In article ,
wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:59:05 -0800, Erik wrote:


My next truck is going to have a carb, no matter how old it is.
You can have it. Carburetor rebuilds - leaky floats, sticky and leaky
needle valves, bad accellerator pumps, sticky and malfunctioning
chokes, bad fuel mileage and high exhaust emissions, perculation when
hot - all the problems that have been virtually eliminated by fuel
injection

Agreed! Fuel injection is much simpler and reliable... and with OBDII
easier to troubleshoot

If your after a truck, get a for real truck... not one of those
expensive 'truck like product' gimmicks that seem to be everywhere
now... go for a Tundra or Tacoma.

Erik
Or a base F150 or GMC Sierra

Sorry... disagree with those two selections.

Erik

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 19:43:56 -0800, Erik wrote:

In article ,
wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:59:05 -0800, Erik wrote:


My next truck is going to have a carb, no matter how old it is.
You can have it. Carburetor rebuilds - leaky floats, sticky and leaky
needle valves, bad accellerator pumps, sticky and malfunctioning
chokes, bad fuel mileage and high exhaust emissions, perculation when
hot - all the problems that have been virtually eliminated by fuel
injection

Agreed! Fuel injection is much simpler and reliable... and with OBDII
easier to troubleshoot

If your after a truck, get a for real truck... not one of those
expensive 'truck like product' gimmicks that seem to be everywhere
now... go for a Tundra or Tacoma.

Erik
Or a base F150 or GMC Sierra

Sorry... disagree with those two selections.

Erik
Your perrogative. The Tundra is a good truck - but pricey. The Tacoma
is a decent truck too - but also pricey. Comparable to a Ranger but a
higher snack bracket.
A base F150 is a rock solid basic truck - better value than the Toyota
in many ways - particularly if you are not worried about resale -
drive the wheels off of it. The GM pickup likewize - a bit pricier
than the f150.

Buy either one 3 years old and drive it till it drops - maintaining it
properly that can be half a million miles on either of them - and the
parts are readilly available everywhere - new or used.

I'm a great fan of Toyota - was a Toyota service manager for 10 years
- they make great stuff - but dollar for dollar a good 3 year old GM
or Ford is better VALUE for a truck. If you want a fancy truck - the
Tundra takes it.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:19:49 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:59:05 -0800, Erik wrote:


My next truck is going to have a carb, no matter how old it is.
You can have it. Carburetor rebuilds - leaky floats, sticky and leaky
needle valves, bad accellerator pumps, sticky and malfunctioning
chokes, bad fuel mileage and high exhaust emissions, perculation when
hot - all the problems that have been virtually eliminated by fuel
injection

Agreed! Fuel injection is much simpler and reliable... and with OBDII
easier to troubleshoot

If your after a truck, get a for real truck... not one of those
expensive 'truck like product' gimmicks that seem to be everywhere
now... go for a Tundra or Tacoma.

Erik
Or a base F150 or GMC Sierra

The F-150 is what I have now, but this one has been a lemon and will
soon be sold.

I had a GMC Sierra and it was a decent truck till it just started to
wear out, but it had lots of miles on it. I tend to have better luck
with GM than Ford vehicles. I've considered a Dodge, but I'm not
sure...

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 19:42:47 -0500, wrote:

My next truck is going to have a carb, no matter how old it is.
You can have it. Carburetor rebuilds - leaky floats, sticky and leaky
needle valves, bad accellerator pumps, sticky and malfunctioning
chokes, bad fuel mileage and high exhaust emissions, perculation when
hot - all the problems that have been virtually eliminated by fuel
injection

My 89 Caprice has lots of miles and I've never had any carb problems,
aside from the choke being a little touchy. I cant complain about the
gas milage either.

When this car dont want to start (occasionally), it's because the engine
is still warm, weather is cold, and if the choke is closed too much, the
engine will flood. I pop the air cleaner cover, stick a tool in to hold
the choke open and it starts right up. This takes me one minute to fix.
(No starting problems at all in warm weather).

When my F.I. F-150 refuses to start in the same conditions, (partly warm
engine, which was shut off for a few minutes), there is nothing I can
do, other than sit there for 20 minutes or more, or start walking.

That's what I hate about F.I. if it dont start, or some other problem,
there is nothing you can do. If a carb engine dont start, you can
ususlly screw around with it and at least get home, if not fix the
problem. I've taken the tops off carbs on the shoulder of the road
because of a stuck float, and was driving again in no time.

On top of that, when a carb screws up, a $20 carb kit will fix it right
up. When a F.I. engine screws up, it's off to a mechanic, a tow truck,
and to the bank to get a loan for hundreds of dollars to get it running
again.

I've never worked as a mechanic, but I've done almost all my own auto
repairs since I started driving around 44 years ago. I rarely went to a
mechanic with the old cars. I've spent more to have F.I vehicles
repaired at a mechanic in the last 8 or 9 years (since I got my first
F.I vehicle), than I spent on parts the first 35ish years of driving.
And I've still done all the other repairs myself such as brakes,
u-joints, hoses, radiators, belts, tires, etc.....

I'm not impressed by F.I in the least. It's complicated, costly to
repair, leaves drivers stranded, less reliable, and most of the engine
work can only be done by the pros. The backyard mechanic/owner is
pretty much dead these days, at least for engine work.

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:21:58 -0500, wrote:

Your perrogative. The Tundra is a good truck - but pricey. The Tacoma
is a decent truck too - but also pricey. Comparable to a Ranger but a
higher snack bracket.
A base F150 is a rock solid basic truck - better value than the Toyota
in many ways - particularly if you are not worried about resale -
drive the wheels off of it. The GM pickup likewize - a bit pricier
than the f150.

Buy either one 3 years old and drive it till it drops - maintaining it
properly that can be half a million miles on either of them - and the
parts are readilly available everywhere - new or used.

I'm a great fan of Toyota - was a Toyota service manager for 10 years
- they make great stuff - but dollar for dollar a good 3 year old GM
or Ford is better VALUE for a truck. If you want a fancy truck - the
Tundra takes it.

I'm a farmer. I want a truck that can work, and the body can hold up to
the abuse farm trucks get. And I want reliability. I dont want fancy,
and I cant afford to buy new. I also want and need 4wd, and FULL 4wd,
not what they call 4wd on those "city trucks", where only half of tires
grip (something about the differentials). I have not had very good luck
with the F-150s. They all seem to break down way too often, compared to
GM. And I've had two of them, 88 and a 90, both had the rearend
bearings go to hell. One actually started on fire inside the brake
drum. I wont buy another Ford truck. GM is my preference, but I have
been looking at the Dodge Ram too.

At the same time, the most depenable truck I ever had was a 78 F-150
with 400 engine 4wd automatic. That thing was built like an army tank.
WhenI finally quit driving it, the tranny was dying, the lockouts were
screwed up, the box had literally fallen off the frame on one side,
crushing the gas filler hose so I could not get gas in it. Yet, that
rear end never had bearing problems, and when I quit driving it, that
400 engine ran like the day it was new. However, that engine drank gas
faster than a drunk can drink a beer. 7mpg normal, down to 3mpg when it
was hauling a load of hay. A friend of mine still has the engine from
it in his garage.

