Thinking of ECM Issues

D-a-n-i-e-l · November 1, 2012

I find myself with time, in between rocket attacks and while waiting for the all clear, to think. Today I started thinking about ECM issues. I would like to use the ECM from a 91 SC Park Ave (same as the 91 Reatta) in my upcoming swap. Reason being is it can control the bypass valve and accounts for vacuum on the SCed engines thus increasing fuel economy during low to moderate throttle. It has been stated, the data stream change in the different years. I am wondering how we know this to be true. Has any one tried to see if the data stream will communicate with the BCM?

Reasons for my doubt of a change:

1) I know the E&C buss did not change. Yes it is a different data stream but it is constant through all GMs in the years it was used.

2) The code readers all read the data stream with no changes even when using the cheapest readers. (same data that is communicated to the BCM)

3) GM is cheap why would they change something that is common in all models? Does not sound like a GM thing to do.

4) If there is a change is it in the memcal or hard programmed in the ECM?

Any one have input on this?

Edited November 1, 2012 by D-a-n-i-e-l (see edit history)

Ronnie · November 1, 2012

Daniel, thank you for all you do for our country. I appreciate it. I hope the rocket attacks you are experiencing are simulated since you say you are in HI.

I wish I could help answer your questions about the ECM and data stream. That is a little over my head.

Also thank you for the help you offer Reatta owners here on this forum.

-Ronnie

November 1, 2012

Glad your keeping your head down, stay safe!

You finally got on the right idea at the end. The difference between the ECM in an SC'd 91 Park Ave and a 91 Reatta is all in the program in the memcal.

The changes in data stream would come about from a change like from BCD I to BCD II and CAN. Those are standards so that all cars can be read with a compatible scanner.

The ECM contains all the circuitry and I/Os needed to control all the functions in all the different cars it is used in. What changes is the software programs that operate the specific functions in a specific car.

In 91, the Reatta got an electronic tranny, other cars got SCs available. The ECM in the 88s thru 90s didn't have the hardware circuits built in to handle the I/O and control for these functions, therefore a new ECM had to be incorporated. But the difference between the one in your car and the SC'd Park Ave is the program in the memcal. There both set up to handle the electronic tranny, but the Park Ave's is set up to handle the parameters that go along with the supercharger. Just like how you reprogrammed yours to adjust the air/fuel requirements and fan turn on temps, you can have the code for the bypass valve incorporated as well. But just because you add the ability to the memcal, if you don't have the needed sensors and solenoids installed, and the wiring harness to connect them to the ECM, it won't do anything.

D-a-n-i-e-l · November 2, 2012

Glad your keeping your head down, stay safe!
You finally got on the right idea at the end. The difference between the ECM in an SC'd 91 Park Ave and a 91 Reatta is all in the program in the memcal.
The changes in data stream would come about from a change like from BCD I to BCD II and CAN. Those are standards so that all cars can be read with a compatible scanner.
The ECM contains all the circuitry and I/Os needed to control all the functions in all the different cars it is used in. What changes is the software programs that operate the specific functions in a specific car.
In 91, the Reatta got an electronic tranny, other cars got SCs available. The ECM in the 88s thru 90s didn't have the hardware circuits built in to handle the I/O and control for these functions, therefore a new ECM had to be incorporated. But the difference between the one in your car and the SC'd Park Ave is the program in the memcal. There both set up to handle the electronic tranny, but the Park Ave's is set up to handle the parameters that go along with the supercharger. Just like how you reprogrammed yours to adjust the air/fuel requirements and fan turn on temps, you can have the code for the bypass valve incorporated as well. But just because you add the ability to the memcal, if you don't have the needed sensors and solenoids installed, and the wiring harness to connect them to the ECM, it won't do anything.

Thank you for the response. The wiring is a non-issue. I would like to get a couple functions from the 91 SCed ECM in my 89, with out losing any functions of the TCC. I have been writing several people on this and keep getting the same answers.

1) It will not work

2) no one has done it

If the data stream can be modified in the memcal then the possibilities that would be opened to gearheads would be amazing.

November 2, 2012

It would be a difficult project to undertake because just like the BCM and CRTC, the software programming used is proprietary with little to no documentation available. The ECMs have been cracked to some extant by the tuners so that they can control some parameters so there is more hope for what you want to do than reprogramming the BCM or CRTC.

