Do away with dizzy?
09-08-2009, 03:44 PM
#201
Re: Do away with dizzy?
afgun scanned the page and posted it up for me from the book he bought. that gave me something to e mail to the place and that's the reply. Larry Engelbert @ Indmar Service gave me the part numbers, prices and said its all in stock. but without the page it would have been hard to explain what I was looking for, or where to even look everyone posted before it was mercuy(sp) instead of indmar that build these. a cad drawing of the bracket would be nice forsure.
09-08-2009, 07:26 PM
#202
TGO Supporter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NJ/PA
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Yes
Engine: Many
Transmission: Quite a few
Re: Do away with dizzy?
those parts are nice, but you will probably end up right where you are right now after dropping quite a bit of coin. You'd have to get the reference angles and max advance and retard from the marine ecm, since the northstar had the sensors practically parallel with the pan rails(I think), and the drawing of the lt1 parts looks like they rotated everything up. I don't know how easy that would be.
09-08-2009, 07:40 PM
#203
Senior Member
Re: Do away with dizzy?
those parts are nice, but you will probably end up right where you are right now after dropping quite a bit of coin. You'd have to get the reference angles and max advance and retard from the marine ecm, since the northstar had the sensors practically parallel with the pan rails(I think), and the drawing of the lt1 parts looks like they rotated everything up. I don't know how easy that would be.
09-08-2009, 07:44 PM
#204
Re: Do away with dizzy?
those parts are nice, but you will probably end up right where you are right now after dropping quite a bit of coin. You'd have to get the reference angles and max advance and retard from the marine ecm, since the northstar had the sensors practically parallel with the pan rails(I think), and the drawing of the lt1 parts looks like they rotated everything up. I don't know how easy that would be.
The only difference between the off the shelf parts and the ones already made, would be that the off the shelf parts are proven.
But If I'm not mistaken, the current home made trigger wheel and sensors run the N* ignition fine in "bypass" mode, with no input from the ECM, so I would still be looking at the settings in the bin.
I'd still also look a little deeper into just how needed the cam position sensor is.
09-08-2009, 07:52 PM
#205
Supreme Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Costal Alabama
Posts: 2,136
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1989 Iroc-Z
Engine: 350, ZZ4 equivalent
Transmission: Pro-Built Road Race 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 Dana 44
Re: Do away with dizzy?
According to the documentation you can run only one crank sensor if you use a cam sensor which could be nice.
- Luke
Last edited by 89 Iroc Z; 09-12-2009 at 02:04 AM.
09-08-2009, 07:53 PM
#206
Senior Member
09-08-2009, 07:59 PM
#207
TGO Supporter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NJ/PA
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Yes
Engine: Many
Transmission: Quite a few
Re: Do away with dizzy?
the module definitely does NOT take care of max advance and retard. I believe this is the whole problem ??? is having, those values are still not quite right in the BIN file.
the reference angle needs to match the TDC/sensors/trigger wheel relationship in order to run properly in startup AND run.
without the proper TDC-to-sensor position, and the corresponding reference angle in the code, you are just pi$$ing in the wind.
afgun, and six_shooter, you guys are basically agreeing with what I said in the quoted post, the point was that everything is shifted in the marine ecm, so you still NEED those values in order to use those parts.
the reference angle needs to match the TDC/sensors/trigger wheel relationship in order to run properly in startup AND run.
without the proper TDC-to-sensor position, and the corresponding reference angle in the code, you are just pi$$ing in the wind.
afgun, and six_shooter, you guys are basically agreeing with what I said in the quoted post, the point was that everything is shifted in the marine ecm, so you still NEED those values in order to use those parts.
Last edited by jwscab; 09-08-2009 at 08:02 PM. Reason: added info/typo correction
09-08-2009, 08:10 PM
#208
Re: Do away with dizzy?
The wheel would just be rotated to compensate for the different sensor(s) position.
The only difference between the off the shelf parts and the ones already made, would be that the off the shelf parts are proven.
But If I'm not mistaken, the current home made trigger wheel and sensors run the N* ignition fine in "bypass" mode, with no input from the ECM, so I would still be looking at the settings in the bin.
I'd still also look a little deeper into just how needed the cam position sensor is.
The only difference between the off the shelf parts and the ones already made, would be that the off the shelf parts are proven.
But If I'm not mistaken, the current home made trigger wheel and sensors run the N* ignition fine in "bypass" mode, with no input from the ECM, so I would still be looking at the settings in the bin.
I'd still also look a little deeper into just how needed the cam position sensor is.