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 06:38:06 -0600, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 22:19:49 -0500, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 18:59:05 -0800, Erik wrote:


My next truck is going to have a carb, no matter how old it is.
You can have it. Carburetor rebuilds - leaky floats, sticky and leaky
needle valves, bad accellerator pumps, sticky and malfunctioning
chokes, bad fuel mileage and high exhaust emissions, perculation when
hot - all the problems that have been virtually eliminated by fuel
injection

Agreed! Fuel injection is much simpler and reliable... and with OBDII
easier to troubleshoot

If your after a truck, get a for real truck... not one of those
expensive 'truck like product' gimmicks that seem to be everywhere
now... go for a Tundra or Tacoma.

Erik
Or a base F150 or GMC Sierra

The F-150 is what I have now, but this one has been a lemon and will
soon be sold.

I had a GMC Sierra and it was a decent truck till it just started to
wear out, but it had lots of miles on it. I tend to have better luck
with GM than Ford vehicles. I've considered a Dodge, but I'm not
sure...

The Dodge isn't a bad truck either - and cheaper than the rest.

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:01:13 -0600, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 19:42:47 -0500, wrote:

My next truck is going to have a carb, no matter how old it is.
You can have it. Carburetor rebuilds - leaky floats, sticky and leaky
needle valves, bad accellerator pumps, sticky and malfunctioning
chokes, bad fuel mileage and high exhaust emissions, perculation when
hot - all the problems that have been virtually eliminated by fuel
injection

My 89 Caprice has lots of miles and I've never had any carb problems,
aside from the choke being a little touchy. I cant complain about the
gas milage either.

When this car dont want to start (occasionally), it's because the engine
is still warm, weather is cold, and if the choke is closed too much, the
engine will flood. I pop the air cleaner cover, stick a tool in to hold
the choke open and it starts right up. This takes me one minute to fix.
(No starting problems at all in warm weather).

When my F.I. F-150 refuses to start in the same conditions, (partly warm
engine, which was shut off for a few minutes), there is nothing I can
do, other than sit there for 20 minutes or more, or start walking.

Ever try holding your foot to the floor??? Shuts off the fuel and
opens the air - without having to open the hood, remove the air
cleaner and find the screwdriver.

That's what I hate about F.I. if it dont start, or some other problem,
there is nothing you can do. If a carb engine dont start, you can
ususlly screw around with it and at least get home, if not fix the
problem. I've taken the tops off carbs on the shoulder of the road
because of a stuck float, and was driving again in no time.

On top of that, when a carb screws up, a $20 carb kit will fix it right
up. When a F.I. engine screws up, it's off to a mechanic, a tow truck,
and to the bank to get a loan for hundreds of dollars to get it running
again.


WHEN they fail - which is not very often.
I've never worked as a mechanic, but I've done almost all my own auto
repairs since I started driving around 44 years ago. I rarely went to a
mechanic with the old cars. I've spent more to have F.I vehicles
repaired at a mechanic in the last 8 or 9 years (since I got my first
F.I vehicle), than I spent on parts the first 35ish years of driving.
And I've still done all the other repairs myself such as brakes,
u-joints, hoses, radiators, belts, tires, etc.....

I'm not impressed by F.I in the least. It's complicated, costly to
repair, leaves drivers stranded, less reliable,
I'll have to dissagree with you on the reliability. I have put MANY
vehicles over the 250,000km without a fuel injection problem. And
when you add electronic ignition into the mix, I have had less trouble
even there than with standard ignition. I've had a couple coil packs
fail - but not as many as coils on the old point ignition vehicles.
Some cars had issues with the ignitors - but more cars had points burn
out - or ballast resistors - and bad capacitors. Add bad vac advance
units, sticking advance weights, and worn dist shafts and they were
DEFINITELY more troublesom than today's electronic controls.

The emission controls are the most problematic - things like O2
sensors and catalytic converters going bad - but then they still run -
and if you'd ever had to sort out the emission controls on carbureted
engines from the seventies on up - the new stuff, in my experience, is
a piece of cake. They even diagnose themselves.

Driveability problems caused by gremlins in the emission control
valving, hoses, and other trash don't exist any more. If the light
comes on, you put the scanner on, read the code, and if you have any
understanding how things work, the unit tells you what is wrong. Not
necessarily what part to change - but what is wrong and where to start
looking.



and most of the engine
work can only be done by the pros. The backyard mechanic/owner is
pretty much dead these days, at least for engine work.


And would be the same if you had carbs instead of EFI.

Getting parts for anything old enough to have a carb is getting more
difficult by the day - unless you get into collector stuff where
reproduction replacement parts are available - and then the price is
as high or higher than for current "high tech" vehicles.

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:18:45 -0600, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:21:58 -0500, wrote:

Your perrogative. The Tundra is a good truck - but pricey. The Tacoma
is a decent truck too - but also pricey. Comparable to a Ranger but a
higher snack bracket.
A base F150 is a rock solid basic truck - better value than the Toyota
in many ways - particularly if you are not worried about resale -
drive the wheels off of it. The GM pickup likewize - a bit pricier
than the f150.

Buy either one 3 years old and drive it till it drops - maintaining it
properly that can be half a million miles on either of them - and the
parts are readilly available everywhere - new or used.

I'm a great fan of Toyota - was a Toyota service manager for 10 years
- they make great stuff - but dollar for dollar a good 3 year old GM
or Ford is better VALUE for a truck. If you want a fancy truck - the
Tundra takes it.

I'm a farmer. I want a truck that can work, and the body can hold up to
the abuse farm trucks get. And I want reliability. I dont want fancy,
and I cant afford to buy new. I also want and need 4wd, and FULL 4wd,
not what they call 4wd on those "city trucks", where only half of tires
grip (something about the differentials). I have not had very good luck
with the F-150s. They all seem to break down way too often, compared to
GM. And I've had two of them, 88 and a 90, both had the rearend
bearings go to hell. One actually started on fire inside the brake
drum. I wont buy another Ford truck. GM is my preference, but I have
been looking at the Dodge Ram too.

At the same time, the most depenable truck I ever had was a 78 F-150
with 400 engine 4wd automatic. That thing was built like an army tank.
WhenI finally quit driving it, the tranny was dying, the lockouts were
screwed up, the box had literally fallen off the frame on one side,
crushing the gas filler hose so I could not get gas in it. Yet, that
rear end never had bearing problems, and when I quit driving it, that
400 engine ran like the day it was new. However, that engine drank gas
faster than a drunk can drink a beer. 7mpg normal, down to 3mpg when it
was hauling a load of hay. A friend of mine still has the engine from
it in his garage.
And whst is going to give you better service for the money??

You need an F250 or 350 for the work you want to do. Or a "super
duty". The GMC is built a bit heavier (as well as the Chevy - which is
genereally a bit cheaper) You should have the 3/4 ton GMC too - not
the half ton.

The big Toyota is a good choice too, but buying them used is more
difficult - and more expensive - and when something DOES go wrong - it
will cost you more.

A 3500 Dodge Diesel dually will do the job too - but too much torque
for the rest of the truck if you get "RAMMY" with it.

