Re: fooling the confuser

From: Shane Moseley (smoseley@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Tue Feb 15 2000 - 09:32:11 EST


dakota_24 wrote:

> Ok on to the theory - suppose we put in a 160 thermostat (or whatever is
> less than the
> <stuff deleted>
> --------------------
> ok on theory if all this hinges on lets say a 160 deg thermo but we all know
> that isnt good for the perf why not give the puter a false code with a
> resistor in the wire to the water temp sensor ??
> Chris

Cause this will only work during open loop which the computer is in a very short
length of time. The rest of the time - the mixture is totally controlled by the
O2 sensor regardless of what the temp sensor is sending.

Another theory: Along your same train of thought - how about we add a voltage
follower circuit with a quick response time and very low input impedance - to
follow the bouncing O2 sensor - giving the computer its expected 14.7 while
REALLY allowing a 12.5 for power??? Anyone want to play with that one? (not on
my Indy!)

Latr,

Shane

--
'96 IndyRam w/lots of mods (mine)
'96 IndyRam w/lots of options (wifes) - also a numbered (#142) "Track Truck"
'74 Triple-Black Dodge Challenger Rallye 360 home-brew EFI R&D vehicle
'68 Black Corvette Convertible 427 (For Sale)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:48:07 EDT