TGP LG5 Turbo 3.1 ECU/MAP/Injectors

[Rettax3]

As the title says, I am looking for the ECU (computer), 2-BAR MAP sensor, and injector set from an '89-'90 TGP (Turbo Grand Prix) or STE Turbo Grand Prix. I have the MAP sensor and injectors already, but they have been sitting so long I would prefer a fresh set. I really want the ECU first, before I put any money out for anything else. PM me with prices, figure a medium flat-rate USPS box for $12.35 should cover shipping. I would pay via PayPal. I'm not in a hurry, so there is no rush. When I get closer to needing this, I'll consider posting on the W-Body forums too. Thanks.

[DOHC_tuner]

wow i like your sig. You need to turbocharge a 10.0:1 Quad 4. That will be beast!

[Rettax3]

wow i like your sig. You need to turbocharge a 10.0:1 Quad 4. That will be beast!

I agree! I do have a turbo 2.4 Twin Cam (later-production higher compression 9.7:1 engine too), but IMO the 2.3 Quad is a little better for performance. I would love to do something like that into my old '95 Z-26...

For the longest time, everything I had on four wheels either had a V-8 or a turbo six; the only four-cylinders I had were motorcycles. I would still like to get a '90 GTZ to build-up the Quad in that. I have ideas from back in the day that I wanted to do to it, both for performance and reliability (there are a few overlooked design-flaws in the Quad engines that can be fixed easily and cheaply, like the leaky oil-supply passage to the cylinder-head). My main problem is that I don't have a DHP Tuner, I don't want the 'other one' (keep paying us 'credit' money, if you want to actually use the hardware you bought... No thanks ), so I typically use off-the-shelf parts to find ways around needing to tune. There aren't a whole lot of options for a four-cylinder, unless I want to rig something up from an import, and I don't think the 2.0 Sunbird Turbo gear will work right for a Quad. You should see what I am planning for the next upgrade on that 2.4 Twin Cam.

If I decide to drop one (or two) of my 'spare' turbos under the hood of my Yellow Indy, I am going to need something different in the ECM department to run it... When I lived at 9,000 feet above sea-level, I could get away with a lot of serious mods without having to alter the ECM that I just can't get away with now. Hence, the desire for a TGP ECM. Or a DHP, if anyone wants to sell one off for cheap.

[RobertISaar]

the TGP ECM was a 1227727(which was used with almost all of the W 2.8/3.1 applications).... you can find them in almost every W-body from 88-92. pin-for-pin compatible is the 16149396, just has 2K of extra RAM, found in the 91-93 W-body 3.4 and 93-94 W-body 3.1(but not 3100) cars.

[Rettax3]

the TGP ECM was a 1227727(which was used with almost all of the W 2.8/3.1 applications).... you can find them in almost every W-body from 88-92. pin-for-pin compatible is the 16149396, just has 2K of extra RAM, found in the 91-93 W-body 3.4 and 93-94 W-body 3.1(but not 3100) cars.

Thanks for the info. I have an Olds Cutlass Supreme International 3.1 88999195 reman that I pulled to run the digital instruments I have sourced from the same car for my '90 turbo Beretta (just to run the instruments ONLY). Different numbers, but is that the same too? I'm sure I have a 16149396 attached to the 3.4 DOHC harness I have in storage (along with the 3.4 DOHC that was aimed at my '95 Z-26 a couple of years ago.

The issue is the different PROM configuration; compatibility for the MAP which should be 2-bar on the TGP, and of course for the bigger injectors. So I would need a PROM for the TGP, even if the ECM I have is compatible, or if I pull the 1227727 from a NA car. I would prefer just to get a complete ECM...

[RobertISaar]

88999195 is a remanned 7727, so that would work fine.

a TGP MEMCAL would be useful IF the ECM ever goes into limp-home mode(and running stock everything), otherwise it has no advantage over any other 2.8/3.1 MEMCAL. the knock filter on the TGP MEMCAL is the same as other 3.1s and even most 2.8s.

everything else could be dealt with in the calibration.