For heavy farm use I wouldn't have a gasoline engine. The early
powerstrokes were a bit fragile for my tastes - and the Duramax had
reliability problems too. Nothing is perfect, but you'd likely have
better luch engine-wize with a Cummins Ram.

Let me just throw out here, that just because a car repair shop owner
says that 50% or whatever of his business is replacing in-tank fuel pumps,
that does not necessarily mean that 100% of those pumps actually needed to
be replaced...

:wq

--
There are no stupid questions, but there are lots of stupid answers.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

In article ,
wrote:
...snipped...

My 89 Caprice has lots of miles and I've never had any carb problems,
aside from the choke being a little touchy. I cant complain about the
gas milage either.


What engine does your Caprice have? I think by 89 the 305 and 350 had both
been switch to TBI but maybe a 307 was still available with a carb.



--
There are no stupid questions, but there are lots of stupid answers.

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:53:04 +0000 (UTC),
(Larry W) wrote:

Let me just throw out here, that just because a car repair shop owner
says that 50% or whatever of his business is replacing in-tank fuel pumps,
that does not necessarily mean that 100% of those pumps actually needed to
be replaced...

Indeed. Aamco's advertisement states that half of the cars they work
on don't need a new transmission. It says nothing about the
percentage that actually get a new transmission.

In article ,
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:53:04 +0000 (UTC),
(Larry W) wrote:

Let me just throw out here, that just because a car repair shop owner
says that 50% or whatever of his business is replacing in-tank fuel pumps,
that does not necessarily mean that 100% of those pumps actually needed to
be replaced...

Indeed. Aamco's advertisement states that half of the cars they work
on don't need a new transmission. It says nothing about the
percentage that actually get a new transmission.

Or get charged for one, wheter it needed it or it was installed or not, if
you get my drift... Certainly happens with in-tank fuel pumps, I have no
doubt of that.



--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:50:55 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:18:45 -0600, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:21:58 -0500, wrote:

Your perrogative. The Tundra is a good truck - but pricey. The Tacoma
is a decent truck too - but also pricey. Comparable to a Ranger but a
higher snack bracket.
A base F150 is a rock solid basic truck - better value than the Toyota
in many ways - particularly if you are not worried about resale -
drive the wheels off of it. The GM pickup likewize - a bit pricier
than the f150.

Buy either one 3 years old and drive it till it drops - maintaining it
properly that can be half a million miles on either of them - and the
parts are readilly available everywhere - new or used.

I'm a great fan of Toyota - was a Toyota service manager for 10 years
- they make great stuff - but dollar for dollar a good 3 year old GM
or Ford is better VALUE for a truck. If you want a fancy truck - the
Tundra takes it.

I'm a farmer. I want a truck that can work, and the body can hold up to
the abuse farm trucks get. And I want reliability. I dont want fancy,
and I cant afford to buy new. I also want and need 4wd, and FULL 4wd,
not what they call 4wd on those "city trucks", where only half of tires
grip (something about the differentials). I have not had very good luck
with the F-150s. They all seem to break down way too often, compared to
GM. And I've had two of them, 88 and a 90, both had the rearend
bearings go to hell. One actually started on fire inside the brake
drum. I wont buy another Ford truck. GM is my preference, but I have
been looking at the Dodge Ram too.

At the same time, the most depenable truck I ever had was a 78 F-150
with 400 engine 4wd automatic. That thing was built like an army tank.
WhenI finally quit driving it, the tranny was dying, the lockouts were
screwed up, the box had literally fallen off the frame on one side,
crushing the gas filler hose so I could not get gas in it. Yet, that
rear end never had bearing problems, and when I quit driving it, that
400 engine ran like the day it was new. However, that engine drank gas
faster than a drunk can drink a beer. 7mpg normal, down to 3mpg when it
was hauling a load of hay. A friend of mine still has the engine from
it in his garage.
And whst is going to give you better service for the money??

You need an F250 or 350 for the work you want to do. Or a "super
duty". The GMC is built a bit heavier (as well as the Chevy - which is
genereally a bit cheaper) You should have the 3/4 ton GMC too - not
the half ton.

The big Toyota is a good choice too, but buying them used is more
difficult - and more expensive - and when something DOES go wrong - it
will cost you more.

A 3500 Dodge Diesel dually will do the job too - but too much torque
for the rest of the truck if you get "RAMMY" with it.

For heavy farm use I wouldn't have a gasoline engine. The early
powerstrokes were a bit fragile for my tastes - and the Duramax had
reliability problems too. Nothing is perfect, but you'd likely have
better luch engine-wize with a Cummins Ram.

I sort of agree with the need for a heavier duty truck. This F-150 I
have now came with overload springs, so it can easily handle the normal
loads I haul. My most common loading, and normally the heaviest loads I
haul are loads of hay, with the average load being one ton maximum.
Everything else is normally pulled behind the truck such as hay and
grain wagons, and implement machinery.

That old 78 F-150 used to sag, till a friend sold me some leaf springs
from a very heavy duty truck. I put them in and nothing would push that
frame down, but it rode like a concrete truck. I wish I would have kept
those springs when I junked the body, after selling the engine and a few
other parts.

While I know diesels are more durable and a little better on fuel, I'd
not want one because in this climate where we get well below zero in
winter, all I hear from other farmers are problems with the fuel gelling
up, even with the additives made to prevent it. They're good in warm
weather but a pain in the ass in the cold. I'll stick with gasoline.

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:53:04 +0000 (UTC),
(Larry W) wrote:

Let me just throw out here, that just because a car repair shop owner
says that 50% or whatever of his business is replacing in-tank fuel pumps,
that does not necessarily mean that 100% of those pumps actually needed to
be replaced...

:wq

While I get your drift, but I know for fact several of the people who's
cars/trucks most definately did not have a working pump. I dont enjoy
working on machinery too much. I fix most of my own, but when friends
ask me to do repairs, I tell them no. Yet, I'll often do a simple
diagnosis for them. It's easy to stick a piece of hose in the gas tank,
hold it to my ear and listen for the pump. If I dont hear it, I will
usually check for power at the wire going to the pump. If there's
power, the pump is shot. Then they can take it to a mechanic or fix it
themself.

I am wondering if we have some fuel additives around here that ruins the
pumps. Not all parts of the country get the same fuel, and here in the
north, we have summer gas and winter gas. Who knows whats in it that
may do damage. All of it contains alcohol these days too, yet in an
adjoining state, they still sell pure 100% gasoline.

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:41:24 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:01:13 -0600, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 19:42:47 -0500, wrote:

My next truck is going to have a carb, no matter how old it is.
You can have it. Carburetor rebuilds - leaky floats, sticky and leaky
needle valves, bad accellerator pumps, sticky and malfunctioning
chokes, bad fuel mileage and high exhaust emissions, perculation when
hot - all the problems that have been virtually eliminated by fuel
injection

My 89 Caprice has lots of miles and I've never had any carb problems,
aside from the choke being a little touchy. I cant complain about the
gas milage either.

When this car dont want to start (occasionally), it's because the engine
is still warm, weather is cold, and if the choke is closed too much, the
engine will flood. I pop the air cleaner cover, stick a tool in to hold
the choke open and it starts right up. This takes me one minute to fix.
(No starting problems at all in warm weather).

