- GM truck radio swap - 7 Updates
- SOT89-3 regulator - 3 Updates
- Transformerless PSU using a capacitor - 15 Updates
| captainvideo462009@gmail.com: Aug 03 07:52PM -0700 I have a 2006 Chevy Express van. The radio is the stock Delco AM/FM radio. All my music is on cassettes so I would like to replace it with an equivalent junk yard Delco AM/FM/cassette unit. The problem is that these radios talk to the body control module, and when power up is attempted compare the vehicle's VIN number to that which was programmed into the radio. If they match the unit will work. If they don't, (as would be the case if one were to just switch radios) the "new" radio will not do anything. This is apparently their anti theft scheme. I have been told that only a GM dealer can reprogram one of these radios for it to work in another vehicle. For the simple procedure of what is probably just erasing an eprom the dealer charges 115.00 The radio is 45.00 plus the 115.00 and I'm way beyond what I want to spend for this. Does anyone know of a way around this. Thanks, Lenny |
| Tim R <timothy42b@aol.com>: Aug 04 05:27AM -0700 > I have a 2006 Chevy Express van. The radio is the stock Delco AM/FM radio. All my music is on cassettes I think you're asking the wrong question. I have an old (1991) vehicle that I use for local transportation in the knowledge that I have one year left. (each year I decide how much to spend to pass inspection. I'm not planning on 10 years.) It seems you've decided your cassettes are worth keeping for another 10 years but your vehicle has one year left so you need to be cheap. In fact it's probably the other way around. My wife put an aftermarket radio in our other car for a trip. It has this weird slot my daughter calls a USB. All their music is somehow on my daughter's phone, in some kind of digital fashion I don't understand but apparently doesn't degrade or tangle like cassette tape. There are local car audio shops everywhere that do this kind of thing and it's not super expensive. |
| captainvideo462009@gmail.com: Aug 04 05:47AM -0700 > I have been told that only a GM dealer can reprogram one of these radios for it to work in another vehicle. For the simple procedure of what is probably just erasing an eprom the dealer charges 115.00 > The radio is 45.00 plus the 115.00 and I'm way beyond what I want to spend for this. > Does anyone know of a way around this. Thanks, Lenny I don't understand what you mean that my truck "has one year left". I may only have one year left but that has nothing to do with this discussion either. Perhaps you were being sarcastic. I don't know . It's hard to read people sometimes. I've been an electronics tech for most of my life,(I'm 71) and of course I can install my 1990 Delco AM/FM cassette if need be but a factory radio that would just fit perfectly would be so much easier. So, sure I know what USB is and how it can input to a newer radio and if you don't with all due respect, what are you doing on this forum? Did you read my post? Lenny |
| Tim R <timothy42b@aol.com>: Aug 04 08:31AM -0700 > > The radio is 45.00 plus the 115.00 and I'm way beyond what I want to spend for this. > > Does anyone know of a way around this. Thanks, Lenny > I don't understand what you mean that my truck "has one year left". I may only have one year left but that has nothing to do with this discussion either. Perhaps you were being sarcastic. I don't know . It's hard to read people sometimes. I've been an electronics tech for most of my life,(I'm 71) and of course I can install my 1990 Delco AM/FM cassette if need be but a factory radio that would just fit perfectly would be so much easier. So, sure I know what USB is and how it can input to a newer radio and if you don't with all due respect, what are you doing on this forum? Did you read my post? Lenny Okay, let me back up. I think you are overlooking opportunity by asking the wrong question. You want to know how to install a salvage yard radio in an old van and make it work. That's what you've asked for help on. But that's not what you need. What you need is a way to play music in an old van. You have that music available in one format. When you've redefined the problem this way, you can see there may be a much easier or cheaper solution. Might even be more expensive, but more convenient, higher quality, longer term. |
| rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: Aug 04 11:43AM -0400 >> The radio is 45.00 plus the 115.00 and I'm way beyond what I want to spend for this. >> Does anyone know of a way around this. Thanks, Lenny > I don't understand what you mean that my truck "has one year left". I may only have one year left but that has nothing to do with this discussion either. Perhaps you were being sarcastic. I don't know . It's hard to read people sometimes. I've been an electronics tech for most of my life,(I'm 71) and of course I can install my 1990 Delco AM/FM cassette if need be but a factory radio that would just fit perfectly would be so much easier. So, sure I know what USB is and how it can input to a newer radio and if you don't with all due respect, what are you doing on this forum? Did you read my post? Lenny He is not saying your truck has one year or ten years left on it, he is just talking about the fact that you are trying to make the swap with as little effort as possible, as if you weren't expecting to see it continue to run for more than a year. If you think about it, if there was a way to bypass the anti-theft feature, the thieves would have been the first to learn about it. The difficulty of installing a new radio is the main reason why I haven't fixed the burned out lamp in my radio. That and the fact that I don't listen to more than one station most of the time. -- Rick C |
| John Keiser <johnkeiser@juno.com>: Aug 04 06:15AM -1000 > I have been told that only a GM dealer can reprogram one of these radios for it to work in another vehicle. For the simple procedure of what is probably just erasing an eprom the dealer charges 115.00 > The radio is 45.00 plus the 115.00 and I'm way beyond what I want to spend for this. > Does anyone know of a way around this. Thanks, Lenny My guess is that the car's ECU [or whatever GM calls it] is being programed to recognize the radio, not the other way around. If that is the case, you might be able to by-pass the switched power and bring live power to the radio if you consult a wiring diagram and are willing to cut a cable, splice a cable. Have you tried posting this question to the various internet GM user forums? |
| John Keiser <johnkeiser@juno.com>: Aug 04 06:18AM -1000 > I have been told that only a GM dealer can reprogram one of these radios for it to work in another vehicle. For the simple procedure of what is probably just erasing an eprom the dealer charges 115.00 > The radio is 45.00 plus the 115.00 and I'm way beyond what I want to spend for this. > Does anyone know of a way around this. Thanks, Lenny This might work? https://www.gmpartsonline.net/blog/how-to-unlock-your-chevy-or-gmc-radio-without-paying-a-dime |
| amdx <nojunk@knology.net>: Aug 03 09:30PM -0500 On 8/2/2017 3:58 PM, jethro tull wrote: > here : http://picpaste.com/GY139-bhTrEixQ.jpg > Another similar component on the same board is marked "KY139". I have not been > able to find anything with these part numbers. I went to this SMD code page. > http://www.marsport.org.uk/smd/mainframe.htmI clicked on G in the upper left, when the G page loaded, I paged down to GY, it shows 2SC2882Y in case style SC62. If you search SC62 or better SC-62, you get > http://www.e-devices.ricoh.co.jp/en/products/product_power/pkg/sot-89.pdf Does that match your part dimensions and make sense that it would be an npn gp amp hfe 160-320? I think gp is for general purpose. Mikek If that doesn't look right, get confused and look here, |
| jethro tull <heavytull@outlook.com>: Aug 04 08:54AM > Mikek > If that doesn't look right, get confused and look here, >> http://alltransistors.com/smd-search.php?search=GY The 2SC2882Y differs quite a lot from the 2SD2403 given by Dan previously, though junction type and the hFE given seems fine. The one I have I'm not sure it is in good condition, which is why I would like to change it, is showing ~ 260 with my cheap meter. alltransistors.com says 2SD2003 for "GY" as keyword, so I need some confirmation. Also I'm searching for the meaning of the "139" marked on my device. |
| jethro tull <heavytull@outlook.com>: Aug 04 10:10AM > alltransistors.com says 2SD2003 for "GY" as keyword, so I need some > confirmation. Also I'm searching for the meaning of the "139" marked on my > device. typo: 2SD2403, not 2SD2003 The datasheet of the 2SC2882Y/O from toshiba is as old as april 1997 which means the device is even older, while the 2SD2403's from nec is marked april 2002. The cd player I'm trying to repair is from 2001, so the 2SD2403 might be the most appropriate. |
| etpm@whidbey.com: Aug 03 09:57AM -0700 >He wanted to use it to boost his car, but we found out that the thing was pulling like 11 amps at 12 volts and the load on the alternator would negate most of the gain. >It is like what I have been saying, fossil fuel beats about anything, that is why it sells. When something better comes along, the oil companies won't be oil companies, they will be selling whatever it is. >But anyway, dropping voltage/current with a capacitor is not the way to do it. There are times when you just cough up the money for a transformer. Actually, the load on the alternator must be MORE than any gain, otherwise you would have a perpetual motion device. Eric |
| Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net>: Aug 02 10:28AM +1000 On 02/08/17 00:13, Phil Allison wrote: > ** The OP is not making any sense. > 66uF implies amps of current and 220 ohms in series implies > hundreds of watts of dissipation. Ugh, yeah, I chose to ignore the 220R. He's probably trying to limit inrush current when switched at the wrong point. > The fool probably means 0.68uF. > Wish he would get one tiny fact RIGHT !!! Indeed. It's hard to do electronics without knowing arithmetic. Clifford Heath. |
