dig. Thanks! I'll start picking the collectives brain for 2004 EFI wiring in a month or so. Just got a 63 truck with a 2004 drivetrain dropped at the shop this week. From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun May 14 11:44:34 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 17:44:34 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com><08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8427E3BBBC017-2898-2D3C@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><09ba01c674dd$b95815f0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8445B14414D25-23F4-3D2E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <0eb201c67775$b0bc5790$020101c0@gandalf> > What I can say with certainty is that flipping the bit to 1 BAR and > connecting to a 1 BAR sensor produced poor idle and driveability in my > car. I had no desire to chase the reason, I simply switched to a 2 BAR > sensor. I valued the time spent more than the potential for education. I've been comparing what values PROMgrammer shows for pressures (kPa), for the same Sunbird.bin, but when the MAP sensor range flag is changed: Some calibration values are approximately halved. Some are identical. Some are approximately the same. So, PROMgrammer seems to be applying different scale factors/formulae, to convert the raw stored value into kPa, for different calibration values. Whether it is doing this when appropriate I just don't know. I had been hoping that the GM programmers had been sufficiently clever so that raw values (stored in the .BIN) would be appropriate no matter what sensor range is chosen, but I'm beginning to wonder if this was wishful thinking. If life isn't that simple (and I expect it isn't), then I reckon I've potentially got a yucky job on my hands to try and work out what new values should be used. This could be made all the more difficult if PROMgrammer's scalings aren't right - as I could be putting in a perfectly sensible value of kPA, which is then scaled to something stupid. :-( I'd be very grateful if somebody could comment here. :-) Dependent on what the expert response is, the option of buying a 2 BAR MAP sensor is looking more attractive. Anybody know what a scrap one goes for? Are they easy to come by? The last option that I can think of is to find a set of calibration values for $58 from a NA car. Anybody know if one of these exists? Were all Sys/Tys Turboed? Robin From rjdrew at adelphia.net Sun May 14 12:25:16 2006 From: rjdrew at adelphia.net (Ron Drew) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:25:16 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] OBDII scanner/Monitoring software & cable References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com><08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8427E3BBBC017-2898-2D3C@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><09ba01c674dd$b95815f0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8445B14414D25-23F4-3D2E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><0dc901c676c5$195f51f0$020101c0@gandalf><8C84500AA1104B9-A6C-4C8C@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> <0e2b01c67719$8aa90be0$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <000701c6777b$5e412c10$6801a8c0@RonHome> Does anyone have a recommendation to offer regarding the best all around OBDII scanner/monitoring software & cable combination? From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Sun May 14 13:23:02 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 14:23:02 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Re: throttle bodies Message-ID: <44677586.6020103@highspeedlink.net> D-oh... that should have said 1 piece fuel rail. Will > From: William Lucke > Subject: [Gmecm] Re: Gmecm Digest, Vol 15, Issue 9 > > By solid, do you mean one piece? Yes, my sets do have one piece throttle > bodies. > > > Will From bcroe at juno.com Sun May 14 13:36:25 2006 From: bcroe at juno.com (bcroe at juno.com) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 13:36:25 -0500 Subject: [Gmecm] voltage regulators Message-ID: <20060514.133626.872.4.bcroe@juno.com> OK, I'm wondering if my early 80s is quite different. No problem getting the brushes out, you need a 1/16" drill to put them back in. Running 200,000 on brushes I would not describe as a failure, but poor maintenance. Usually they work with an open diode, but output is way down and the GEN light may glow some. At least you can get home. Regulators are pretty good, but I may have a bad one not yet checked on bench. The problem with a front bearing on mine was the shaft wouldn't slide out. I finally bent some cheap wrenches to reach inside the air vent, unscrew the bearing retainer, and slide shaft/bearing/retainer all out of the case. Then I could grind the bearing off. Bruce Roe 14 May 2006 "Jason M." writes: > Any tips for taking it apart with out breaking the brushes? I've had > a > couple of the smaller CS alternators apart before to fix little > problems, > like the charging post coming loose. They would just slide apart. > What > actually broke the brushes on this one was a plastic bearing > retainer. > > Both of the bearings were stuck on this one (rust). Cut some > notches in the > outer race of the rear bearing to get a puller on it then cranked > hard with > a 1/2'' rachet. Felt about the same as an over tightened lug nut. > The > Front bearing I tried the same thing on but eneded up cutting it > off. On > the inner race I ground it 3/4 the way through then cracked it with > a > chisel. > > So far I've had 3 alternator failures on different GM products. 