Since you want to control the bypass valve you will have probably have to start with a 91 ECM. Then you have to identify all the differences in the connector pinouts from an 89 ECM so that you can get the inputs and outputs in the 89 to the proper pins for the 91 ECM. You would need to identify any different sensors or controllers between the two cars and either change the hardware or software to compensate for the differences. It would probably be better to upgrade to the 91 sensors and controllers if possible especially since they can handle the supercharger needs (more air and fuel flow). Then modify the software in the 91 memcal to work what you've got and disable what you don't, like the electronic tranny bits so you don't get unwanted error codes etc.

My feeling is it can be done, but not worth the trouble for the folks that have the capability to tackle the project. It should be more doable than getting our BCMs reprogrammed to allow better control of the climate control system, or modifying the CRTC to get custom color displays and functions on our CRTs.

D-a-n-i-e-l · November 2, 2012

It would be a difficult project to undertake because just like the BCM and CRTC, the software programming used is proprietary with little to no documentation available. The ECMs have been cracked to some extant by the tuners so that they can control some parameters so there is more hope for what you want to do than reprogramming the BCM or CRTC.
Since you want to control the bypass valve you will have probably have to start with a 91 ECM. Then you have to identify all the differences in the connector pinouts from an 89 ECM so that you can get the inputs and outputs in the 89 to the proper pins for the 91 ECM. You would need to identify any different sensors or controllers between the two cars and either change the hardware or software to compensate for the differences. It would probably be better to upgrade to the 91 sensors and controllers if possible especially since they can handle the supercharger needs (more air and fuel flow). Then modify the software in the 91 memcal to work what you've got and disable what you don't, like the electronic tranny bits so you don't get unwanted error codes etc.
My feeling is it can be done, but not worth the trouble for the folks that have the capability to tackle the project. It should be more doable than getting our BCMs reprogrammed to allow better control of the climate control system, or modifying the CRTC to get custom color displays and functions on our CRTs.

The sensors for the 91 are exactly the same. and will work with the 89 as plug and play. With the exception of the injectors, TPS, and the boost sensor they ar the same on the SCed engine all the way to the 95 year. As far as repinning, I have been doing that for years. I am even runnng the 91 ABS in my 89 as we type.

I have got in contact with a couple GM engineers and depending on how far they are willing to go I may keep chasing this. If not there are several things I want to do in the electronics of this car. So I will be schooling myself to be able to mod the BCM and reconstruct the radio modual, to my specs. It will definately take alot of time effort but I am not getting rid of the car, ever, so why not. Plus it will pay off in my retirement plans as well.

November 2, 2012

The easiest way to start would be to convince a tuner to share their dump of the 91 ECM code and associated documentation. I'm sure several know quite a bit about the code and what sections control what functions. They obviously know how to adjust the air and fuel maps and how to get the cooling fans to turn on at different temps etc. so what other functions are known?

Also would be nice to know what proprietary programming commands were set up for Delco for the processors. They had enough clout to get these created for them if they wanted. Then those of us who used to read and write machine and assembly language code would have a good chance to pick these programs apart and write code to do what we wanted. Of course speaking for myself and maybe for Padgett and KDirk, we're probably as rusty as the undercarriage of a snow-belt beater at doing this anymore, and the time and effort to create a test setup and do this work work would be a substantial undertaking.

padgett · November 2, 2012

Look on the 'net for a file called "aldlstuff.zip", it explains the different streams.The issue is that the stream does not say "speedometer" for instance, the BCM receives the engine parameter stream and knows that for a 1988, the speedometer is the n'th byte in the stream. Now one time I think Harry had a 1989 with a 1990 MemCal and his speedo was reading 255 mph all of the time because the 90 Memcal program was sending the speedo in a different byte than the 89 BCM was expecting. They have to match.AFAIR (haven't looked for some time) the ALDL stream was generated near the TOM (top of memory) in the 88. I suspect that once you know what to look for, it would be easy to find.

KDirk · November 3, 2012

Well,

I will add a few details regarding programming (in general) of GM modules. Almost all used some variant of the Motorola 6800 series CPU, and as MC stated, there were likely customized variants made to GM request as they used enough of these chips they could get that done. Programming itself was done mostly in a language called "Modula-GM" as this was a high level language well suited for safety critical embedded systems. This of course was then compiled down to Motorola 6800 machine code. Probably lots of guys with major knowledge of the 6800 platform, but the custom bits (I/O ports and embedded ROM not present stock variants of the chip mostly I'd imagine) are the tough part.