09-08-2009, 08:16 PM
#209
Senior Member
Re: Do away with dizzy?
the module definitely does NOT take care of max advance and retard. I believe this is the whole problem ??? is having, those values are still not quite right in the BIN file.
the reference angle needs to match the TDC/sensors/trigger wheel relationship in order to run properly in startup AND run.
without the proper TDC-to-sensor position, and the corresponding reference angle in the code, you are just pi$$ing in the wind.
afgun, and six_shooter, you guys are basically agreeing with what I said in the quoted post, the point was that everything is shifted in the marine ecm, so you still NEED those values in order to use those parts.
the reference angle needs to match the TDC/sensors/trigger wheel relationship in order to run properly in startup AND run.
without the proper TDC-to-sensor position, and the corresponding reference angle in the code, you are just pi$$ing in the wind.
afgun, and six_shooter, you guys are basically agreeing with what I said in the quoted post, the point was that everything is shifted in the marine ecm, so you still NEED those values in order to use those parts.
09-09-2009, 10:19 AM
#210
TGO Supporter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NJ/PA
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Yes
Engine: Many
Transmission: Quite a few
Re: Do away with dizzy?
???, I guess you didn't get a chance to test those values i posted the other day?
did you measure the timing in bypass mode? I also noticed that in your pictures of your sensor placement, they look lower than the gm reference documents, that is, rotated lower in relation to the centerline of the crankshaft, shifting the reference point. I suppose you placed notch 1 at the center of sensor one, while the engine was at TDC? In that case, it wouldn't matter.
did you measure the timing in bypass mode? I also noticed that in your pictures of your sensor placement, they look lower than the gm reference documents, that is, rotated lower in relation to the centerline of the crankshaft, shifting the reference point. I suppose you placed notch 1 at the center of sensor one, while the engine was at TDC? In that case, it wouldn't matter.
Last edited by jwscab; 09-09-2009 at 10:20 AM. Reason: added a comment
09-09-2009, 11:03 AM
#211
Re: Do away with dizzy?
???, I guess you didn't get a chance to test those values i posted the other day?
did you measure the timing in bypass mode? I also noticed that in your pictures of your sensor placement, they look lower than the gm reference documents, that is, rotated lower in relation to the centerline of the crankshaft, shifting the reference point. I suppose you placed notch 1 at the center of sensor one, while the engine was at TDC? In that case, it wouldn't matter.
did you measure the timing in bypass mode? I also noticed that in your pictures of your sensor placement, they look lower than the gm reference documents, that is, rotated lower in relation to the centerline of the crankshaft, shifting the reference point. I suppose you placed notch 1 at the center of sensor one, while the engine was at TDC? In that case, it wouldn't matter.
09-09-2009, 11:08 AM
#212
Re: Do away with dizzy?
I do have a question for you guys thou, I would like to find the location of the base referance of an $A1 bin. as I understand it. that bin has 2 referance angle values, one for the 10* bypassed and the other for true referance angle. I know the location of one and its set to 65* in a said to be working 730 bin. I'd like to double check the other to see if anything weird was done to that value. any one one to teach me how to find that? lol
09-09-2009, 11:33 AM
#213
Re: Do away with dizzy?
I do have a question for you guys thou, I would like to find the location of the base referance of an $A1 bin. as I understand it. that bin has 2 referance angle values, one for the 10* bypassed and the other for true referance angle. I know the location of one and its set to 65* in a said to be working 730 bin. I'd like to double check the other to see if anything weird was done to that value. any one one to teach me how to find that? lol
The other IIRC is 10*, which I believe is called "spark Reference angle", basically the same as the base timing reference angle as used in dizzy bins.
The 60*V6 ICM has a base 10* advance built in, at idle, or rather low RPM. I have seen in my application where it advances as the engine is reved, I'm not sure if this is a function of an advance curve in the ICM, or just a mechanical phenominon.
Have you tried adding ECM timing control with the sensors lined up at TDC #1 as per the diagram, where you get 40* of base timing? That might be part of the problem there.
09-09-2009, 12:01 PM
#214
Re: Do away with dizzy?
Stock $A1 settings are "59.77*" Reference angle, which is effectivly "60*", since saving "60" is saved as 59.77.
The other IIRC is 10*, which I believe is called "spark Reference angle", basically the same as the base timing reference angle as used in dizzy bins.
The 60*V6 ICM has a base 10* advance built in, at idle, or rather low RPM. I have seen in my application where it advances as the engine is reved, I'm not sure if this is a function of an advance curve in the ICM, or just a mechanical phenominon.
Have you tried adding ECM timing control with the sensors lined up at TDC #1 as per the diagram, where you get 40* of base timing? That might be part of the problem there.
The other IIRC is 10*, which I believe is called "spark Reference angle", basically the same as the base timing reference angle as used in dizzy bins.
The 60*V6 ICM has a base 10* advance built in, at idle, or rather low RPM. I have seen in my application where it advances as the engine is reved, I'm not sure if this is a function of an advance curve in the ICM, or just a mechanical phenominon.
