And the Reason

> wrote in message
...
>I looked on the web for, Troubleshooting 1990 Chevrolet van 350 fuel
> system
>
> One of the sites there said something about a noid light.So then I
> looked up, Noid Light
>
> It's all Greek to me.
> cuhulin
>

> wrote in message
...
>I looked on the web for, Troubleshooting 1990 Chevrolet van 350 fuel
> system
>
> One of the sites there said something about a noid light.So then I
> looked up, Noid Light
>
> It's all Greek to me.
> cuhulin

Greek culture has nothing to do with fuel injection.

"AZ Nomad" > wrote in message
> The ECU may also have the logic for querying the key. The only real way
> to
> fix a bad reader is to replace it. Get one from a junk yard if don't feel
> like paying the dealer's 1,000% markup.

It may be the best way, but certainly is not the only way, nor the cheapest
way.

You can shunt the key reader with an equivalent resistance, as was mentioned
earlier. (Now, anyone who challenges the term "shunt" is a cocksucker.. You
know what I am saying..)

There are two issues in this system.. If the FGM system doesnt work, then
the
starter can be approached directly, AND the injectors can be fired
independently
of the freaking security system..

Then it should start, and having started should run.

There is a special place in Hell, next to the furnace, for GM engineers.

"aarcuda69062" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "HLS" > wrote:
>
>> "AZ Nomad" > wrote in message
>> > You're absolutely insane.
>>
>> Sorry I even asked. Too many people get hung up on the semantics, but
>> I suspect (1) everyone knows what Im talking about, or (2) some have no
>> clue about this system.
>>
>> Let's drop the waveform word. I wanted to know how to fool the system
>> into injecting fuel during startup if the security system was balky.
>>
>> Apparently nobody knows.
>
> When the security system is acting up, does the starter work?

Where are you? Do you want to fix this POS for me?
If I knew any experts here who would take this car and return me a ride,
I would be most happy.

In article > ,
"HLS" > wrote:

> "aarcuda69062" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "HLS" > wrote:
> >
> >> "AZ Nomad" > wrote in message
> >> > You're absolutely insane.
> >>
> >> Sorry I even asked. Too many people get hung up on the semantics, but
> >> I suspect (1) everyone knows what Im talking about, or (2) some have no
> >> clue about this system.
> >>
> >> Let's drop the waveform word. I wanted to know how to fool the system
> >> into injecting fuel during startup if the security system was balky.
> >>
> >> Apparently nobody knows.
> >
> > When the security system is acting up, does the starter work?
>
> Where are you?

Right here. 20 or so miles north of Milwaukee, about two miles east of
the big pond.

> Do you want to fix this POS for me
> If I knew any experts here who would take this car and return me a ride,
> I would be most happy.

You said that you installed a bypass resistor. Where and how exactly
did you install it?

Does it set codes when it no starts?

In article >,
"HLS" > wrote:

> "aarcuda69062" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >,
> > "HLS" > wrote:
> >
> >> "AZ Nomad" > wrote in message
> >> > You're absolutely insane.
> >>
> >> Sorry I even asked. Too many people get hung up on the semantics, but
> >> I suspect (1) everyone knows what Im talking about, or (2) some have no
> >> clue about this system.
> >>
> >> Let's drop the waveform word. I wanted to know how to fool the system
> >> into injecting fuel during startup if the security system was balky.
> >>
> >> Apparently nobody knows.
> >
> > When the security system is acting up, does the starter work?
>
> Absolutely NOT. It could be routed past the security system, but the lack
> of injector function would still not let the car start.
>
> To totally bypass this GM abortion would require direct connection to the
> starter, AND activation of the injectors outside the normal startup cycle.

I think one work around would be to have a new custom PROM burned that
ignores the VATS function.

On Mar 21, 7:56*pm, "HLS" > wrote:
> "Comboverfish" > wrote in message news:50e1a360-a76c-
> > So again, the scope generates the waveform.
>
> > Toyota MDT in MO
>
> No, it doesnt. It makes the waveform visible to the observer..

This is all rather trivial and semantic-y, but it does appear that you
are ignoring the definition(s) of waveform. Whatever. It certainly
doesn't matter in the end; like someone else typed, we all understand
the crux of the biscuit.

Toyota MDT in MO

On Mar 21, 9:19*pm, AZ Nomad > wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 19:56:39 -0500, HLS > wrote:
> >"Comboverfish" > wrote in message news:50e1a360-a76c-
> >> So again, the scope generates the waveform.
>
> >> Toyota MDT in MO
> >No, it doesnt. It makes the waveform visible to the observer..
>
> By fish's logic, there's no such thing as a electrical waveform.

Explain the rationale which led you to this conclusion. When seeing
that I posted agreed upon definitions for [electrical] waveform, how
would one come to the conclusion that I'm a disbeliever in "electrical
waveforms"?

> The best thing to do with the fool is put him into a killfile.

That's clearly the best policy, just like you have proven to do in the
past.

Toyota MDT in MO

"aarcuda69062" > wrote in message news:nonelson-

> You said that you installed a bypass resistor. Where and how exactly
> did you install it?

Wires going to the contacts in the ignition switch were removed and the
equivalent
key resistance (dont remember just which resistor value just now) was
soldered
into place. Taped and put back out of the way.


> Does it set codes when it no starts?

As best I remember, no. It has set phantom codes on occasions
but they apparently have no bearing on anything. As I remember it, they come
from the leveling system.

The Check Engine light is on, due to the cam magnet having taken a dive.
That never causes any real problems either. I have a block prepped, and all
the
new parts to put in a fresh engine, but have not wanted to get involved with
this
due to the electrical problems.

This series of car is KNOWN for electrical problems.

In article > ,
"HLS" > wrote:

> "aarcuda69062" > wrote in message news:nonelson-
>
> > You said that you installed a bypass resistor. Where and how exactly
> > did you install it?
>
> Wires going to the contacts in the ignition switch were removed and the
> equivalent
> key resistance (dont remember just which resistor value just now) was
> soldered
> into place. Taped and put back out of the way.

I think it would be worthwhile to move the resistor to as close to the
VATS module as possible.

>
> > Does it set codes when it no starts?
>
> As best I remember, no. It has set phantom codes on occasions
> but they apparently have no bearing on anything. As I remember it, they come
> from the leveling system.

It should code if the VATs prevented a start.
It's entirely possible the problem lies elsewhere like the starter
inhibit relay.

> The Check Engine light is on, due to the cam magnet having taken a dive.
> That never causes any real problems either. I have a block prepped, and all
> the
> new parts to put in a fresh engine, but have not wanted to get involved with
> this
> due to the electrical problems.

I don't blame you.

> This series of car is KNOWN for electrical problems.

I know. The manager at the local NAPA had one. Thank god he finally
totaled it. The electrical systems are akin to what's found on
aftermarket customized vans.