As discussed already, the ECM is the most documented (though that isn't saying much) of any of the major modules. I'd start with a dump of a MEM-CAL EPROM from both an 89 and a 91 and do a bit comparison to see how much is the same. Obviously, you need some foreknowledge of programming and machine code in general to have any clue what you are looking at. Then, you might be able to at least drill down the parts of the code related to transmission control, and other sensors and such that were added in the 91 SC engine vs. the 89. How to graft the needed sections of code into the 89 PROM is the tough part. Doing this in machine code is a lot tougher than in C or basic as you can't just insert lines of program code without offsetting the jumps in execution (which are done by address - often relative to the starting point of the jump, not a clearly defined line number) for the remainder of the code.

If grafting the 91 PCM into the 89, the major hurdle is getting it to talk correctly to the BCM as this controls the data flowing to the IPC and CRT. Without proper ECM data into the BCM, the instrumentation will either not work at all, or will at least be very confused.

What is needed for this kind of work is a bus analyzer to eavesdrop on the data going from the ECM to the BCM in real time from both ECM's (in a working environment, so basically in car, with the engine running - unless you want to build out a test rig/simulator) to see what portions of the data stream are different. Most likely there will be added bytes to account for transmission control and other parameters related to the supercharger in the 1991 stream, vs. the 1989 stream. Quite possibly also different ordering of bytes for the parameters that are passed for 89 vs. 91. And don't forget that there is probably a header a the start of each packet/message that identifies the originating node (module) and it's intended target node as a multi-drop network of the sort used in these cars pretty well requires that for proper routing of data. These header ID's may be (and probably are) different for similar modules of different years.

I've been toying with the CRTC program for a while and have done some mildly interesting things but it is 64K of machine code and is very difficult to determine (for me anyway) what some portions of the code are doing. Haven't even messed with the BCM yet except to dump the 2816 EEPROM which holds the odometer, option programming content and - oddly enough - the reminder messages on the 88/89 cars. I believe it would also store the cell phone speed dial directory if the car were so equipped. It was funny to see old reminders in there when I pulled up the contents of that IC with my programming rig. I also identified the odometer setting (where it is stored in the PROM chip, but not yet how to change the value as it is encrypted) so I have some understanding of that portion but not of the BCM program itself which is in the larger 27256 UVEPROM.

Someday I may actually do half of what I hope to with the CRT system. Besides being fuzzy on a lot of what is going on in that code, I lack the time to gain a better understanding so I can start doing more modification of it.

KDirk

padgett · November 3, 2012

Daniel: Did I send you one of my CD's with all the various ECM (almost all documented) and BCM (just a dump). Also had a lot of -253 binaries. If not I can probably reconstruct it.I've been working mostly with OBD-II these days but still have those files including the special ones for an 88 computer with an L67 and Getrag. (Somewhere).

Machiner 55 · November 4, 2012

I too am thinking of ECM issues but, some may consider this a hijack attempt on this thread. If it is, I’ll delete and re-post to a new thread but, with all the talk here about bits and bytes, ECM’s, proms, loops opened and closed, data streams and baud rates, I think this post may be appropriate. And, because I’ve scoured the Internet only to find that the finest minds for resolving this issue are right here on this forum I think it’s in the right place. Allow me to present a brief (grief) history

I have this issue with the E024 popping up due to the failure of TCC lockup. The IPC readout and tach read OK but the ECM data for VSS input shows 0 MPH all time no matter what. Also, while the fault exists, the cruise control doesn’t work and, when the car is first started, it idles high at least until the code is cleared. The code comes back when conditions exist for TCC lockup.

This all started after swapping out the engine and transmission from my ’88 to my ’89. It was done in two steps. First, I believe I installed the ’88 engine in the ’89 Reatta then about six months later, I had to put the original ’88 transmission in as the ‘89 failed (or visa-versa). Trying to get all the parts to play nice with each other, I swapped the VSS units (which required splicing and re-splicing the connector as they are different for each of the sending units. Swapped out the ECM’s and the Mem-Cals as well as the sending units in different combinations and the only combo that I can come up with where everything is compatible (except for the E024 issue) is the ’89 ECM with the ’88 Mem-Cal running in it and the sending unit from the ’88 transmission. To add even more confusion to the situation, the trans. from the 88 isn’t the original transmission. When I purchased the ’88 Reatta, the trans. was shot. I acquired a compatible trans. from a local salvage yard. If I remember correctly, I was told that it came from a ’90 Bonneville. It may or may not have. In any event, at the time, it worked fine with no issues while it was installed in the ’88 with the ’88 Reattas’ VSS attached to it.