When my F.I. F-150 refuses to start in the same conditions, (partly warm
engine, which was shut off for a few minutes), there is nothing I can
do, other than sit there for 20 minutes or more, or start walking.

Ever try holding your foot to the floor??? Shuts off the fuel and
opens the air - without having to open the hood, remove the air
cleaner and find the screwdriver.

That dont work on my carb chevy, but it's usually pretty well flooded
once it gets that far. What appears to happen is that frost builds up
on the chole plate and sort of glues it shut.

I will try this on the FI Ford truck. I just asked a local mechanic
what might cause that problem, and he told me to put the pedal to the
floor and try it again. But since I'm still waiting for my radiator, I
have not used the truck lately to try it.

That's what I hate about F.I. if it dont start, or some other problem,
there is nothing you can do. If a carb engine dont start, you can
ususlly screw around with it and at least get home, if not fix the
problem. I've taken the tops off carbs on the shoulder of the road
because of a stuck float, and was driving again in no time.

On top of that, when a carb screws up, a $20 carb kit will fix it right
up. When a F.I. engine screws up, it's off to a mechanic, a tow truck,
and to the bank to get a loan for hundreds of dollars to get it running
again.


WHEN they fail - which is not very often.
I've never worked as a mechanic, but I've done almost all my own auto
repairs since I started driving around 44 years ago. I rarely went to a
mechanic with the old cars. I've spent more to have F.I vehicles
repaired at a mechanic in the last 8 or 9 years (since I got my first
F.I vehicle), than I spent on parts the first 35ish years of driving.
And I've still done all the other repairs myself such as brakes,
u-joints, hoses, radiators, belts, tires, etc.....

I'm not impressed by F.I in the least. It's complicated, costly to
repair, leaves drivers stranded, less reliable,
I'll have to dissagree with you on the reliability. I have put MANY
vehicles over the 250,000km without a fuel injection problem. And
when you add electronic ignition into the mix, I have had less trouble
even there than with standard ignition. I've had a couple coil packs
fail - but not as many as coils on the old point ignition vehicles.
Some cars had issues with the ignitors - but more cars had points burn
out - or ballast resistors - and bad capacitors. Add bad vac advance
units, sticking advance weights, and worn dist shafts and they were
DEFINITELY more troublesom than today's electronic controls.

I have to admit that after working on that stuff for over 40 years, I
know a lot more what to look for on a carb vehicle. This FI is all new
to me. I will agree that the electronic ignitions on the carb vehicles
was a big improvement over points. I even converted one of my tractors
to an after market elec. ign. system.

I still recall back in the 70s when a vacuum advance weight broke loose
in an old car and cut the top right off the distributor. That time I
wasnt going anywhere. We had to push the car off the road, get a ride
home, and cone back the next day with a new dist. and replace it. That
was a really weird problem.

The emission controls are the most problematic - things like O2
sensors and catalytic converters going bad - but then they still run -
and if you'd ever had to sort out the emission controls on carbureted
engines from the seventies on up - the new stuff, in my experience, is
a piece of cake. They even diagnose themselves.

Driveability problems caused by gremlins in the emission control
valving, hoses, and other trash don't exist any more. If the light
comes on, you put the scanner on, read the code, and if you have any
understanding how things work, the unit tells you what is wrong. Not
necessarily what part to change - but what is wrong and where to start
looking.


My Caprice 1989 was the last year they used a carb. It has 16 vacuum
hoses. When I had to change the intake manifold gasket because of
coolant leaking outside of the engine, I spent over an hour just drawing
a chart and putting labels in each and every hose. PIA! Yea, too many
emission things on tht engine. A mechainc once helped me with a
problem, and told me to eliminate several of them. I did, and it ran
better.

and most of the engine
work can only be done by the pros. The backyard mechanic/owner is
pretty much dead these days, at least for engine work.


And would be the same if you had carbs instead of EFI.

Getting parts for anything old enough to have a carb is getting more
difficult by the day - unless you get into collector stuff where
reproduction replacement parts are available - and then the price is
as high or higher than for current "high tech" vehicles.

Getting parts for both my 88 F-150 and 89 Caprice are getting harder to
find, particularly junk yard parts and body parts. Brakes and most
engine parts are still available. A lot of guys restore and rebuild
these old Ford trucks around here. Actually mine was partly restored,
with a new box, and the driver door, but the rest was needing work. Whe
I bought it I had to completely replace the entire brake system,
re-mount the cab which was not attached on one side, repair some bad
wiring, and more. Soon after the rear end had to be rebuilt, and now
I'm dealing with the cooling system. Seems that for every day I drive
it, it's broke down for 3 or more days. As soon as the cooling is
fixed, it's getting a "for sale" sign.

On the other hand, the caprice is as reliable as any car can be. I did
some brake and front end work in fall, and replaced the battery and some
tires. Aside from the choke issues, it starts and runs every time. It
will need some exhaust system work soon, and I know there is a bad rear
shock, but it always gets me where I need to go.

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:01:23 +0000 (UTC),
(Larry W) wrote:

In article ,
wrote:
...snipped...

My 89 Caprice has lots of miles and I've never had any carb problems,
aside from the choke being a little touchy. I cant complain about the
gas milage either.


What engine does your Caprice have? I think by 89 the 305 and 350 had both
been switch to TBI but maybe a 307 was still available with a carb.

It's the 307 Olds engine. The body is a station wagon, and they seem to
have always used those engines in the wagons. Station wagons are hard
to find anymore, so I try to keep it in good shape. I've been offerred
some pretty good money for it, but I'd rather keep it since it's so
reliable, and I like the STW body. This was the last year they had a
carb. It has some electronics in the carb, there are 2 plugs on it.
Before this one, I had an 86 Olds STW. The body was almost identical,
the engine was the same, except only one elec. plug on the carb. I
still have that car for parts, but had to quit driving it when the frame
broke and was too rusty to weld, not to mention the tranny was dying.
The engine in that one still ran well, and aside from taking the
electronic ign module off of it, and the starter, it's still complete.

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 13:58:04 -0600, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:50:55 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:18:45 -0600, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:21:58 -0500, wrote:

Your perrogative. The Tundra is a good truck - but pricey. The Tacoma
is a decent truck too - but also pricey. Comparable to a Ranger but a
higher snack bracket.
A base F150 is a rock solid basic truck - better value than the Toyota
in many ways - particularly if you are not worried about resale -
drive the wheels off of it. The GM pickup likewize - a bit pricier
than the f150.

Buy either one 3 years old and drive it till it drops - maintaining it
properly that can be half a million miles on either of them - and the
parts are readilly available everywhere - new or used.

I'm a great fan of Toyota - was a Toyota service manager for 10 years
- they make great stuff - but dollar for dollar a good 3 year old GM
or Ford is better VALUE for a truck. If you want a fancy truck - the
Tundra takes it.