Have you tried adding ECM timing control with the sensors lined up at TDC #1 as per the diagram, where you get 40* of base timing? That might be part of the problem there.
09-09-2009, 12:15 PM
#215
Re: Do away with dizzy?
some times I'm slow in the head lol. junkcltr already posted the places I was looking for.
from the $A1 code
address 8021 shows the 153 usec latency correction. It appears it is always constant for the DIS. The $8D dizzy HEI module has a table that varies.
The "0x" means that the number is being displayed as a hex number.
address 8021 shows the 153 usec latency correction. It appears it is always constant for the DIS. The $8D dizzy HEI module has a table that varies.
The "0x" means that the number is being displayed as a hex number.
Code:
8013 1A 26 KINITSPK 9 DEG INITIAL SPARK ADVANCE 801B AA 170 KREFANGL 59.8 DEG SPARK REFERENCE ANGLE 8021 000A 10 KTIMELAG 153 USEC TIME DOMAIN CORRECTION TO SPARK 8023 FFE4 65508 KMAXADV2 -10 DEG MAX ADVANCE REL TO REF (2'S COMP) 8025 FF39 65337 KMAXRTD2 -70 DEG MAX RETARD REL TO REF (2'S COMPL)
09-10-2009, 12:08 AM
#217
Supreme Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Costal Alabama
Posts: 2,136
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1989 Iroc-Z
Engine: 350, ZZ4 equivalent
Transmission: Pro-Built Road Race 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 Dana 44
Re: Do away with dizzy?
???,
Do you have a ECM test bench?? That would be a easier way to clear some of these measurements up. I was planing to build the whole setup on a bench before moving forward to the car to figure the reference angle, etc.
Do you have a ECM test bench?? That would be a easier way to clear some of these measurements up. I was planing to build the whole setup on a bench before moving forward to the car to figure the reference angle, etc.
09-10-2009, 05:53 PM
#218
Re: Do away with dizzy?
no I don't have a test bench, on car only. a bench would be nice for testing stuff but without an o'scope how could to measure the referance angle? those arn't cheap.
09-10-2009, 11:01 PM
#219
Supreme Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Johnstown, Ohio
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 84 Z28
Engine: 355 (fastburn heads, LT4 HOT cam)
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt, 3.27
Re: Do away with dizzy?
Wow! I've been away for a long time, and just look at what has happened!
Oh no.... Looks like time to start working on the car again......
Oh no.... Looks like time to start working on the car again......
09-12-2009, 08:10 PM
#220
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: largo, Fl
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 93 Z28
Engine: LT1 w/ 727ecm, $59, N* coil packs
Transmission: 6 gear
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: Do away with dizzy?
update....I installed the new wheel, did a new layout for the sensors. I had some problems with the threads in the front of the crankshaft (as in i cleaned about half of the out) so I changed it to 1/2-20. anyway, I fired the car up, and it seems to be working. I had an issue with the car not revving past 4k rpms, and that problem has been solved, cleanly revs to 6500. So, we will be back to tuning with the hope of getting it running. If not, I really like the idea of a single turbo BBC, with a dizzy.....to be continued.
09-13-2009, 04:36 AM
#221
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moorestown, NJ
Posts: 9,962
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Car: 88 Camaro SC
Engine: SFI'd 350
Transmission: TKO 500
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt w/ 3.23's
Re: Do away with dizzy?
Ive only been following this loosely, but it sounds like it would be a cool mod. Id kind of like to switch over to an e-dist. at some point as well, and this sounds like a possible way to do it. Although it would probably be a bit more challanging for me with a PCM. The PCM actually has full control over when and how long the coil fires as its SFI rather than HEI.
So there is the code stuff.......all done using a disassembled bin. Now to get some trigger wheels made. Like mentioned earlier in this thread....this would work great on the LT1 intake swaps and the LT1 engines. I think this is an easy change in the $0D code also. I will have to take a look. DIS along with the E-trans would be nice. Gotta do the spark rev limit mod. though because the revs come up fast when the tires break loose from boost. Pulling spark and adding fuel is a crutch for a real spark rev limiter.
On a side note, I think this setup is better than a 411 PCM. The reason being is that the $0D code can easily be adapted to boost, N2O pulsewidth injection (variable N2O), water/alky motor PWM, extra IATs, oil temp sensor, wastegate control. The list goes on and on. This can't easily be done with the new 411 and up PCMs. Not to mention that those PCMs require $500 and up just to tune ONE of them and a lot of the calibration tables are missing. The $0D can be easily modified to send out new variables on the ALDL. Again, not easily done on the 411 and up ECMs. The only thing the newer ones have going for them is SEFI. Until the tuning gets cheaper or I need a new project it is OBD-I for me. I can live without the SEFI and just run a tad richer so the leaner cyls are happy. Actually, the '279 used in the 98/99 vortecs was the last of that line of PCMs. The base $0D code is there almost in full, with additional coding for the MAF/MAP fueling, SFI, dist., and OBD-II. It looks like it even has support for injector firing phasing as well, which is handy for cams with overlap. Id like to delete the distributer and just use it as a cam sensor, but it would probably be a bit more work to adapt the n-star system as the PCM works quite a bit differently on the timing side. The '411 is an option, but the code appears to be different in them.
