check it out

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eb...957570&r=0&t=0

sidemarker

 

GARBAGE!!!!! I already emailed this guy tons of questions. He won't tell me what it is, what it looks like, what kind of pieces it is, all he would tell me was it plugs into a sensor to fool the computer. I asked what sensor, & how, & he would not tell me. Gave me a run around answer. Considering he has lauctions for the same thing for alot of other cars, I suspect it is either a scam, or a "one size fits all" thing, that will not work at all.

 

Read the comments in seller's Feedback Profile. There IS a sucker born every minute.

Homemade junk. For $10 bucks, he can rip people off and they will just accept the loss.

 

And the best part.... its good for 20rwhp our cars are front wheel drive. :P

 

I was looking at his feedback... and what does PRIVATE mean on the item number?

I don't think I've seen that before.

 

" L O S E R " !

 

Keep in mind that there has been some discussion on the board in regards to timing adj. and computer ECU/ sensor mods.

I believe that Scalbert is still doing some testing to "fool" the ECU. Not that I agree with what is posted on Ebay but somebody could of come up with a simple proprietary device that may just work. I just wonder if it keeps the check engine lights at ease.

 

WHOA, look at all that NEGATIVE feedback!!!!!!!! If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I should have some log files this weekend of the sensor voltages which will be the beginning of determining what the values should be to see gains.

 

Can we sic the FTC on this guy?

Unless he has proof somewhere that there exists at least ONE CL, TL or RL that gained 20hp, he is falsely advertising his product, is he not?

After seeing that this guy has several HUNDRED auctions like this one, I would like to see this guy put out of business and PUNISHED for trying to take advantage of people.

This kinda shia, just makes me sick to my stomach.

Can we petition eBay if he is making false claims to have his auctions removed if the FTC won't investigate something like this?

 

please dont get ripped off by this dude, this is a old trick. heres how we do it on the fbods

The idea here is that the computer reads the resistance generated in the IAT sensor and alters the RATE of advance. It does not alter the maximum advance, simply the rate the timing is advanced. A 4.7K ohm resistor (radio shack less that $2 for a pack) used in place of the actual sensor, signals the computer to read 51º ambient air. The result (on a warmer day) will be a sharpened throttle response for the first 1/3 of the pedal travel. It is best used on warmer days, such as a humid night at the track. You will need to run 93 or better or the motor has a tendancy to rattle a bit and will cause some knock retard with crappy gas. When done racing, remove the resistor and reconnect the IAT harness and you are back to stock. It can be left that way if you wish. I ran mine for a few years that way, but discovered the car only responded to the mod in warmer than 51º temps. When operating in colder weather, use the stock setup.

 

Just FYI, our PCM supplies a voltage to the thermister so that as the temperature increases the voltage output decreases. So our PCM reads a voltage signal, not a resistance signal. Adding a resistor in series would be worthless for us unless a divider circuit is used and even then you would be fooling the PCM into thinking it is warmer. Better yet, just feed the full 5VDC source and make the PCM think it is -4 F.

The sensor voltage output is close to the following:

0 VDC = 302 F
5 VDC = -4 F

But there is another and prominent issue. The F-Bodies use a MAF as the primary sensor for determining load. We do not have a MAF, our PCM uses a speed density system which utilizes the IAT and MAP signal (temperature and pressure) to calculate the load and subsequent fuel requirements. By seriously altering the IAT you can significantly influence the fueling. If you make it think is is colder out then you will have an imediate rich condition (at least that is better than the other side).

The ECT does play a significant role in the timing advance calculations. But again, this is a voltage supplied sensor identical to the IAT.

 

Looks like rail-to-rail amp time

Did you every get your hands on an auto-tap (or other OBDII unit) to allow any "codes thrown" to be cleared out of the "flash" memory?

The other issue concerns change of temp (season) issues. Tell me if I am wrong here...

If the trim tables will correct for too-rich conditions with the op-amp faking 0-40 degrees F (with it really being in the 60-90 degree F range), how fast will the trim tables (short/long) "adjust" to work properly with a cold morning start at 30-degrees F?

(For example, assume the trim tables adjust the fuel-air mixture at mid-day temps (with the op-amp and friends); then the car gets parked overnight and a cold front moves in and its 20-degrees outside the next morning. Won't the O2 sensor voltage report a, "too lean signal", and force the CPU to start moving the tables (short, then long) to correct? Since all the manufactures have proprietary "algos" for this interaction, is it possible that a code could be thrown if the "change in ambient temp" (temp rate of change) is extreme?)

Comments?

 

Yea, it is nice to see there are several 5 VDC sources out of the PCM. With the rail we won't overrun the expected signal at any time.

Not yet but I will probably just order and try http://www.obd-2.com next week. Once I start adjusting the signals it will be a nessesity as I know I'll do something wrong and set a code. But before I do I need to verify that it can report knock retard as this will be needed information.

Yep, the exact problem with an always present adjustment to signals. First issue does involve FT adjustment, which the PCM will do in a matter of minutes negating any fuel changes which may of been used to gain power. If you do alter the signal which the PCM will correct for then you have gained nothing other than causing the PCM to hunt to the true stoich values between a warm shut down and a cold start up.

The other issue is the relevance of the IAT reading and should it be altered. Since we do use speed density its true value is needed more to keep fueling in line. But how much of an impact does the IAT have on timing advance?? According to the Helms the ECT has more of an impact on timing.

So this brings up whether or not to modify the IAT, the ECT is a definite as it appears right now since we are really only wanting more timing. But should the IAT be messed with?? This will be easy enough to test but I do need to see O2 voltage outputs and knock retard values to determine if things are getting a little off.

But regardless if I do modify the IAT and/or the MAP signals (fueling issues) I will be using an analog multiplexer to switch the signal outputs. It looks like the TPS can be used to cause the switch in that the modified signal will only be used at whatever level throttle input I decide (probably 50%). I am still debating on first trying a set signal before incoporating and op-amp, but that will need to be tested. So only the altered signals will be used at WOT (when the PCM is in open loop not adjusting the FT)keeping everything in line at cruise and idle situations.