Date:         Thu, 16 Mar 2000 08:47:16 -0500
Reply-To:     David Beierl <dbeierl@IBM.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         David Beierl <dbeierl@IBM.NET>
Subject:      Re: Digitool diagnostics
Comments: To: KENWILFY@AOL.COM
In-Reply-To:  <5b.3336d7c.260237b0@aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 08:12 AM 3/16/2000 , KENWILFY@AOL.COM wrote:
>The problem that you have here is if you had some kind of shunt to allow you
>to test a van with the digitool without removing the ECU, how would you
>install it?  The only way would be to unplug the ECU, plug in this shunt
>connector, and then plug the ECU connector into some kind of other connector
>(that might not exsist) and hook up the digitool.  This is actually more work
>than just swapping in a digitool equipped ECU.  The only advantage this would

Ken, the "shunt connector" would simply be a male-female pair of the exact
connector that the ECU already uses, wired straight through pin-to-pin --
with (ideally) a *pair* of Digitool connectors, one set up for Digijet and
one for Digifant.  Using it would be like falling off a log, except for
making sure you had it plugged in for the proper computer.  The only snag
is that such connectors aren't easy to find -- someone ?David Marshall? was
trying to locate a supply earlier, not sure how far he got.  They also
might easily run $20 each, or about $50 for materials for the complete
connector quad -- but from that point forward setting up a van for testing
would take about 90 seconds.  *Also* it would provide better results b/c an
intermittent ECU failure could be influencing the problem as well -- using
a different ECU would tend to conceal this problem.

david
ps -- have you forgotten me? :)

David Beierl - Providence, RI
  http://pws.prserv.net/synergy/Vanagon/
'84 Westy "Dutiful Passage"
'85 GL "Poor Relation"