1st > was > brushes/contacts worn down to nothing on a camaro with 200,000 > miles. 2nd > was a voltage regulator, don't know the complete history of the car > but > appeared the alternator was on there for a while, car had 220,000 > and the > junkyard 1973 olds engine was put in ~1984 when the car had ~10,000 > miles. > 3rd, the diodes on the one I'm messing with now. > > Jason. From william.lucke at highspeedlink.net Sun May 14 13:53:22 2006 From: william.lucke at highspeedlink.net (William Lucke) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 14:53:22 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] disassembly 101 / writing a commented hack Message-ID: <44677CA2.6050507@highspeedlink.net> I'd like to get started hacking the OBDI Cadillac Northstar computer (). I have a couple of different BCC's, as well as a dyno program that only has engine management turned on. I'm familiar with assembly and have worked with commercial 68HC11's in development boards. I'm familiar with the concepts of disassembly and I'm ready to devote the time necessary to reverse engineer this program. What I'm not sure of, however, is where to start. What's the best disassembler to use on GM chip images? Is there a listing of the memory locations of the data for the ALDL stream? Other than starting at the beginning, I'm not entirely sure how to enter the program and know what's what. Will From davesnothereman at netscape.net Sun May 14 14:07:46 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 15:07:46 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Saturated/P&H injection In-Reply-To: <0e3b01c6774b$87f39d20$020101c0@gandalf> References: <446694E0.8000000@highspeedlink.net> <0e3b01c6774b$87f39d20$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <8C845A0D1B1D1C0-A6C-5C01@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> OIther than the fact that one indicates a single driver while the other is plural? Peak and hold injector drivers operate low impedance injector drivers. They allow higher current to initially open the injector, then when current reaches a peak level the driver switches to "hold" mode, limiting current to typically 1/4 of the peak value. Saturated injector drivers are designed for high impedance injectors. Total current draw through these injectors is lower than the low impedance types, so the driver simply allows maximum current through the injector coil at all times. This scheme allows the injector coil to become "saturated" with current. P&H drivers will operate saturated type high impedance drivers. Saturated drivers are not intended to be used with P & H type injectors, although some people (and even OEM's) will do so with the aid of current limiting resistors. The 7749 can operate in either saturated or P & H mode selectable by an external jumper. Zaphod -----Original Message----- From: Robin Handley To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sun, 14 May 2006 12:42:47 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Saturated/P&H injection Something else that's been puzzling me recently, from the reading that I've been doing, is what's the difference between: 'saturated injector driver' (Syclone?) and 'dual Peak&Hold' (Sunbird?). Can anyone help? Robin _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From davesnothereman at netscape.net Sun May 14 14:18:57 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 15:18:57 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] Back to square one In-Reply-To: <0eb201c67775$b0bc5790$020101c0@gandalf> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20060426145405.03520590@dyakron.com><08ed01c67410$c8b917b0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8427E3BBBC017-2898-2D3C@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com><09ba01c674dd$b95815f0$020101c0@gandalf> <8C8445B14414D25-23F4-3D2E@mblkn-m13.sysops.aol.com> <0eb201c67775$b0bc5790$020101c0@gandalf> Message-ID: <8C845A261ED475D-A6C-5C2A@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> The pressure <-> voltage relationship for the 1 and 2 BAR sensors are not exactly linear. This becomes even more apparent for the 3 BAR saneor. The lower the pressure, the closer the voltage between the two sensors. And really, they both have to represent about 20 kPa as something close to 1V. I believe there is a PV chart for the 2 BAR sensor accessible from the gmecm home page. Promgrammer's scaling is most likely correct. The only 1 BAR calibration I'm aware of for the 7749 is used with the Quad 4 engine. That's more better suited to high rpm use. It's also long overdue to be hacked / disassembled. Used sensors vary in price depending on where you go shopping. Send me an email off list. Zaphod -----Original Message----- From: Robin Handley To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sun, 14 May 2006 17:44:34 +0100 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Back to square one > What I can say with certainty is that flipping the bit to 1 BAR and > connecting to a 1 BAR sensor produced poor idle and driveability in my > car. I had no desire to chase the reason, I simply