So there is the code stuff.......all done using a disassembled bin. Now to get some trigger wheels made. Like mentioned earlier in this thread....this would work great on the LT1 intake swaps and the LT1 engines. I think this is an easy change in the $0D code also. I will have to take a look. DIS along with the E-trans would be nice. Gotta do the spark rev limit mod. though because the revs come up fast when the tires break loose from boost. Pulling spark and adding fuel is a crutch for a real spark rev limiter.
On a side note, I think this setup is better than a 411 PCM. The reason being is that the $0D code can easily be adapted to boost, N2O pulsewidth injection (variable N2O), water/alky motor PWM, extra IATs, oil temp sensor, wastegate control. The list goes on and on. This can't easily be done with the new 411 and up PCMs. Not to mention that those PCMs require $500 and up just to tune ONE of them and a lot of the calibration tables are missing. The $0D can be easily modified to send out new variables on the ALDL. Again, not easily done on the 411 and up ECMs. The only thing the newer ones have going for them is SEFI. Until the tuning gets cheaper or I need a new project it is OBD-I for me. I can live without the SEFI and just run a tad richer so the leaner cyls are happy.
09-13-2009, 09:04 AM
#222
Re: Do away with dizzy?
Ive only been following this loosely, but it sounds like it would be a cool mod. Id kind of like to switch over to an e-dist. at some point as well, and this sounds like a possible way to do it. Although it would probably be a bit more challanging for me with a PCM. The PCM actually has full control over when and how long the coil fires as its SFI rather than HEI.
Actually, the '279 used in the 98/99 vortecs was the last of that line of PCMs. The base $0D code is there almost in full, with additional coding for the MAF/MAP fueling, SFI, dist., and OBD-II. It looks like it even has support for injector firing phasing as well, which is handy for cams with overlap. Id like to delete the distributer and just use it as a cam sensor, but it would probably be a bit more work to adapt the n-star system as the PCM works quite a bit differently on the timing side. The '411 is an option, but the code appears to be different in them.
Actually, the '279 used in the 98/99 vortecs was the last of that line of PCMs. The base $0D code is there almost in full, with additional coding for the MAF/MAP fueling, SFI, dist., and OBD-II. It looks like it even has support for injector firing phasing as well, which is handy for cams with overlap. Id like to delete the distributer and just use it as a cam sensor, but it would probably be a bit more work to adapt the n-star system as the PCM works quite a bit differently on the timing side. The '411 is an option, but the code appears to be different in them.
09-14-2009, 08:39 AM
#223
TGO Supporter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: NJ/PA
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: Yes
Engine: Many
Transmission: Quite a few
Re: Do away with dizzy?
So did I read that correctly, you got it all sorted out and running well?
what did you have to change on the sensors, and what did you end up with for setting TDC, and what did you use for code values for ref, maxadv, maxret?
what was the issue not revv'ing past 4k?
what did you have to change on the sensors, and what did you end up with for setting TDC, and what did you use for code values for ref, maxadv, maxret?
what was the issue not revv'ing past 4k?
09-14-2009, 06:08 PM
#224
Re: Do away with dizzy?
just got off the phone with him after i emailed a new bin with a different setup. and it sounds like it just might be working, atleast close. from what we could tell, its idleing within a few *s of whats showing on the tunerpro dash and goes the right way when reved, maybe higher than called out, but hard to rev, look at the screen and check timing while turning the dial at the same time for one person. so as soon as i get so free time to head that way, later this week. will try to conferm.
the setting, i'll save till i know for sure its running and working right, but the referance angle of 75* seemed to get it close with -54.84 max retard and -6.33 max adv. doesnt seem to be clipping atleast but the over advancing as to whats called for worrys me a bit.
i'll deffently call this progress thou.
the setting, i'll save till i know for sure its running and working right, but the referance angle of 75* seemed to get it close with -54.84 max retard and -6.33 max adv. doesnt seem to be clipping atleast but the over advancing as to whats called for worrys me a bit.
i'll deffently call this progress thou.
09-14-2009, 07:44 PM
#225
Junior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: largo, Fl
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 93 Z28
Engine: LT1 w/ 727ecm, $59, N* coil packs
Transmission: 6 gear
Axle/Gears: 3.73
Re: Do away with dizzy?
you see, running well part is still up in the air. But, at least its doing some things correctly now. The original wheel I made by hand. It ended up a tad bit bigger than luke skaffs cad drawing. Once I got the new laser cut wheel, I had to re-position the sensors to accomdate the new wheel dia. Not going past 4kish I guess was to due to either the original sensor bracket or the handmade wheel wasnt correct. I need to order a WB and let ??? and his laptop attack the tune.