I'm a farmer. I want a truck that can work, and the body can hold up to
the abuse farm trucks get. And I want reliability. I dont want fancy,
and I cant afford to buy new. I also want and need 4wd, and FULL 4wd,
not what they call 4wd on those "city trucks", where only half of tires
grip (something about the differentials). I have not had very good luck
with the F-150s. They all seem to break down way too often, compared to
GM. And I've had two of them, 88 and a 90, both had the rearend
bearings go to hell. One actually started on fire inside the brake
drum. I wont buy another Ford truck. GM is my preference, but I have
been looking at the Dodge Ram too.

At the same time, the most depenable truck I ever had was a 78 F-150
with 400 engine 4wd automatic. That thing was built like an army tank.
WhenI finally quit driving it, the tranny was dying, the lockouts were
screwed up, the box had literally fallen off the frame on one side,
crushing the gas filler hose so I could not get gas in it. Yet, that
rear end never had bearing problems, and when I quit driving it, that
400 engine ran like the day it was new. However, that engine drank gas
faster than a drunk can drink a beer. 7mpg normal, down to 3mpg when it
was hauling a load of hay. A friend of mine still has the engine from
it in his garage.
And whst is going to give you better service for the money??

You need an F250 or 350 for the work you want to do. Or a "super
duty". The GMC is built a bit heavier (as well as the Chevy - which is
genereally a bit cheaper) You should have the 3/4 ton GMC too - not
the half ton.

The big Toyota is a good choice too, but buying them used is more
difficult - and more expensive - and when something DOES go wrong - it
will cost you more.

A 3500 Dodge Diesel dually will do the job too - but too much torque
for the rest of the truck if you get "RAMMY" with it.

For heavy farm use I wouldn't have a gasoline engine. The early
powerstrokes were a bit fragile for my tastes - and the Duramax had
reliability problems too. Nothing is perfect, but you'd likely have
better luch engine-wize with a Cummins Ram.

I sort of agree with the need for a heavier duty truck. This F-150 I
have now came with overload springs, so it can easily handle the normal
loads I haul. My most common loading, and normally the heaviest loads I
haul are loads of hay, with the average load being one ton maximum.
Everything else is normally pulled behind the truck such as hay and
grain wagons, and implement machinery.


So you are overloading it by 100% on a GOOD day - and the wagons are
generally also exceding the GCVW by 100% or more.
That old 78 F-150 used to sag, till a friend sold me some leaf springs
from a very heavy duty truck. I put them in and nothing would push that
frame down, but it rode like a concrete truck. I wish I would have kept
those springs when I junked the body, after selling the engine and a few
other parts.

Still overloading the axles and axle bearings - and quite possibly the
tires and wheels as well. Not to mention the poor frame!.

While I know diesels are more durable and a little better on fuel, I'd
not want one because in this climate where we get well below zero in
winter, all I hear from other farmers are problems with the fuel gelling
up, even with the additives made to prevent it. They're good in warm
weather but a pain in the ass in the cold. I'll stick with gasoline.


Up here in Ontario they are just fine. Much better torque for slugging
around the farm - and who uses gasoline tractors any more????
Sure not around here. The winter diesel doesn't have any trouble
flowing here. Even a ****ty B414 International will start in
Huntsville / Parry Sound Ontario if you plug it in for half an hour.
(or feed it ether) Friend's Toyota Hilux Diesel was even starting on
one glow-plug if he cycled it twice - ran like crap and smoked like a
fiend - starts and runs beautifully now since he put in new glowplugs.

Just don't get caught with off-road fuel in your road truck!!!!!

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:10:08 -0600, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:53:04 +0000 (UTC),
(Larry W) wrote:

Let me just throw out here, that just because a car repair shop owner
says that 50% or whatever of his business is replacing in-tank fuel pumps,
that does not necessarily mean that 100% of those pumps actually needed to
be replaced...

:wq

While I get your drift, but I know for fact several of the people who's
cars/trucks most definately did not have a working pump. I dont enjoy
working on machinery too much. I fix most of my own, but when friends
ask me to do repairs, I tell them no. Yet, I'll often do a simple
diagnosis for them. It's easy to stick a piece of hose in the gas tank,
hold it to my ear and listen for the pump. If I dont hear it, I will
usually check for power at the wire going to the pump. If there's
power, the pump is shot. Then they can take it to a mechanic or fix it
themself.

Or the ground is bad - or the connector to the pump is bad.

I am wondering if we have some fuel additives around here that ruins the
pumps. Not all parts of the country get the same fuel, and here in the
north, we have summer gas and winter gas. Who knows whats in it that
may do damage. All of it contains alcohol these days too, yet in an
adjoining state, they still sell pure 100% gasoline.

Up here in Ontario we get winter gas, and hooch too.

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:46:45 -0600, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:01:23 +0000 (UTC),
(Larry W) wrote:

In article ,
wrote:
...snipped...

My 89 Caprice has lots of miles and I've never had any carb problems,
aside from the choke being a little touchy. I cant complain about the
gas milage either.


What engine does your Caprice have? I think by 89 the 305 and 350 had both
been switch to TBI but maybe a 307 was still available with a carb.

It's the 307 Olds engine. The body is a station wagon, and they seem to
have always used those engines in the wagons.

My son had a mid to late '80's Chevy wagon with the Olds engine.
Bought it used about in 1999 or 2000. There was a batch of those
307's made with soft cylinder walls, and he got one.
My mechanic told me this, and he had seen more than one.
With about 70k miles on it the blow-by was so bad the cat got plugged
and my son had to hole it with a screwdriver to get down the road.
Since my son really liked the car, I had my mech put in a new GM
Target 307. Same warranty as GM factory. Cost me about $2500.
My mech said it's a real good engine except for that bad batch.
A couple months later the car was stolen, and never recovered.
No insurance. Book value was real low.
Think it had a quad. I remember my mech told me it would cost more if
the blow-by had screwed it up, but he got it all running sweet.

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:38:31 -0600, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:41:24 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:01:13 -0600, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 19:42:47 -0500, wrote:

My next truck is going to have a carb, no matter how old it is.
You can have it. Carburetor rebuilds - leaky floats, sticky and leaky
needle valves, bad accellerator pumps, sticky and malfunctioning
chokes, bad fuel mileage and high exhaust emissions, perculation when
hot - all the problems that have been virtually eliminated by fuel
injection

My 89 Caprice has lots of miles and I've never had any carb problems,
aside from the choke being a little touchy. I cant complain about the
gas milage either.

When this car dont want to start (occasionally), it's because the engine
is still warm, weather is cold, and if the choke is closed too much, the
engine will flood. I pop the air cleaner cover, stick a tool in to hold
the choke open and it starts right up. This takes me one minute to fix.
(No starting problems at all in warm weather).

When my F.I. F-150 refuses to start in the same conditions, (partly warm
engine, which was shut off for a few minutes), there is nothing I can
do, other than sit there for 20 minutes or more, or start walking.

Ever try holding your foot to the floor??? Shuts off the fuel and
opens the air - without having to open the hood, remove the air
cleaner and find the screwdriver.

That dont work on my carb chevy, but it's usually pretty well flooded
once it gets that far. What appears to happen is that frost builds up
on the chole plate and sort of glues it shut.

Thats the beaty uf FI. It works every time - no stinkin' choke to
stick

I will try this on the FI Ford truck. I just asked a local mechanic
what might cause that problem, and he told me to put the pedal to the
floor and try it again. But since I'm still waiting for my radiator, I
have not used the truck lately to try it.

