Bernie is talking about the difference in the manual and auto computers saying that the auto computer was the way to go. That's a new one to me. Presumably he's talking about the A9L vs. the A9P, and I always thought the A9L was the way to go. Any thoughts?
Also, WTH is he talking about the computer pulling timing when it pings? I am not following what he's referring to. Is it possible he's thinking of the EEC V cars?
Also, WTH is he talking about the computer pulling timing when it pings? I am not following what he's referring to. Is it possible he's thinking of the EEC V cars?
I remember a thread on corral where someone dissected the coding between the a9l and a9p and found there really wasn’t a significant difference.
This was after years of the “auto computer more aggressive myth”
Found it. Post 6 and 8
A9L vs A9P vs X3Z
Can anyone tell me the difference in performance between these three computers? Will there be any appreciable difference in street performance on a basically stock 93 cobra motor when using any of the three? Ford must have used the X3Z on the 93 for a reason. I'm converting a stock GT motor...
Yeah, what he seemed to be saying was that both chips would pull timing due to ping and then the A9P would add it back in more quickly. I also considered that maybe he meant that there was a shift-retard. Neither, so far as I understand it, is the case. The computer has no way to detect ping, and it does not pull timing on the shifts. However, according to the link you sent, the difference between the two is about 1/2 a degree at WOT at certain RPM. At the top, it's the same.
The partial load tables have some significant departures, though. If they were measuring the timing in that range and assuming that it applied at WOT, then they may have easily been misled by their observations.
The partial load tables have some significant departures, though. If they were measuring the timing in that range and assuming that it applied at WOT, then they may have easily been misled by their observations.