At 05:33 AM 2/11/01 -0800, you wrote:
> Have you checked into getting your gauges to work
>with the 96 PCM? I'm guessing that most aftermarket
>computers wouldn't work the gauges either.
Yes. Jon Steiger was kind enough to email me a copy
of the wiring diagrams and '96 OE PCM pinouts. I compared
them to those of '97. In addition to finding that the '96 gauges
were of the analog type ('97s went to LEDs), wiring for the '96
basically went straight from the sensors to the dash. In the
'97, wiring went from the sensors to the OE PCM that to
another 'computer' in the passenger side of the dash (called
the Central Timer Module), and then from the CTM to the dash.
I'm currently running with aftermarket tach, afr gauge and
fuel pressure gauge (although the sending unit does appear
to work) when I use the '96 MP PCM.
> What was the difference between the stock and the 97
>PCM? Thanks again.
I haven't look at the scanner outputs in quite awhile but,
as far as timing going from least to more aggressive, it would
be '97 OE PCM, '97 MP PCM, '96 MP PCM and a '96 MP PCM
which had been custom programmed (but not for my mods).
While this last one had more aggressive timing and pulsewidths
at part throttle than the '96 MP PCM, it was basically programmed
to handle blown and juiced mods. Therefore, at WOT, it's timing
was quite retarded.
I can't give any 1/4-mile comparisons between the "97 OE and
MP computers because I had done quite bit of mods after the
'97 OE but before getting the '97 MP PCM.
I can say that, with the same mods (K&N dropin and Gibson
cat-back at the time), the Dak went from 16.7s with the stock computer
to 15.9s with the '96 MP PCM.
Bob Tom Burlington, Ont., Canada
'97 CC Dakota, 5.2L, 4x2, auto., 3.92SG, 4,265 lb (racing weight)
Dyno: 231.2 rwhp 340.0 lb-ft rwtorque
PB: 14.737 @ 91.75 9.364 @ 72.95
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:59:13 EDT