So, to boil this down, I have an ’89 Reatta with a transmission that may or may not have come from a ‘90 Bonneville which has the VSS from the original ’88 transmission properly attached and wired correctly. An aftermarket ECM for an ‘89 (which was working fine before the transmission change-out) running with the Mem-Cal from my ’88. (If I put the ’89 Mem-Cal back in, the speedometer reads way high. I don’t recall if it reads 255 MPH as Padgett has mentioned but it is out of proportion with the actual speed. I also can’t tell you what the CRT would read with the ’89 Mem-Cal installed as, at the time, I assumed it would be the same as the speedo and didn’t check it.) Anyway, with the ’89 ECM and the ’88 Mem-Cal installed, the speedo works fine but the speed reading shown on the CRT always reads “0” when called up in the diagnostics. I can clear any and all codes and drive around town all day every day and all is right as rain. But, get on the highway and into conditions that initiate a TCC lockup and it will set a code EO24 every time. Go home and shut down the engine. Start it up some time later and the idle will be high, over 2K RPM. Enter diagnostics and clear the EO24 code and the engine RPM will drop down to around 650-675 RPM and all will be well until the next time I hit the highway. The question I pose is this. Aside from obtaining another transmission from an ’89 Reatta (with the appropriate VSS attached) and re-installing the original Mem-Cal that came with the car along with the ’89 ECM, is there a work around, a line of code to be burned or re-burned or edited, a specific spot to hit with a hammer or this or that or something… anything… to eliminate the EO24 code from popping up? Someone here, Bushwack I think, mentions something about a persistent high idle. Maybe there’s a fix here for that too.

In advance, thank you for your time.

Regards,

John F.

padgett · November 4, 2012

Interesting, I was not aware that there were two VSSs. Did know the Getrag was different and needed a Dakota Digital adapter to correct. E039 is the Torque Converter Clutch error and triggers when it is supposed to be locked but the RPMs do not drop. E024 is the VSS and happens when the speed vs RPM gets far out. Usually happens when the VSS stops working.

Your problem may be in that the VSS circuit is different in an 88. It goes from the VSS to the BCM and from the BCM to the ECM. If the VSS fails in an 88 you will proobably also get a B124 error. In the 89 the VSS goes straight to the ECM.

Now the 88 speedo is driven by the BCM so what this sounds like is the Reatta is now wired as an 88 and has the 88 BCM but you have an 89 ECM so are getting the dash display from the BCM but the ECM is looking for a direct input and not from the BCM.

See if you are getting a MPH reading on BD60 and not on ED12.

Edited November 4, 2012 by padgett (see edit history)

Ronnie · November 4, 2012

Interesting, I was not aware that there were two VSSs. Did know the Getrag was different and needed a Dakota Digital adapter to correct. E039 is the Torque Converter Clutch error and triggers when it is supposed to be locked but the RPMs do not drop. E024 is the VSS and happens when the speed vs RPM gets far out. Usually happens when the VSS stops working.
Your problem may be in that the VSS circuit is different in an 88. It goes from the VSS to the BCM and from the BCM to the ECM. If the VSS fails in an 88 you will proobably also get a B124 error. In the 89 the VSS goes straight to the ECM.
Now the 88 speedo is driven by the BCM so what this sounds like is the Reatta is now wired as an 88 and has the 88 BCM but you have an 89 ECM so are getting the dash display from the BCM but the ECM is looking for a direct input and not from the BCM.
See if you are getting a MPH reading on BD60 and not on ED12.

There are actually 3 different VSSs for the Reatta.

1- 1988 only

2- 1989-1990

3- 1991 only

I found this out when I was doing research to add them to The Reatta Store,

The 3 different sensors don't look the same and I don't think the signal is the same for all three. I'm surprised the '88 and ''89 sensors are working at all when being mixed and matched with different BCMs ('88 and '89 BCM is different), and mixing different year ECM PROMs (ECM is the same for both years with the exception of the PROMs).

I have some trouble following John's long post. It seems the car is an '89 from what I read. I would use an '89 BCM, ECM PROM and VSS. They should all be compatible and work together to solve the problems. Just my 2 cents.