09-15-2009, 02:32 AM
#226
Supreme Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moorestown, NJ
Posts: 9,962
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
Car: 88 Camaro SC
Engine: SFI'd 350
Transmission: TKO 500
Axle/Gears: 9-bolt w/ 3.23's
Re: Do away with dizzy?
In the PCMs, theres just one output that controls the module/coil directly. The module doesnt do what the HEI ones do, in that it independantly fires the coil w/ input from the ECM. Instead, the module just acts as an amplifier of sorts to energize the coil. Basically, from what I see, the PCM calculates the time when the coil needs to fire from the crank reference pulses, and adds additional time on for dwell and latency in the hardware to determine when to energize the coil. It then sends out a waveform to the ignition module.
09-18-2009, 03:56 PM
#227
Re: Do away with dizzy?
so got over and we did some checking. the car runs and drives fine but the timing is close to what's called out at idle and reved up TP is showing 44 and its over 65* with a timing light. and goes up from there. we tried different ref settings, from the 75 it runs best out all the way to 90*. it changes but nothing that made sense really. we both agree that what the timing light is showing is not what's happening when out driving. because it doesn't run like a car with 60* timing, and the knock sensor is hooked up and pulls timing with a tap on the block but not even a single knock count while doing a wot pull to over 6k. with that much timing on a 10.5:1 motor I would think it would have rattled like hell and blown up by now. I don't seem to have a handle on the math of this max min stuff, but if someone that gets it has I min, can you tell me what the max timing cut off would be with the ref, max retard and max adv set to 75, -54.84, -6.33? because it seems like we shouldn't be seeing 60* at the crank. shouldn't it be cliping the timing before that?
09-18-2009, 04:54 PM
#228
Re: Do away with dizzy?
so got over and we did some checking. the car runs and drives fine but the timing is close to what's called out at idle and reved up TP is showing 44 and its over 65* with a timing light. and goes up from there. we tried different ref settings, from the 75 it runs best out all the way to 90*. it changes but nothing that made sense really. we both agree that what the timing light is showing is not what's happening when out driving. because it doesn't run like a car with 60* timing, and the knock sensor is hooked up and pulls timing with a tap on the block but not even a single knock count while doing a wot pull to over 6k. with that much timing on a 10.5:1 motor I would think it would have rattled like hell and blown up by now. I don't seem to have a handle on the math of this max min stuff, but if someone that gets it has I min, can you tell me what the max timing cut off would be with the ref, max retard and max adv set to 75, -54.84, -6.33? because it seems like we shouldn't be seeing 60* at the crank. shouldn't it be cliping the timing before that?
Use a regular old, non-dial back, not fancy timing light when setting timing with a DIS system. The waste-spark seems to play havok with the calculations that the dial back lights need to do.
Some people say that setting the dial back lights to 0 works as well.
09-18-2009, 05:06 PM
#229
Re: Do away with dizzy?
I did not know that. yep using a dial back and we only have a TDC pointer setup with a mark on the wheel, so using the dial for all timing setting. will work on getting a normal one and some more marks. on the wheel or timing strips.
09-18-2009, 07:19 PM
#230
Re: Do away with dizzy?
so reading up on why the normal dial backs don't work on wasted spark setups. it would sure explain what we are seeing.
I have some hope that its right and the light was throwing us
I have some hope that its right and the light was throwing us
09-18-2009, 09:05 PM
#231
Re: Do away with dizzy?
update.. holy **** at this point I'm calling it a success. cornerworker took the wheel and laid out the timing on it from TDC and with the light on 0 it was off 10* everywhere. changed the reference angle to 65 from 75 and bam.. spot on everywhere.
thanks to everyone in this thread for all the help. every idea along the way helped and it couldn't have been done without the code stuff. we've both learned a ton along the way.
now that we are 100% that it works, its off to get a wideband and a 3bar. then see how $59 works so he can start doing the part he loves, which is fabing up the turbos.
I really can't thank everyone enough.
thanks to everyone in this thread for all the help. every idea along the way helped and it couldn't have been done without the code stuff. we've both learned a ton along the way.
now that we are 100% that it works, its off to get a wideband and a 3bar. then see how $59 works so he can start doing the part he loves, which is fabing up the turbos.
I really can't thank everyone enough.
Last edited by ???; 09-20-2009 at 01:08 AM.