[Rettax3]

a TGP MEMCAL would be useful IF the ECM ever goes into limp-home mode(and running stock everything), otherwise it has no advantage over any other 2.8/3.1 MEMCAL. the knock filter on the TGP MEMCAL is the same as other 3.1s and even most 2.8s.

everything else could be dealt with in the calibration.

...Okay, but I can't just plug this in to an LG5 MAP and injectors and expect the engine to run even remotely right, if at all. Without the bigger injectors, I will potentially have issues tapping out the capacity of the LH0 units, and without the 2-BAR MAP, I will be confusing (or worse) the ECM under higher boost (above ~4PSI, maybe even lower at sea-level). With TGP PROM (or MEMCAL), the computer now thinks it is running a TGP LG5, not a Beretta LH0. So it would become plug-n-play (after updating the wiring harness, of course). I'm sure there would still be room for improvement, but factory tune is good enough for me. I don't have chip-burning capabilities, and I don't have datalogging equipment either. After building the turbo headers for my '90 'Retta, I can tell you that I will probably never build another 60-degree set again, unless I do some wonky twin turbo setup, so the stock LG5 manifolds I have would likely be reused if/when I do build this into the next car. Even a mild porting job on the intake/heads and an exhaust upgrade wouldn't require a custom tune, unless I just needed that last 5%-10% of efficiency... If I was that picky, this wouldn't even be my starting platform -I would push for OBD2 and beat someone up for their DHP (not Jon of course, he would fight back )...

If I was going to have a chip burned, wouldn't I do just as well to start off with the Beretta's LH0 ECM? That way I wouldn't have to double-up on any sensors or piggy-back a harness in place to keep my digital instruments working right... If I can't find anything for the TGP by the time I'm ready to start this project (and it is a while out -my Yellow Indy is running great right now, and I still have to collect the rest of the components for the five-speed swap the car will be getting), I may consider playing around with the OBD2 system from an L67 3800SC, which would require me to rig up twin CKPs , which I don't want to do unless I have to.

[RobertISaar]

with the builds you have listed, i assumed you had a burner, or an ALDL cable at the very least... stock TGP calibrations were intermittent at best, even in their native applications.

from the factory, you should have a 1227730 ECM, which CAN run TGP code without any problems.

i assume you have the 87-90ish digi cluster? i made up a patch for Ben so that $A1(91-94 3.1MPFI) code could be used on an older beretta with the digi dash, but i don't remember him getting back to me if it worked or not. the problem with using the newer code on the older car with digi is that the ECM doesn't broadcast information in the correct order or as the correct origin module. i'm fairly confident that the patch works, but no way of testing it.

[Rettax3]

with the builds you have listed, i assumed you had a burner, or an ALDL cable at the very least... stock TGP calibrations were intermittent at best, even in their native applications.

from the factory, you should have a 1227730 ECM, which CAN run TGP code without any problems.

i assume you have the 87-90ish digi cluster? i made up a patch for Ben so that $A1(91-94 3.1MPFI) code could be used on an older beretta with the digi dash, but i don't remember him getting back to me if it worked or not. the problem with using the newer code on the older car with digi is that the ECM doesn't broadcast information in the correct order or as the correct origin module. i'm fairly confident that the patch works, but no way of testing it.

Yes, three of my Berettas (the GTU and both Indys) have the factory digi-dash as original options. I could have retro-fit another one into my '90 turbo, as I have several spare clusters, a pair of correct ECMs with connectors, pinout information, and a complete wiring harness, but I wanted something different for that car.

I have always found a good way around ECM tuning. By the time I got interested in taking that step, DHPs were an endangered species. Now that I have so many heavily modified cars, and so many others looking for extreme mods, I would love to have that option, as it may now be cost-effective for me to invest $300-$400 in a single unit, instead of spending $50-$75 per vehicle, and it would simplify some of my builds while actually getting more out of them. I just can't find a decently (or lately even an indecently) priced DHP. I have yet to investigate chip-burners seriously, but that would be a good technology for me to branch out to as well, as most of my cars are old enough to be OBD1. Not to hijack my own thread, but would you have suggestions on what equipment to start with, and what I should look into beyond that starting point?