| John-Del <ohger1s@gmail.com>: Aug 03 01:07PM -0700 > Actually, the load on the alternator must be MORE than any gain, > otherwise you would have a perpetual motion device. > Eric The HHO guys say you can get "free" energy out of tap water by building a hydrogen generator and feeding the resulting hydrogen into the intake of the engine giving it more power and using less gasoline. What the poster was saying was any gain (if any) from any hydrogen produced and burned would be negated by electrical toll it took to create it. Even if the hydrogen scheme produced a net positive, it still wouldn't be perpetual motion (or breaking the conservation of energy law) any more than a gas engine is because the water is an expendable fuel. |
| etpm@whidbey.com: Aug 03 01:50PM -0700 On Thu, 3 Aug 2017 13:07:55 -0700 (PDT), John-Del <ohger1s@gmail.com> wrote: >> Eric >The HHO guys say you can get "free" energy out of tap water by building a hydrogen generator and feeding the resulting hydrogen into the intake of the engine giving it more power and using less gasoline. What the poster was saying was any gain (if any) from any hydrogen produced and burned would be negated by electrical toll it took to create it. >Even if the hydrogen scheme produced a net positive, it still wouldn't be perpetual motion (or breaking the conservation of energy law) any more than a gas engine is because the water is an expendable fuel. What you are saying is that it would be not be breaking any conservation of energy law if you get more power from an engine by feeding it hydrogen or even HHO that the power required from the engine to break the water molecule apart into HHO. I don't get it. Please explain. Eric |
| rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: Aug 03 05:23PM -0400 John-Del wrote on 8/3/2017 4:07 PM: > The HHO guys say you can get "free" energy out of tap water by building a hydrogen generator and feeding the resulting hydrogen into the intake of the engine giving it more power and using less gasoline. What the poster was saying was any gain (if any) from any hydrogen produced and burned would be negated by electrical toll it took to create it. > Even if the hydrogen scheme produced a net positive, it still wouldn't be perpetual motion (or breaking the conservation of energy law) any more than a gas engine is because the water is an expendable fuel. When you burn the hydrogen and oxygen you produce more water that could be fed back into the tank along with the water produced from burning the hydrocarbons resulting in *MORE* fuel than you started with. But the problem is that the energy produced by separating the oxygen and the hydrogen is at *least* as much as what you get from burning the hydrogen. Taking into account all the losses and you get a net loss of energy by some 80% or more. Eric is right. Water is not a fuel. The fact that in any practical machine you just refill it is because of the cost rather than the issue of it providing any energy. -- Rick C |
| rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: Aug 03 05:50PM -0400 rickman wrote on 8/3/2017 5:23 PM: > hydrogen is at *least* as much as what you get from burning the hydrogen. > Taking into account all the losses and you get a net loss of energy by some > 80% or more. Err, that should read, "energy *consumed* by separating the oxygen and the hydrogen" -- Rick C |
| jurb6006@gmail.com: Aug 03 05:00PM -0700 >"The only appliances that NEED isolation are electronic ones that have external connections to other devices. The rest can safely rely on being fully insulated or by safety grounding any external metalwork. " Oh really. Then plug your smartphone into an unisolated charger and then the audio output to your stereo. |
| jurb6006@gmail.com: Aug 03 05:22PM -0700 >"As indicated by Phil its not all appliances that need to be duly isolated. A device like an automatic dawn to dusk light switch can be safe without an isolation transformer" Sure, but there are different standards for construction and isolation to prevent shock. In this country we have the UL, which is actually independent but carries alot of weight. If they find that something was not UL approved and it burns your house down they got grounds for not paying the insurance claim. What Phil said about toasters n shit is true. But you don't plug them into anything else, like your TV or stereo. plenty of times people have plugged their smartphone into my garage stereo, now if it was also plugged into a charger that did not provide isolation then the whole system becomes "hot chassis". I remember hot chassis TVs. The had an antenna isolator and many of them, that was the only input they had. Some had video inputs that were isolated by optos. Some people put in their own earphone jacks and in some cases took their lives into their own hands. Later, Zenith came out with a kit that had a transformer and it provdeded the isolation. In this country you can't run isolated wire