09-18-2009, 10:31 PM
#232
Re: Do away with dizzy?
update.. holy at this point I'm calling it a success. cornerworker took the wheel and laid out the timing on it from TDC and with the light on 0 it was off 10* everywhere. changed the reference angle to 65 from 75 and bam.. spot on everywhere. <b /> <b /> <b /> thanks to everyone in this thread for all the help. every idea along the way helped and it couldn't have been done without the code stuff. we've both learned a ton along the way. <b /> <b /> now that we are 100% that it works, its off to get a wideband and a 3bar. then see how $59 works so he can start doing the part he loves, which is fabing up the turbos. <b /> <b /> <b /> <b /> I really can't thank everyone enough.
09-18-2009, 11:47 PM
#233
Re: Do away with dizzy?
I'll have to get a hold of you on $59.org so that I can get some specifics from you about this, I want to run DIS on my T-bucket, and would like to run it on my '71 chev truck with the Crossfire Injection as well....... just because I think It would really screw with people. LOL
I also wanna show with tooth you line up with sensor A to get 10* base too, but pretty much its the one under the one labled #1 on the drawing of the wheel. and we ended up with 65* as the referecnce. not 65+the 10* base like was in the A1 code. so don't get that, but whatever.
I will say everything is pretty touchy, like the size of the wheel needed to be the same as stock, because laying his hand made wheel over the lazer cut one from the cad drawing it very very close, just a little bigger and thinner. so save the hassle and just get a wheel cut out.
I still keep waiting for a phone call saying its not working right lol but no, he said its running and driving nicely. very smooth, even more so than the stock opti setup. I'm suprised it runs as well as it does tune wise, when all I did was copy the ve and spark tables over to the S_aujp bin. cranking and everything seemed fine. I tried copying the AE stuff over but it hated that, so even the ae is stock tpi right now haha.
now I'm wondering if there's anything cool to do with the 24x output
09-19-2009, 07:27 PM
#234
Supreme Member
Re: Do away with dizzy?
This thread stretches out fir most of the last decade. I read thru it this morning and thought I'd hop on thinking perhaps some of you could help further with DIS. This past winter I tried using a hybrid ignition with the LT5 DIS firing LS2 coils on my 92 ZR1. My first attempt was with 1st Gen LS 2 coils fired in waste spark mode by LT5 module providing ground as trigger.
We had built. circuit to provide inverted 5v signal required by coils.
First time it actually fired up and ran until Inj fuse blew.
I decided to pull power feed direct from battery and separated coil
grounds from triggering circuit. Now it ran for about 45sec and then motor died. Looked as if several coils were "fried".
Converted to 2nd Gen LS2 truck coils
with heat sinks. Now the motor would start but not run as if the ECM was not acccepting handoff module to go from
start into run mode. Any thoughts are welcome.
Would like to give this another shot this winter.
We had built. circuit to provide inverted 5v signal required by coils.
First time it actually fired up and ran until Inj fuse blew.
I decided to pull power feed direct from battery and separated coil
grounds from triggering circuit. Now it ran for about 45sec and then motor died. Looked as if several coils were "fried".
Converted to 2nd Gen LS2 truck coils
with heat sinks. Now the motor would start but not run as if the ECM was not acccepting handoff module to go from
start into run mode. Any thoughts are welcome.
Would like to give this another shot this winter.
09-19-2009, 08:32 PM
#235
Re: Do away with dizzy?
if it were me, I'd buy a msd dis-4 cd box and wire that into the ls1 coils in a wasted spark setup and let the ecm control it.. that turns the coils into transforms and just fires from the box, no worrying about inverting anything or melting anything from pulling to much power charging coils. because if you fry that icm, from my research they are big money are hard to find.
at that point you may want to look into using northstar coil packs and icm.
at that point you may want to look into using northstar coil packs and icm.
09-19-2009, 09:07 PM
#236
Re: Do away with dizzy?
if it were me, I'd buy a msd dis-4 cd box and wire that into the ls1 coils in a wasted spark setup and let the ecm control it.. that turns the coils into transforms and just fires from the box, no worrying about inverting anything or melting anything from pulling to much power charging coils. because if you fry that icm, from my research they are big money are hard to find.
at that point you may want to look into using northstar coil packs and icm.
at that point you may want to look into using northstar coil packs and icm.
09-19-2009, 09:19 PM
#237
Re: Do away with dizzy?
yeah, I was expecting him to still have a working lt5 icm on there to wire the msd too. the lt5 icm's would be the nice way to go, but you just can't buy one for less than 500 these days. bit prices for my blood
09-19-2009, 10:23 PM
#239
Supreme Member
Re: Do away with dizzy?
You still need an ignition module of some sort between the MSD box and the ECM. The LT5 ICM should work well for this. The LT5 ICM is closer in functionality to the 60 degree V6 ICM than the N*, since it uses a single crank position sensor and a very similar wheel, though I believe the LT5 needs a 9X reluctor wheel instead of the 7X that the V6 and I4 use.
Because of the cost of an LT5 ICM (I have 2 spares), some of us would like to find a work around.