That's what I hate about F.I. if it dont start, or some other problem,
there is nothing you can do. If a carb engine dont start, you can
ususlly screw around with it and at least get home, if not fix the
problem. I've taken the tops off carbs on the shoulder of the road
because of a stuck float, and was driving again in no time.

On top of that, when a carb screws up, a $20 carb kit will fix it right
up. When a F.I. engine screws up, it's off to a mechanic, a tow truck,
and to the bank to get a loan for hundreds of dollars to get it running
again.


And good luck getting a "$20 carb kit" for your average old clunker.
A gasket only kit for a quadrajet is $30 to $50 if you can wait to
order it online. A Holley 4600 is about $60.

A full renew kit for that holley is about $75 for a 77/78 Ford.

WHEN they fail - which is not very often.
I've never worked as a mechanic, but I've done almost all my own auto
repairs since I started driving around 44 years ago. I rarely went to a
mechanic with the old cars. I've spent more to have F.I vehicles
repaired at a mechanic in the last 8 or 9 years (since I got my first
F.I vehicle), than I spent on parts the first 35ish years of driving.
And I've still done all the other repairs myself such as brakes,
u-joints, hoses, radiators, belts, tires, etc.....

I'm not impressed by F.I in the least. It's complicated, costly to
repair, leaves drivers stranded, less reliable,
I'll have to dissagree with you on the reliability. I have put MANY
vehicles over the 250,000km without a fuel injection problem. And
when you add electronic ignition into the mix, I have had less trouble
even there than with standard ignition. I've had a couple coil packs
fail - but not as many as coils on the old point ignition vehicles.
Some cars had issues with the ignitors - but more cars had points burn
out - or ballast resistors - and bad capacitors. Add bad vac advance
units, sticking advance weights, and worn dist shafts and they were
DEFINITELY more troublesom than today's electronic controls.

I have to admit that after working on that stuff for over 40 years, I
know a lot more what to look for on a carb vehicle. This FI is all new
to me. I will agree that the electronic ignitions on the carb vehicles
was a big improvement over points. I even converted one of my tractors
to an after market elec. ign. system.

I still recall back in the 70s when a vacuum advance weight broke loose
in an old car and cut the top right off the distributor.

Vacuum advance has no weights - that was your centrifical advance.
That time I
wasnt going anywhere. We had to push the car off the road, get a ride
home, and cone back the next day with a new dist. and replace it. That
was a really weird problem.

The emission controls are the most problematic - things like O2
sensors and catalytic converters going bad - but then they still run -
and if you'd ever had to sort out the emission controls on carbureted
engines from the seventies on up - the new stuff, in my experience, is
a piece of cake. They even diagnose themselves.

Driveability problems caused by gremlins in the emission control
valving, hoses, and other trash don't exist any more. If the light
comes on, you put the scanner on, read the code, and if you have any
understanding how things work, the unit tells you what is wrong. Not
necessarily what part to change - but what is wrong and where to start
looking.


My Caprice 1989 was the last year they used a carb. It has 16 vacuum
hoses. When I had to change the intake manifold gasket because of
coolant leaking outside of the engine, I spent over an hour just drawing
a chart and putting labels in each and every hose. PIA! Yea, too many
emission things on tht engine. A mechainc once helped me with a
problem, and told me to eliminate several of them. I did, and it ran
better.

And electrically controlled carb on most of them too.

and most of the engine
work can only be done by the pros. The backyard mechanic/owner is
pretty much dead these days, at least for engine work.


And would be the same if you had carbs instead of EFI.

Getting parts for anything old enough to have a carb is getting more
difficult by the day - unless you get into collector stuff where
reproduction replacement parts are available - and then the price is
as high or higher than for current "high tech" vehicles.

Getting parts for both my 88 F-150 and 89 Caprice are getting harder to
find, particularly junk yard parts and body parts. Brakes and most
engine parts are still available. A lot of guys restore and rebuild
these old Ford trucks around here. Actually mine was partly restored,
with a new box, and the driver door, but the rest was needing work. Whe
I bought it I had to completely replace the entire brake system,
re-mount the cab which was not attached on one side, repair some bad
wiring, and more. Soon after the rear end had to be rebuilt, and now
I'm dealing with the cooling system. Seems that for every day I drive
it, it's broke down for 3 or more days. As soon as the cooling is
fixed, it's getting a "for sale" sign.

You'd likely have gotten the same price without fixing the radiator.
Generally the price can only go SO low!!!

On the other hand, the caprice is as reliable as any car can be. I did
some brake and front end work in fall, and replaced the battery and some
tires. Aside from the choke issues, it starts and runs every time. It
will need some exhaust system work soon, and I know there is a bad rear
shock, but it always gets me where I need to go.

And other than the choke - which is a total non-issue on a car 2 years
newer (with EFI) - so would a fuel injected car. None of what you've
had to do has ANYTHING to do with EFI.
And from 1996 on up, diagnostics is a lot less of a "black art".

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:54:44 -0500, wrote:

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 13:58:04 -0600, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 16:50:55 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 07:18:45 -0600, wrote:

On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:21:58 -0500, wrote:

Your perrogative. The Tundra is a good truck - but pricey. The Tacoma
is a decent truck too - but also pricey. Comparable to a Ranger but a
higher snack bracket.
A base F150 is a rock solid basic truck - better value than the Toyota
in many ways - particularly if you are not worried about resale -
drive the wheels off of it. The GM pickup likewize - a bit pricier
than the f150.

Buy either one 3 years old and drive it till it drops - maintaining it
properly that can be half a million miles on either of them - and the
parts are readilly available everywhere - new or used.

I'm a great fan of Toyota - was a Toyota service manager for 10 years
- they make great stuff - but dollar for dollar a good 3 year old GM
or Ford is better VALUE for a truck. If you want a fancy truck - the
Tundra takes it.

I'm a farmer. I want a truck that can work, and the body can hold up to
the abuse farm trucks get. And I want reliability. I dont want fancy,
and I cant afford to buy new. I also want and need 4wd, and FULL 4wd,
not what they call 4wd on those "city trucks", where only half of tires
grip (something about the differentials). I have not had very good luck
with the F-150s. They all seem to break down way too often, compared to
GM. And I've had two of them, 88 and a 90, both had the rearend
bearings go to hell. One actually started on fire inside the brake
drum. I wont buy another Ford truck. GM is my preference, but I have
been looking at the Dodge Ram too.

At the same time, the most depenable truck I ever had was a 78 F-150
with 400 engine 4wd automatic. That thing was built like an army tank.
WhenI finally quit driving it, the tranny was dying, the lockouts were
screwed up, the box had literally fallen off the frame on one side,
crushing the gas filler hose so I could not get gas in it. Yet, that
rear end never had bearing problems, and when I quit driving it, that
400 engine ran like the day it was new. However, that engine drank gas
faster than a drunk can drink a beer. 7mpg normal, down to 3mpg when it
was hauling a load of hay. A friend of mine still has the engine from
it in his garage.
And whst is going to give you better service for the money??