switched to a 2 BAR > sensor. I valued the time spent more than the potential for education. I've been comparing what values PROMgrammer shows for pressures (kPa), for the same Sunbird.bin, but when the MAP sensor range flag is changed: Some calibration values are approximately halved. Some are identical. Some are approximately the same. So, PROMgrammer seems to be applying different scale factors/formulae, to convert the raw stored value into kPa, for different calibration values. Whether it is doing this when appropriate I just don't know. I had been hoping that the GM programmers had been sufficiently clever so that raw values (stored in the .BIN) would be appropriate no matter what sensor range is chosen, but I'm beginning to wonder if this was wishful thinking. If life isn't that simple (and I expect it isn't), then I reckon I've potentially got a yucky job on my hands to try and work out what new values should be used. This could be made all the more difficult if PROMgrammer's scalings aren't right - as I could be putting in a perfectly sensible value of kPA, which is then scaled to something stupid. :-( I'd be very grateful if somebody could comment here. :-) Dependent on what the expert response is, the option of buying a 2 BAR MAP sensor is looking more attractive. Anybody know what a scrap one goes for? Are they easy to come by? The last option that I can think of is to find a set of calibration values for $58 from a NA car. Anybody know if one of these exists? Were all Sys/Tys Turboed? Robin _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From davesnothereman at netscape.net Sun May 14 14:27:44 2006 From: davesnothereman at netscape.net (davesnothereman at netscape.net) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 15:27:44 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] disassembly 101 / writing a commented hack In-Reply-To: <44677CA2.6050507@highspeedlink.net> References: <44677CA2.6050507@highspeedlink.net> Message-ID: <8C845A39BD62177-A6C-5C42@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> I use Donald Whisnant's (spelling?) code seeking disassembler. It's freeware written to disassemble code from GMECM's. Tunercat also has one, but I'm not as familiar with it. IDA Pro is also good, but not so free. Is there a data definition file for the norstar ALDL stream? That would at least provide the correct order to the ALDL data words if you can find the ALDL xmit table. Most of the ALDL tables I've looked at begin with the prom id byte located in the beginning of the calibration. If you know or can work out the calibration address then you might be able to make a guess at the beginning of the ALDL table. You're famaliar with the reset vectors located at the end of Motorola code... use those to separate code from cal. data. If you're working with a P4 ecm, look for hardware addresses in the 3XXX range and attempt to use those with known calibrations from other P4's to locate specific portions of code. Use pattern matching to attempt to locate and identify some common routines such as spark timing calculation. There's probably people much better at this than I am who can offer better clues. But will they? Zaphod -----Original Message----- From: William Lucke To: gmecm at diy-efi.org Sent: Sun, 14 May 2006 14:53:22 -0400 Subject: [Gmecm] disassembly 101 / writing a commented hack I'd like to get started hacking the OBDI Cadillac Northstar computer (). I have a couple of different BCC's, as well as a dyno program that only has engine management turned on. I'm familiar with assembly and have worked with commercial 68HC11's in development boards. I'm familiar with the concepts of disassembly and I'm ready to devote the time necessary to reverse engineer this program. What I'm not sure of, however, is where to start. What's the best disassembler to use on GM chip images? Is there a listing of the memory locations of the data for the ALDL stream? Other than starting at the beginning, I'm not entirely sure how to enter the program and know what's what. Will _______________________________________________ Gmecm mailing list Gmecm at diy-efi.org http://lists.diy-efi.org/mailman/listinfo/gmecm ___________________________________________________ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com From Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk Sun May 14 14:48:59 2006 From: Robin at FuryWorld.fsnet.co.uk (Robin Handley) Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 20:48:59 +0100 Subject: [Gmecm] Saturated/P&H injection References: <446694E0.8000000@highspeedlink.net><0e3b01c6774b$87f39d20$020101c0@gandalf> <8C845A0D1B1D1C0-A6C-5C01@mblkn-m18.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: <0f0701c6778f$b21ab040$020101c0@gandalf> Many thanks again. I knew about the difference impedances but the local solution that I'd heard of involved adding a resistor. The GMECM triumphs yet again! Sorry for all the questions, but here's another one! Can the 727 do both? (I've never come across any mention of a jumper in the time I've been researching the 727.) I have a bunch of Bosch high impedance injectors which I'd like to use. Thanks, Robin ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: 14 May 2006 20:07 Subject: Re: [Gmecm] Saturated/P&H injection > OIther than the fact that one indicates a single driver while the