1228746 vs 1228747 ECM?
09-10-2009, 04:14 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Okinawa, Japan
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1989 RS
Engine: 350 TBI
Transmission: 700R4 by Monster transmition
Axle/Gears: Borg warner 3.08 posi
1228746 vs 1228747 ECM?
I currently am running the 1228746 ECM (the 91 RS ECM) and am having troubles. The Car was originally a 89 v6 Multi and I dropped a 350 out of a suburban into it. I stole all the wiring out of a 91 RS (305 TBI) and have been fighting with it ever since.
I found an aftermarket wiring harness on ebay and they said it was set up for the 1228747 ECM. I plan to send witch ever ECM I go with to Dynamic EFI.
I was wondering does anyone know enough about either ECMs to give me some Pros and Cons. The 91 RS ECM has the Pass key system but I already bypassed it.
Any thoughts or advice would be helpful.
-Rob
I found an aftermarket wiring harness on ebay and they said it was set up for the 1228747 ECM. I plan to send witch ever ECM I go with to Dynamic EFI.
I was wondering does anyone know enough about either ECMs to give me some Pros and Cons. The 91 RS ECM has the Pass key system but I already bypassed it.
Any thoughts or advice would be helpful.
-Rob
09-11-2009, 10:03 AM
#2
Moderator
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Chasing Electrons
Posts: 18,432
Likes: 0
Received 226 Likes
on
211 Posts
Car: check
Engine: check
Transmission: check
Re: 1228746 vs 1228747 ECM?
It doesn't matter which ECM gets converted via the EBL Flash system. Once converted they are all identical.
For the wiring harness, if the one you have ('91 RS harness) is OK, I'd stay with it. If some of the connectors are bad, can replace those.
The '8747 ECM was used in full size vans. Which means that the harness for it will not even be close to fitting your RS. It is so long that you could put the ECM under the rear seat.
Not sure, but even if the '8747 ECM was used in pickups, it won't be a drop in in the Camaro. Just too many differences.
RBob.
For the wiring harness, if the one you have ('91 RS harness) is OK, I'd stay with it. If some of the connectors are bad, can replace those.
The '8747 ECM was used in full size vans. Which means that the harness for it will not even be close to fitting your RS. It is so long that you could put the ECM under the rear seat.
Not sure, but even if the '8747 ECM was used in pickups, it won't be a drop in in the Camaro. Just too many differences.
RBob.
09-11-2009, 07:07 PM
#3
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: OC CA
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 75 Beast
Engine: 383 +EBL Flash
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 4.11 with 33"
Re: 1228746 vs 1228747 ECM?
8747 was used in HD trucks and does not have KS input circuit.
//RF
//RF
09-13-2009, 09:32 PM
#5
Junior Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Okinawa, Japan
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 1989 RS
Engine: 350 TBI
Transmission: 700R4 by Monster transmition
Axle/Gears: Borg warner 3.08 posi
Re: 1228746 vs 1228747 ECM?
It doesn't matter which ECM gets converted via the EBL Flash system. Once converted they are all identical.
For the wiring harness, if the one you have ('91 RS harness) is OK, I'd stay with it. If some of the connectors are bad, can replace those.
The '8747 ECM was used in full size vans. Which means that the harness for it will not even be close to fitting your RS. It is so long that you could put the ECM under the rear seat.
Not sure, but even if the '8747 ECM was used in pickups, it won't be a drop in in the Camaro. Just too many differences.
RBob.
For the wiring harness, if the one you have ('91 RS harness) is OK, I'd stay with it. If some of the connectors are bad, can replace those.
The '8747 ECM was used in full size vans. Which means that the harness for it will not even be close to fitting your RS. It is so long that you could put the ECM under the rear seat.
Not sure, but even if the '8747 ECM was used in pickups, it won't be a drop in in the Camaro. Just too many differences.
RBob.
09-14-2009, 12:03 AM
#6
Supreme Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: OC CA
Posts: 1,873
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Car: 75 Beast
Engine: 383 +EBL Flash
Transmission: 700R4
Axle/Gears: 4.11 with 33"
Re: 1228746 vs 1228747 ECM?
Like Rbob said there are just too many differences between 8747 and 91 TBI system (harness). The 91 should be based on 1228746 or later version service replacement which has IAT and KS inputs. Oh yea - IAT inlet air temperature & KS knock sensor. EBL conversion will further enhance this ECM capability.
HD trucks did not use IAT and KS - spark curve in 8747 is very conservative and GM deemed unnecessary to provide HD applications with these sensors. My guess they figured that there is little value since HD engines were meant to be abused and withstand this abuse.
The last 8747 that I have pulled came out of the '90 3500 that had well 450k on the clock and was wrecked (hit in the rear). The 454 mill backed by a manual gear box was still running although oil leaks made a mess out of engine bay.
//RF
HD trucks did not use IAT and KS - spark curve in 8747 is very conservative and GM deemed unnecessary to provide HD applications with these sensors. My guess they figured that there is little value since HD engines were meant to be abused and withstand this abuse.
The last 8747 that I have pulled came out of the '90 3500 that had well 450k on the clock and was wrecked (hit in the rear). The 454 mill backed by a manual gear box was still running although oil leaks made a mess out of engine bay.
//RF
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
efiguy
Engine/Drivetrain/Suspension Parts for Sale
0
09-27-2015 01:30 PM