You need an F250 or 350 for the work you want to do. Or a "super
duty". The GMC is built a bit heavier (as well as the Chevy - which is
genereally a bit cheaper) You should have the 3/4 ton GMC too - not
the half ton.

The big Toyota is a good choice too, but buying them used is more
difficult - and more expensive - and when something DOES go wrong - it
will cost you more.

A 3500 Dodge Diesel dually will do the job too - but too much torque
for the rest of the truck if you get "RAMMY" with it.

For heavy farm use I wouldn't have a gasoline engine. The early
powerstrokes were a bit fragile for my tastes - and the Duramax had
reliability problems too. Nothing is perfect, but you'd likely have
better luch engine-wize with a Cummins Ram.

I sort of agree with the need for a heavier duty truck. This F-150 I
have now came with overload springs, so it can easily handle the normal
loads I haul. My most common loading, and normally the heaviest loads I
haul are loads of hay, with the average load being one ton maximum.
Everything else is normally pulled behind the truck such as hay and
grain wagons, and implement machinery.


So you are overloading it by 100% on a GOOD day - and the wagons are
generally also exceding the GCVW by 100% or more.

How do you figure 100% overload? Even my little Ranger will haul
1600lbs. (5260-3606). Well, I wouldn't do it now that it's 12yo but I
have carried over 1000lbs (1/2yd of stone), many times; didn't even
faze it.

And from 1996 on up, diagnostics is a lot less of a "black art".

Not so! Especially with some mfg's.

Here's an excellent example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-MTko-otio&feature=em

Yes, I know it's long... runs just over 40 minutes... make some popcorn
& kick back.

We see stuff like this more often than you'd think... scan tools really
have to be taken with a grain of salt. You really have to be careful, or
you can end up eating very expensive parts, and/or blowing more time
than you could ever bill for.

This is why I say buy 'real' car's & trucks.

Erik

PS, Incidentally, this 'ScannerDanner' guy has many superb automotive
computer related troubleshooting video's up on YouTube.

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:16:56 -0800, Erik wrote:


And from 1996 on up, diagnostics is a lot less of a "black art".

Not so! Especially with some mfg's.

Here's an excellent example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-MTko-otio&feature=em

Yes, I know it's long... runs just over 40 minutes... make some popcorn
& kick back.

We see stuff like this more often than you'd think... scan tools really
have to be taken with a grain of salt. You really have to be careful, or
you can end up eating very expensive parts, and/or blowing more time
than you could ever bill for.

This is why I say buy 'real' car's & trucks.

Erik

PS, Incidentally, this 'ScannerDanner' guy has many superb automotive
computer related troubleshooting video's up on YouTube.
Like I said - the scanner does not tell you what to replace. It tells
you what is wrong.
It says the right bank is lean, or the left bank is rich, or the left
bank front O2 sensor is slow, or reading low.. It is up to the
mechanic to KNOW what will cause those problems. And how to find /
eliminate the possibilities without throwing the parts department at
it. Do you have a bad injector? or a vacuum leak? Or is the engine
burning oil?

Or the scanner tells you you have an intermittent misfire. Or a
misfire on cyl 5. What is causing the misfire? A bad plug, a bad wire,
a bad coil, a vacuum leak, a bad injector, a bad valve? At least you
know to look at #5 cyl, not 1, 2, 3, 4, or 6 (or 7 or 8)
It is the combination of codes and/or other symptoms, together with
the history of the vehicle, and knowing what goes wrong on certain
vehicles.

You did not have that ability on the older cars - Yes, you could hook
a scope to it - and if you knew how to read both the primary and
secondary patterns, the vacuum guage, the dynamic compression test,
etc it COULD give you most of the information. But not everyone had
the money and space to have an analyzer scope. Every DIY shadetree
mechanic can afford a basic OBD2 scanner, and it will fit in the glove
compartment (or even the ash tray)

The mid-year stuff - electronic controls but pre 1996 (pre OBD2) every
vehicle needed it's own specific scan tester - some gave lots of good
information, and others were almost useless. Some would blink the CEL
when you connected the right combination of pins/wires on the test
plug to spell out the code.

wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:16:56 -0800, Erik wrote:


And from 1996 on up, diagnostics is a lot less of a "black art".

Not so! Especially with some mfg's.

Here's an excellent example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-MTko-otio&feature=em

Yes, I know it's long... runs just over 40 minutes... make some popcorn
& kick back.

We see stuff like this more often than you'd think... scan tools really
have to be taken with a grain of salt. You really have to be careful, or
you can end up eating very expensive parts, and/or blowing more time
than you could ever bill for.

This is why I say buy 'real' car's & trucks.

Erik

PS, Incidentally, this 'ScannerDanner' guy has many superb automotive
computer related troubleshooting video's up on YouTube.
Like I said - the scanner does not tell you what to replace. It tells
you what is wrong.
It says the right bank is lean, or the left bank is rich, or the left
bank front O2 sensor is slow, or reading low.. It is up to the
mechanic to KNOW what will cause those problems. And how to find /
eliminate the possibilities without throwing the parts department at
it. Do you have a bad injector? or a vacuum leak? Or is the engine
burning oil?

Or the scanner tells you you have an intermittent misfire. Or a
misfire on cyl 5. What is causing the misfire? A bad plug, a bad wire,
a bad coil, a vacuum leak, a bad injector, a bad valve? At least you
know to look at #5 cyl, not 1, 2, 3, 4, or 6 (or 7 or 8)
It is the combination of codes and/or other symptoms, together with
the history of the vehicle, and knowing what goes wrong on certain
vehicles.

You did not have that ability on the older cars - Yes, you could hook
a scope to it - and if you knew how to read both the primary and
secondary patterns, the vacuum guage, the dynamic compression test,
etc it COULD give you most of the information. But not everyone had
the money and space to have an analyzer scope. Every DIY shadetree
mechanic can afford a basic OBD2 scanner, and it will fit in the glove
compartment (or even the ash tray)

The mid-year stuff - electronic controls but pre 1996 (pre OBD2) every
vehicle needed it's own specific scan tester - some gave lots of good
information, and others were almost useless. Some would blink the CEL
when you connected the right combination of pins/wires on the test
plug to spell out the code.

In trying to fix a 1995 olds with OBD 1.5 , had troubles. First was
question on reading the computer. Later found it faulty, replaced with junk
yard $35 unit. I had trouble trying reading first computer as well as
shops. Intermittent problem giving codes. Sure the intake gaskets first
needed replaced. Intermittent. Giving crank sensor codes. Still problem.
Turned out to be intermittent spark control module. The sensors go to the
spark control module.

I bought OBD 1.5 USB plug in, but had trouble communication. Never got to
test again after computer was replaced. Shop took over.

Pre 1995 gm vehicles had less computer info. To add confusion, there was
more than one version of OBD 1.5

Greg

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:12:08 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 14:46:45 -0600, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2013 23:01:23 +0000 (UTC),
(Larry W) wrote:

In article ,
wrote:
...snipped...

My 89 Caprice has lots of miles and I've never had any carb problems,
aside from the choke being a little touchy. I cant complain about the
gas milage either.


What engine does your Caprice have? I think by 89 the 305 and 350 had both
been switch to TBI but maybe a 307 was still available with a carb.