[RobertISaar]

for almost anything OBD1 that you'll be playing with, moates.net, BURN2(or go with an emulator(ostrich) or emulator/burner combo(autoprom)) covers programming and reading. at that point, could either use adapters to plug chips into it, or remove the old PROM from the MEMCAL and solder in 27SF512s and program them through an adapter. depends on how hidden you want to make it/price for that decision.

beyond that, an ALDL cable for logging and that covers most, if not all hardware.

[Rettax3]

for almost anything OBD1 that you'll be playing with, moates.net, BURN2(or go with an emulator(ostrich) or emulator/burner combo(autoprom)) covers programming and reading. at that point, could either use adapters to plug chips into it, or remove the old PROM from the MEMCAL and solder in 27SF512s and program them through an adapter. depends on how hidden you want to make it/price for that decision.

beyond that, an ALDL cable for logging and that covers most, if not all hardware.

Thank you. I am still interested in a TGP ECM for all the old reasons, especially the simplicity of application, but I will definitely start focusing more resources into the direction you have pointed me. I appreciate the input, and the time you've spent providing it. Anything more (like, 'hey, this guy here is dumping some of that stuff cheap' or 'this is the best site to download bin files', etc) would also be welcome.

[RobertISaar]

gearhead-efi.com for files/diagrams/etc. we've built up quite a collection.

as for people selling them cheap/used.... not really. when people buy stuff from Moates, they tend to hang onto it. i've been watching for a used emulator for over a year now and i think 2 have popped up for sale in that time. both sold within about 30 minutes of posting too.

[DOHC_tuner]

yeah tuning is required to get the full power of added modifications. Wish it was like the old days (at least ive been told) just with a screw driver you can tune a V8.
Anyways please elaborate more on your turbo LD9 project. What car are you running it in? Im currently building a turbo LD9 in a jbody.

If only tuning were as easy as those honda folks. Finding a tuner is hard for us 4 cylinder GM enthusiast. Best i can say is research and learn to do it yourself.

[Rettax3]

yeah tuning is required to get the full power of added modifications. Wish it was like the old days (at least ive been told) just with a screw driver you can tune a V8.
Anyways please elaborate more on your turbo LD9 project. What car are you running it in? Im currently building a turbo LD9 in a jbody.

If only tuning were as easy as those honda folks. Finding a tuner is hard for us 4 cylinder GM enthusiast. Best i can say is research and learn to do it yourself.

Mine is in a j-body too, a 5-speed '97 Z-24. I bought the car for $120 with a grenaded engine, hobbled together a 2.3 SOHC with a LD9 head and ~$75 worth of gaskets, head-bolts, and a few other new parts, and drove the car around for about a year until the oil-pump seized and damaged the already worn (180k+ miles) bearings. I bought a good low-mileage '01 LD9 (no EGR and higher compression that the older 2.4 Twin Cams) for something like $300, dropped about $100 worth of turbo parts into it from a 2.3 Ford Turbo-Coupe Thunderbird and other sundry items like a cone filter and some piping, and ran stock ECM programming for a few years at 6,000-9,000 feet above sea-level -the first 5-7 pounds of boost just make up for the thinner air, so I had no problems at all. Even at 9 PSI of boost and driving down the mountains to 5,000 feet altitude, I had no problems even with low-grade gas (extensive testing trying to find the boundaries of safe operation discovered no problems here, although the testing was a bit shade-tree without datalogging). Now that I am down at a lower altitude, I am having issues running much more than 5 PSI, but it could actually be the ICM going out (the ICM is almost certainly going out, I experienced a serious spark-loss that started causing severe after-fire through the exhaust after it loaded up the last time I drove it, even without boost) or knock-retarding due to the need for premium fuel with this configuration. Before, the car really had no need for a tune, now it really does need one. I was starting to mess with an AFPR, but the unit I have blew-out the internal diaphragm after only a few days' use, so I am back to factory pressure, which is another problem at this altitude.

I am currently tinkering with the idea of installing a mass-airflow fuel-control system, I just haven't decided if I want that computer to run spark too, or if I will let the car's original ECM control that. Or I can just tune the computer I have now, if I can get a DHP . But I prefer to use parts I already have on my builds, and I do like the challenge of making things work together that aren't supposed to, that is one of the reasons I've gone the direction I have on some of my builds...