November 4, 2012

Went thru this dilemma back when KDirk got his 88 and the speedo didn't read correctly.

As Padgett points out how the ECM/BCM receive the input from the VSS, process the info and display it is very different in an 88 vs 89-91.

The ECM/BCM modules should be the same in 88s-90s, but the programs in their memcals are different.

I think you should have gone with an 89 VSS and ECM memcal. If you go all 88, the speedo should be OK,there are other things that won't be quite right in your

89.

If you have tried the 89 VSS and ECM memcal and they didn't work, you may have a wiring issue or an 88 BCM memcal installed too.

http://forums.aaca.org/f116/88-problem-has-me-stumped-303851.html

Ronnie · November 4, 2012

This all started after swapping out the engine and transmission from my ’88 to my ’89. It was done in two steps. First, I believe I installed the ’88 engine in the ’89 Reatta then about six months later, I had to put the original ’88 transmission in as the ‘89 failed (or visa-versa). Trying to get all the parts to play nice with each other, I swapped the VSS units (which required splicing and re-splicing the connector as they are different for each of the sending units. Swapped out the ECM’s and the Mem-Cals as well as the sending units in different combinations and the only combo that I can come up with where everything is compatible (except for the E024 issue) is the ’89 ECM with the ’88 Mem-Cal running in it and the sending unit from the ’88 transmission. To add even more confusion to the situation, the trans. from the 88 isn’t the original transmission. When I purchased the ’88 Reatta, the trans. was shot. I acquired a compatible trans. from a local salvage yard. If I remember correctly, I was told that it came from a ’90 Bonneville. It may or may not have. In any event, at the time, it worked fine with no issues while it was installed in the ’88 with the ’88 Reattas’ VSS attached to it.
So, to boil this down, I have an ’89 Reatta with a transmission that may or may not have come from a ‘90 Bonneville which has the VSS from the original ’88 transmission properly attached and wired correctly.
Regards,
John F.

John which one of these VSSs are you using?

1. 1988 Model

2. 1989-90 model

3. 1991 model

Edited November 4, 2012 by Ronnie (see edit history)

Machiner 55 · November 5, 2012

To all who've responded, Thank you.

To Padgett.

My son has the car right now so I can't check the reading on BD60 right now and it may be a week until I can do so. But, I will check and get back with you all asap.

Ronnie.

None of the above.

When I install the VSS unit #2 labeled as a1989-90 model is when the speedo reads way high. The unit I'm currently running on the car is the other one pictured in this response. The one on the left is installed right now. The one on the right, as you can see, has crimp connectors attached. That's because I kept swapping it out, trying to make it work, while trying different combinations with the ECM and Memcals. The different VSS having different connectors so as to force one to think about what it is one is about to do.

Mc_Reatta.

I will try your suggestions. Also, you bring up a good point about the '88 BCM Memcal. It was about 2 years ago that this issue started. I gave up on it after a while and just recently decided to put this problem to bed once and for all. I think I may have pulled the BCM out while in the process of trying to get the right combo to make all the components to play nice with each other. So, I'll have to dig it out and see just exactly I have in there. Thanks for providing the "88 problem, has me stumped" link

These are all really great ideas that I will address just as soon as I get the car back and I have a day or two to dedicate into this issue. Looks like it'll probably be 11/14 thru 11/17 when I get the chance to work on it.

Again, thank you all so much. Lots of great input here. Also to KDirk who responded to my PM.

Worn out now gotta go.

John F.

Edited November 5, 2012 by Machiner 55
Added text to Ronnie and Mc_Reatta. (see edit history)

Machiner 55 · November 5, 2012

Mc_Reatta,

"I think you should have gone with an 89 VSS and ECM memcal."

Do I understand this to mean an '89 VSS with an '89 ECM and a '89 Memcal?

If yes, then I have to say that, if memory serves me correctly, that this was the arrangement I started out with after installing the transmission that came from the salvage yard which was originally installed in my '88 prior to being transferred to my '89 where it currently resides.

John F.