09-19-2009, 10:57 PM
#240
Re: Do away with dizzy?
I would agree that the ICM needs to the see the coil firing by way of seeing the magnetic field collapsing, which causes spikes back through the primary. I did see a document on teh way the GM DIS ICM works, but it's been years, I'm quite sure it was a link from here though, so some searching should provide some information on that.
Might need to go back to stock LT5 coils, with an extension or breakout box of sorts between the ICM and coils to connect an O-scope to and watch exactly what happens on those outputs, look for any sort of feedback signature. It might also be just as simple as providing a higher load on the outputs, might be sort of like peak and hold injector drivers that need to see a certain current to make the drivers function properly.
Might need to go back to stock LT5 coils, with an extension or breakout box of sorts between the ICM and coils to connect an O-scope to and watch exactly what happens on those outputs, look for any sort of feedback signature. It might also be just as simple as providing a higher load on the outputs, might be sort of like peak and hold injector drivers that need to see a certain current to make the drivers function properly.
09-19-2009, 11:01 PM
#241
Supreme Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Costal Alabama
Posts: 2,136
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Car: 1989 Iroc-Z
Engine: 350, ZZ4 equivalent
Transmission: Pro-Built Road Race 700R4
Axle/Gears: 3.23 Dana 44
Re: Do away with dizzy?
I think the ICM just uses power FETs with no coil monitoring.
Here is a basic a basic block diagram of the internals of the N* module that supports my assumption of no coil monitoring. I don't know much about the LT5 module though.
- Luke
Here is a basic a basic block diagram of the internals of the N* module that supports my assumption of no coil monitoring. I don't know much about the LT5 module though.
- Luke
Last edited by 89 Iroc Z; 09-19-2009 at 11:17 PM.
09-19-2009, 11:11 PM
#242
Supreme Member
Re: Do away with dizzy?
Would you have any idea if there was a difference between the 1gen LS-2 coils and the
Truck LS-2 (with heat sinks). I've assumed they were interchangeable but the 1gen allowed the motor to run while the 2gen only started the motor but never went into run mode. Both cases used the ICM to trigger the coils through a conversion circuit. So the ICM was not in the load path (hope I am describing correctly) as it would be with the stock DIS coils.
Truck LS-2 (with heat sinks). I've assumed they were interchangeable but the 1gen allowed the motor to run while the 2gen only started the motor but never went into run mode. Both cases used the ICM to trigger the coils through a conversion circuit. So the ICM was not in the load path (hope I am describing correctly) as it would be with the stock DIS coils.
09-20-2009, 01:05 AM
#243
Re: Do away with dizzy?
Would you have any idea if there was a difference between the 1gen LS-2 coils and the
Truck LS-2 (with heat sinks). I've assumed they were interchangeable but the 1gen allowed the motor to run while the 2gen only started the motor but never went into run mode. Both cases used the ICM to trigger the coils through a conversion circuit. So the ICM was not in the load path (hope I am describing correctly) as it would be with the stock DIS coils.
Truck LS-2 (with heat sinks). I've assumed they were interchangeable but the 1gen allowed the motor to run while the 2gen only started the motor but never went into run mode. Both cases used the ICM to trigger the coils through a conversion circuit. So the ICM was not in the load path (hope I am describing correctly) as it would be with the stock DIS coils.
have you watched the timing while its running to see what its doing? and if you pull the bypass wire, will it stay running on the base timing, or still die. that would atleast norrow it down some. I have a feeling its over heating the icm and its shutting down before it burns up.
but I'm not the best for these things, some of the other guys know much better.
09-20-2009, 01:21 AM
#244
Re: Do away with dizzy?
This thread stretches out fir most of the last decade. I read thru it this morning and thought I'd hop on thinking perhaps some of you could help further with DIS. This past winter I tried using a hybrid ignition with the LT5 DIS firing LS2 coils on my 92 ZR1. My first attempt was with 1st Gen LS 2 coils fired in waste spark mode by LT5 module providing ground as trigger.
We had built. circuit to provide inverted 5v signal required by coils.
First time it actually fired up and ran until Inj fuse blew.
I decided to pull power feed direct from battery and separated coil
grounds from triggering circuit. Now it ran for about 45sec and then motor died. Looked as if several coils were "fried".
Converted to 2nd Gen LS2 truck coils
with heat sinks. Now the motor would start but not run as if the ECM was not acccepting handoff module to go from
start into run mode. Any thoughts are welcome.
Would like to give this another shot this winter.
We had built. circuit to provide inverted 5v signal required by coils.
First time it actually fired up and ran until Inj fuse blew.
I decided to pull power feed direct from battery and separated coil
grounds from triggering circuit. Now it ran for about 45sec and then motor died. Looked as if several coils were "fried".