It's the 307 Olds engine. The body is a station wagon, and they seem to
have always used those engines in the wagons.

My son had a mid to late '80's Chevy wagon with the Olds engine.
Bought it used about in 1999 or 2000. There was a batch of those
307's made with soft cylinder walls, and he got one.
My mechanic told me this, and he had seen more than one.
With about 70k miles on it the blow-by was so bad the cat got plugged
and my son had to hole it with a screwdriver to get down the road.
Since my son really liked the car, I had my mech put in a new GM
Target 307. Same warranty as GM factory. Cost me about $2500.
My mech said it's a real good engine except for that bad batch.
A couple months later the car was stolen, and never recovered.
No insurance. Book value was real low.
Think it had a quad. I remember my mech told me it would cost more if
the blow-by had screwed it up, but he got it all running sweet.


I guess I had the good engine. Over 200k miles and it still runs well.
This is the first I heard about this problem. The one thing about them,
they never have the best power on hills, and that was disgussed in a STW
discussion group I found on the web some years ago. They said it was
because the shape of the cam, which made for better gas milage, but a
little low in power. I live in a hilly area, so at times it is a bit
doggy, but I've had this car for many years. I'm just used to it, and
take the trans out of OD on those hills, and take my time getting to the
top on the real big hills.

Too bad yours was stolen, bet it would still be running.

On Fri, 1 Feb 2013 05:39:04 +0000 (UTC), gregz
wrote:

wrote:
On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:16:56 -0800, Erik wrote:


And from 1996 on up, diagnostics is a lot less of a "black art".

Not so! Especially with some mfg's.

Here's an excellent example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-MTko-otio&feature=em

Yes, I know it's long... runs just over 40 minutes... make some popcorn
& kick back.

We see stuff like this more often than you'd think... scan tools really
have to be taken with a grain of salt. You really have to be careful, or
you can end up eating very expensive parts, and/or blowing more time
than you could ever bill for.

This is why I say buy 'real' car's & trucks.

Erik

PS, Incidentally, this 'ScannerDanner' guy has many superb automotive
computer related troubleshooting video's up on YouTube.
Like I said - the scanner does not tell you what to replace. It tells
you what is wrong.
It says the right bank is lean, or the left bank is rich, or the left
bank front O2 sensor is slow, or reading low.. It is up to the
mechanic to KNOW what will cause those problems. And how to find /
eliminate the possibilities without throwing the parts department at
it. Do you have a bad injector? or a vacuum leak? Or is the engine
burning oil?

Or the scanner tells you you have an intermittent misfire. Or a
misfire on cyl 5. What is causing the misfire? A bad plug, a bad wire,
a bad coil, a vacuum leak, a bad injector, a bad valve? At least you
know to look at #5 cyl, not 1, 2, 3, 4, or 6 (or 7 or 8)
It is the combination of codes and/or other symptoms, together with
the history of the vehicle, and knowing what goes wrong on certain
vehicles.

You did not have that ability on the older cars - Yes, you could hook
a scope to it - and if you knew how to read both the primary and
secondary patterns, the vacuum guage, the dynamic compression test,
etc it COULD give you most of the information. But not everyone had
the money and space to have an analyzer scope. Every DIY shadetree
mechanic can afford a basic OBD2 scanner, and it will fit in the glove
compartment (or even the ash tray)

The mid-year stuff - electronic controls but pre 1996 (pre OBD2) every
vehicle needed it's own specific scan tester - some gave lots of good
information, and others were almost useless. Some would blink the CEL
when you connected the right combination of pins/wires on the test
plug to spell out the code.

In trying to fix a 1995 olds with OBD 1.5 , had troubles. First was
question on reading the computer. Later found it faulty, replaced with junk
yard $35 unit. I had trouble trying reading first computer as well as
shops. Intermittent problem giving codes. Sure the intake gaskets first
needed replaced. Intermittent. Giving crank sensor codes. Still problem.
Turned out to be intermittent spark control module. The sensors go to the
spark control module.

I bought OBD 1.5 USB plug in, but had trouble communication. Never got to
test again after computer was replaced. Shop took over.

Pre 1995 gm vehicles had less computer info. To add confusion, there was
more than one version of OBD 1.5

Actually, I could read MORE information from my 1988 Chrysler and 1990
Aerostar than I can get off the new OBD2 vehicles - but it was raw
data that I had to interpret by myself. I could read the value of
every sensor - but the scanner had no idea what was correct, or within
range, so it didn't give a code saying "check this"

Greg
Actually, officially, no such thing as 1.5 You had all the
non-standards that were machine specific that fell loosely into OBD1 -
then there was draft OBD2 or what we in the trade called "pre-2" -
basically just GM trying to get a jump on the technology, then OBD2.
Anything before the full OBD2 of 1996 was a bit hit or miss. My Auto
X Ray scanner has 5 lead kits -OBD2,OBD2 manufacturer specific, GM,
Ford and Chrysler. Each of the imports had their own "flavour" as well
- I didn't bother buying any of them The "manufacturer specific" was
for 1995 GM vehicles with OBD2 plugs that were not fully OBD2
compliant.

On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 18:16:56 -0800, Erik wrote:


And from 1996 on up, diagnostics is a lot less of a "black art".

Not so! Especially with some mfg's.

Here's an excellent example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-MTko-otio&feature=em

Yes, I know it's long... runs just over 40 minutes... make some popcorn
& kick back.


Good vid for tech geeks. What, a couple hours reading meters,
flowcharts, schematics, tracing wires, thinking, speculating,
thinking.
All to find an obviously hosed wiring harness that should have been
evident after about 10 minutes of inspection.
That's what I do first with all electrical faults, unless experience
tells me otherwise. Especially if I see a leaky valve cover gasket
has soaked a harness with oil.
BTW, you can throw a cam sensor, crank sensor and TPS at that engine
for less than $75, and about an hour labor.
Not saying do that, but it's a viable strategy for a DIY'er.
All these sensors and other electrical components degrade over time,
so new is usually best.
My wife's Lumina 3100 just threw a PO300, was chugging when hot, and
she smelled hot metal. BTDT with other 3100's. Bad coil or spark
module. Didn't even consider finding out which coil pack, or if it
was the spark module. Put all new in. Done, finished.
I can't believe he even considered replacing the ECU without checking
the wiring first. He probably knew the harness was bad earlier than
he said but held that so he'd have a good vid. Probably too good to
make that mistake.
But his purpose is to show scanner troubleshooting, whether it's
needed or not.
Good catch for geeks knowing the ECU sources 12v to
cam and crank on a shared circuit.
But that engine is basically a no-brainer for a moderately competent
DIYer since parts are cheap to throw at it.
Anything but an ECU fault or a hidden harness short is no big deal.

We see stuff like this more often than you'd think... scan tools really
have to be taken with a grain of salt. You really have to be careful, or
you can end up eating very expensive parts, and/or blowing more time
than you could ever bill for.


That's why I think the guy making the vid didn't charge for all the
"diagnostic" time he put into it.
ODB codes are great, and either pinpoint the problem, or give you a
starting point


This is why I say buy 'real' car's & trucks.

Erik

And which "real" car can't suffer degraded wiring due to neglecting an
oil leak?