Ronnie · November 5, 2012

Ronnie.
None of the above.
When I install the VSS unit #2 labeled as a1989-90 model is when the speedo reads way high. The unit I'm currently running on the car is the other one pictured in this response. The one on the left is installed right now. The one on the right, as you can see, has crimp connectors attached. That's because I kept swapping it out, trying to make it work, while trying different combinations with the ECM and Memcals. The different VSS having different connectors so as to force one to think about what it is one is about to do.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]161765[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]161766[/ATTACH]

The VSS is just an encoder that generates a pulsed signal when it turns. The '88 VSS produces a different number of pulses per revolution than the '89-90. That is why you cannot mix and match them with the electronics from different years. Besides that the signal from the VSS was routed differently between the ECM and BCM in '88. The more I read about the '88 model the more differences I find between it and the '89 model.

The photo of the VSS on the left, that you say you are currently using, is identical to the VSS in my '88 model. For it to work properly you will need to have the PROM/MemCal/chip from an '88 model and I suspect you will also need an '88 BCM. There is a difference between the 1988 and 1989-90 BCMs. I'm not sure what and I'm not sure that it matters but the ability to read the '88 VSS correctly might be the reason.

If you go with the VSS on the right you will need to stay with all 1989-90 electronics.

The VSS in my photo #1 above is for an '88 model it just looks different because it is an aftermarket brand.

November 5, 2012

Mc_Reatta,
"I think you should have gone with an 89 VSS and ECM memcal."
Do I understand this to mean an '89 VSS with an '89 ECM and a '89 Memcal?
If yes, then I have to say that, if memory serves me correctly, that this was the arrangement I started out with after installing the transmission that came from the salvage yard which was originally installed in my '88 prior to being transferred to my '89 where it currently resides.
John F.

Unlike the BCM, the ECM module was the same for both 88 and 89. The difference was just in which memcal was installed. The BCM modules as well as the memcals inside were different for each year.

In order to get the speedo to work properly, all items (VSS, ECM memcal, BCM, BCM memcal) need to be for the same model year. But if you go all 88, other things will probably not work correctly in your 89.

Believe the link to the other thread I provided shows proper ECM and BCM memcal PNs so you can verify what you have installed. Not sure it has the BCM PN for the two years so you may have to search that out to confirm you don't have the right BCM memcal installed in the wrong BCM module.

D-a-n-i-e-l · November 5, 2012

Daniel: Did I send you one of my CD's with all the various ECM (almost all documented) and BCM (just a dump). Also had a lot of -253 binaries. If not I can probably reconstruct it.I've been working mostly with OBD-II these days but still have those files including the special ones for an 88 computer with an L67 and Getrag. (Somewhere).

Padgett,

I did not get one from you. I would like to have one, it would make a great starting point. I cannot start on the programming part while I am here, but I will be reading up on it in my spare time here. I also have a friend here that loves to write programing code for diffrent things. So I will be picking his brain and try to convince him to give me a hand on this.

Down side is I will have to use the 89 ECM for the swap just to get it completed and on the road. I will not be dropping the programming thing as there are more than a handful of things I want to modify to my liking. On that note, if any one has a dash harness that they would like to donate to the cause, it would help. I have evey other component to set up a bench test system. Just never got around to pulling a harness and the rest of my "play" money will most likely be tied up in my swap, at least until it is 100%

Machiner 55 · November 6, 2012

Daniel,

First of all, I’d like to thanks for not chewing me out for jacking your thread.

Second, I dismantled my ’88 and kept everything except the body and the rear suspension frame. I’m kicking myself now for doing something I probably shouldn’t be admitting in public. When I got to the point where I had to decide whether to cut the wiring harness at the point where it goes through the firewall or not, I erred on the side of stupidity. I said to myself no one’s gonna want or need this harness. The connectors at the ends yah but, not the whole thing. Intact. Damn…

So, the engine compartment harness, where it goes through the firewall on both the left and right sides has been cut. I’m going to keep the engine compartment components connectors and such, but you are welcome to the wiring that was between the firewall and the dash gratis for the cause. Just PM me with your address and mailing instructions. Now, keep in mind that it might be a week or so before I can tear into the pile that was my ’88. What’s the latest you’d like to have it?

John F.

Edited November 6, 2012 by Machiner 55 (see edit history)

Machiner 55 · November 6, 2012

Ronnie,

The photo of the VSS on the left, that you say you are currently using, is identical to the VSS in my '88 model.

Thank you for confirming that for me. One less variable.

John F.

Thinking of ECM Issues

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest Mc_Reatta

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest Mc_Reatta

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest Mc_Reatta

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest Mc_Reatta

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Guest Mc_Reatta

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in