Converted to 2nd Gen LS2 truck coils
with heat sinks. Now the motor would start but not run as if the ECM was not acccepting handoff module to go from
start into run mode. Any thoughts are welcome.
Would like to give this another shot this winter.
do these somehow have a trigger wire and stuff?
any diagrams on the coil packs, as we have already wondered about running ls1 packs off the n* icm. maybe its not as easy as I thought it would be.
09-20-2009, 01:29 AM
#245
Re: Do away with dizzy?
hmmm from rereading this, it sounds like the ls1 coil packs are more than just coils... I didn't know that. I always thought they were just coils like normal with a pos and neg input and when you removed the neg side the coil discharged.
do these somehow have a trigger wire and stuff?
any diagrams on the coil packs, as we have already wondered about running ls1 packs off the n* icm. maybe its not as easy as I thought it would be.
do these somehow have a trigger wire and stuff?
any diagrams on the coil packs, as we have already wondered about running ls1 packs off the n* icm. maybe its not as easy as I thought it would be.
I can see why someone would want to use the LSx coils, as in having an in theory, stronger and more direct path of current. Kinda like using a relay under the hood for fog lights, with a control switch in the interior. Small current controls a larger current or more direct path.
Personally I'm looking at using more conventional type coils (simple two wire connection), just triggered by the DIS ICM, I likely won't get to that until well into next year though, since I have more pressing things to do to my car now.
09-20-2009, 01:43 AM
#246
Re: Do away with dizzy?
The LSx coils have built in igniters. They have 4 wires attached to them, which are IIRC, Ignition, ground, trigger (from ECM) and I don't recall what the 4th wire's function is at this time.
I can see why someone would want to use the LSx coils, as in having an in theory, stronger and more direct path of current. Kinda like using a relay under the hood for fog lights, with a control switch in the interior. Small current controls a larger current or more direct path.
Personally I'm looking at using more conventional type coils (simple two wire connection), just triggered by the DIS ICM, I likely won't get to that until well into next year though, since I have more pressing things to do to my car now.
I can see why someone would want to use the LSx coils, as in having an in theory, stronger and more direct path of current. Kinda like using a relay under the hood for fog lights, with a control switch in the interior. Small current controls a larger current or more direct path.
Personally I'm looking at using more conventional type coils (simple two wire connection), just triggered by the DIS ICM, I likely won't get to that until well into next year though, since I have more pressing things to do to my car now.
I have a feeling some of the guys around here can figure out how to make it work. what does it take to trigger the coil to fire? a 5v square wave?
09-20-2009, 08:20 AM
#247
Supreme Member
Re: Do away with dizzy?
Yes the LSx coils are 4 wire with power, trigger, ECM and power grounds.
The LT5 DIS operates like the others where the ICM provides the power ground to the coils acting as the trigger. I decided to use that power grounding as the "sequencer" for the LS coils since obviously the ECM has no such routine. So rather than actually grounding the LS coil, the ICM triggers the circuit we built to provide the proper trigger signal the LS coils are expecting 5v. It also needs to be inverted. The ICM grounds the appropriate coil pair. The power used to power the DIS coils now just powers the trigger circuit and the LS coils get 20a fused BAT power. This is switched on through relays that are also powered from the circuit that was originally providing power to the coils since that is switched power. I know Grumpy had LS coils running in waste spark on his GN. What we don't know us if the LT5 ICM
has some additional intelligence to it that the previous DIS modules didn't have. For example, it appears that dwell is controlled by the ICM in the LT5.
Thanks guys for being interested in this. With the high revving power of the LT5, I believe LS coils could really benefit performance.
09-20-2009, 10:07 AM
#249
Re: Do away with dizzy?
something i ran across. i have no idea if this info is right.
Heres the quote: "the truck coils will work...as long as they're the ls1-style.... The LS2 coils are different from the ls1's. Ls1's need a ground to trigger whereas the ls2's need voltage. The truck coils are supposed to provide a little hotter spark than the vette/f-body coils anyhow"
and link: http://forum.aempower.com/forum/inde...1558.msg119628
Here are the coil part numbers:
AC DELCO # D514A
STANDARD # UF414
GM # 12573190
Cheers
and link: http://forum.aempower.com/forum/inde...1558.msg119628
Here are the coil part numbers:
AC DELCO # D514A
STANDARD # UF414
GM # 12573190
Cheers
09-20-2009, 11:12 AM
#250
Supreme Member
Re: Do away with dizzy?
The difference between the LS1 and LS2 coils was the size of the harness connector. But they are both 4 wire. There's an excellent video on Yahoo of someone having a bench setup for measuring the voltage of these coils. I'll dig it up and post here. Turns out the 2gen Truck coils are nearly 3 times hotter the 1gen LS-1 coils. Something like 120mv vs 40mv. They seem to
like about a 5ms dwell time. You'll see this in the vid.