in the same conduit with non-insulated wire. That means if you dig a trench to get good power out to your garage, like 220 for your compressor and welder, you cannot run phone wires, cable wires, intercom wires or even that 24 volt stuff along with it. You need a separate conduit for it. There is no way to tell if a tree root comes up and bends it and makes it short out, causing an insidious hazard. And folks, I am sure I am not the only one in the world who goes out to the garage for a smoke barefoot. There are good reasons for most of the NEC here. In fact the NEC are about the only laws that really make sense. I agree that some things do not need to be isolated, as long as they don't plug into anything else. Now they got kitchen appliances controlled by smartphone. Now if they are wifi that is one thing, but if they connect with RJ-45 that is another. |
| jurb6006@gmail.com: Aug 03 05:23PM -0700 ."Still, in the trade, the resistive AC line cord was known as a "curtain burners" because people would often coil them up in a neat little ball instead of spreading them out as the owner's manual directed. " Now there's something I didn't know. |
| Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Aug 03 06:26PM -0700 jurb...@gmail.com wrote: --------------------------- > > external metalwork. " > Oh really. Then plug your smartphone into an unisolated charger > and then the audio output to your stereo. ** An un-isolated phone charger would be a dangerous and highly illegal device. I have done a Google search and find NO evidence that there are ANY on sale. I explained the point to Mike Coon in this thread. Up to YOU to prove they exist. ..... Phil |
| Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Aug 03 07:03PM -0700 fynn...@yahoo.com wrote: ----------------------------- > I have also seen a Chines made portable radio set without transformer. It was boldly written on it "transformerless AC radio" apparently the manufacturer was boasting. A guy opened it to find out what was inside and showed us this cap drop power supply so he warned the friend against possible electric shock when he touch any metal part. the friend replied there were no metal parts so its safe. Not long before that he got zapped when he forgot that the antenna was made of metal. ** The antenna only needs a low value series cap to make it safe. Not so long ago, lots or radios and TV were "hot chassis" designs with the antennas connected via small caps or isolating baluns. Such sets normally have no video or audio connectors. .... Phil |
| rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: Aug 03 10:24PM -0400 Phil Allison wrote on 8/3/2017 10:03 PM: > ** The antenna only needs a low value series cap to make it safe. > Not so long ago, lots or radios and TV were "hot chassis" designs with the antennas connected via small caps or isolating baluns. > Such sets normally have no video or audio connectors. So a single failure in a cap would render the safety factor null. It wouldn't even affect the operation of the radio, so no one would know. -- Rick C |
| Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Aug 03 08:07PM -0700 The trolling Prickman fuckwit wrote: ----------------------------------- > > Such sets normally have no video or audio connectors. > So a single failure in a cap would render the safety factor null. It > wouldn't even affect the operation of the radio, so no one would know. ** Same goes for any Class 2 device with a SMPS that uses a Y2 cap to supress RFI - but you are such a bullshitting fuckhead you have no idea what that even is. For the benefit of others here: The caps used in hot chassis radios and TVs were all special high voltage ceramics rated for the task. .... Phil |
| Mike Coon <gravity@mjcoon.plus.com>: Aug 04 08:47AM +0100 In article <2f896154-7e28-43cc-a669-e153469cc0bb@googlegroups.com>, pallison49@gmail.com says... > I have done a Google search and find NO evidence that there are ANY on sale. > I explained the point to Mike Coon in this thread. IIRC, you "explained" that to some people a transformer is necessarily an iron-cored device working at mains frequency. Whereas I think if it quacks like a duck, it's a duck (so to speak). Not a very fundamental distinction, but thanks for the citation... Mike. |
| Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Aug 04 01:46AM -0700 Mike Coon wrote: ----------------- > IIRC, you "explained" that to some people a transformer is necessarily > an iron-cored device working at mains frequency. Whereas I think if it > quacks like a duck, it's a duck (so to speak). ** It has gotta walk like a duck too, you can buy gadgets that make a realistic quacking sounud. Duck hunters use them. > Not a very fundamental > distinction, but thanks for the citation... ** Just Google "transformerless PSU schem". Most of the hits are for isolated SMPS schems. .... Phil |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No Response to "Digest for sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 3 topics"
Post a Comment