HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bphdarcy@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (SJ Roc D'Arcy, MBP)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: an honest mechanic!
Date: 6 Apr 92 14:36:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <9204021658.AA10587@volitans.morningstar.com>, bob@morningstar.com (Bob Sutterfield) writes...
>My 83 Mazda RX-7 GSL occasionally needs work, and (based on a
>recommendation from Jeff Nappi) I have been taking it to Carswell's
>Rotary Connection, on Rt 16 between Columbus and Pataskala OH.  I knew
>he was good, but it turns out he's honest too, which is a rare trait
>to find in an automobile mechanic.

Since this is a great thread to follow, I'd thought I'd like to add
my opinion.  I usually do the majority of my own mechanical work, but 
when I need something done fast or have a particularly tricky problem,
I take it to a place called Becker's Sunoco in Amhearst, NY.  The guy
is honest (so far over the last three years) and has a great price.

An example is that I took my 88 Grand Am to him for the "Infamous
vibration problem (see previous months post)" and he spent six hours
trying to find the problem.  He couldn't find anything wrong that 
was obvious.  He then called and said if he had to look further he
would have to charge for labor.  He actually did the first six hours
for free because he couldn't fix the problem.

He also readjust everything he does for free and get real upset if
one of his mechanics screw up (they are all quite good).

SJRD
From: billp@hprnd.rose.hp.com (Bill Prouty)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: 74 2002 questions...
Date: 3 Apr 92 22:53:43 GMT
Organization: HP Roseville Networks Division

74 Deuce questions

Static:
Check your wires, stock BMW wires are solid core (ie. not carbon filled) with
resistive conectors at each end. Once you have restored the proper wiring, then
you can play with some capacitors and more elaborate devices.

Idle drop out after getting off the freeway:
If you have the factory Solex two barrel carb, remove it and bury it. It has 
given few people trouble when buried six foot under. Replace it with a Weber
(DGAV 36-32 ???) a CA legal replacement. It still is not the best carb in town
but is legal and legally eliminates a vacuum line. Next check sluggish vac 
advance, and centrifical advance in the distributor, also see if the EGR is 
opening and closing properly. Also check all your standard tune specs.

Seats:
These 320iS seats are like gold, --- however,  I do have a pair in excellent 
condtion that I'll let go for $600. It is a complete 320 interior (black), not 
interested in breaking it up.  However, since you do work for SUN, a competitors
surcharge ( oh say $100 )certainly seems appropriate.  

Good luck,  Happy moteren!
From: zhaoe@mipgsun.mipg.upenn.edu (Enping Zhao (08-16-91))
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Hard to start
Date: 15 Apr 92 18:11:24 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

I have a Honda Accord 85. It is hard to start it. Every morning I have 
to turn-on and turn-off at least twice, often three times, to start
the car. Usually it takes 20 seconds. The problem doesn't occur if the 
car was driven several hours
ago. Though higher temperature makes it easier,  even during the 
morning in August, the problem existed.

The gas milage is also low (22 miles/gal in city). I suspect that more fuel
is wasted during the prolonged starting process.

What's the problem with the starter?

Thanks for any suggestions!

Enping Zhao

zhaoe@mipgsun.mipg.upenn.edu

Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: tedebear@leland.Stanford.EDU (Theodore Chen)
Subject: Re: Mustang V6 pings
Keywords: mustang
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 04:03:10 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.133803.11108@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> bohdan@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (bohdan.l.bodnar) writes:
>In article <bell.1@flounder.nosc.mil> bell@flounder.nosc.mil (Tom T. Bell) writes:
>>I have an '85 Mustang 3.8L V6 that has a pinging problem.  I've tried using
>>different gas and octane boosters to no avail.  I've replaced the ignition
>>coil, thick film ignition unit, distributer stator, rotor, and cap, and the
>>plugs and wires.  I've also adjusted the timing within specs.  The car
>>has 130,000 miles on it so I figure it must be carbon build-up.  Does this
>>sound likely?  Is there any way to remove carbon in the combustion chamber
>>without removing the head?  Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>
>I had a similar problem in a 1986 Mustang.  The engine knock would occur only
>on a *hot* engine (not overheated -- just warmed up after driving on a highway
>for several minutes).  The knock was caused by lack of exhaust gas
>recirculation (EGR) which was due to a plugged port on the carburetor.  I
>removed the carburetor, cleaned out the port, flooded the barrel with
>carburetor cleaner, and now have a nicely humming engine.  Send me e-amil if
>you want details.
>

my friend's dad just sprayed some water into the carb while it was
running.  regardless of whether you use water or carb cleaner,
be careful not to put too much in too quickly.  water is incompressible
and you could end up blowing a gasket.  i've heard stories of the
cylinder head becoming airborne....
From: osborne@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Larry N. Osborne)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Engine Temp Quickly "Surges" Up & Down
Date: 8 Apr 92 02:15:44 GMT
Organization: University of Hawaii

In article <1992Apr7.235357.12207@news.Hawaii.Edu> osborne@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Larry N. Osborne) writes:

>Happened to me three times:  Once it was a bad water pump, once frozen
>hoses, and once (blush) low water level.  

To follow myself up, in rereading the article to which I was
responding, I note that the fuel indicator went up in concert (I don't
think I'd have missed it in real life!).  Clearly the problem isn't in
overheating.

I concur with all the more careful readers who say it's probably a
grounding problem.  

-oz

For I = 1 to 1000
I will read more carefully in the future.
Next I


--
osborne@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu (preferred)      | Larry N Osborne
osborne@uhunix.bitnet                           | SLIS, 2550 The Mall
fax +1 808 956 5835                             | University of Hawaii at Manoa
or via W.A.S.T.E.                               | Honolulu, Hawaii  96822
From: sc963413@longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU (Steve Chaffee)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: legal NAPZ performance - advice
Keywords: NAPZ, nissan, performance
Date: 10 Apr 92 16:41:26 GMT
Reply-To: sc963413@longs.LANCE.ColoState.EDU (Steve Chaffee)
Organization: Colorado State U. Center for Computer Assisted Engineering.

I own a 1985 nissan 4by pickup with the 2.4l NAPZ engine. 
I'm tired of getting passed by 3-yr olds on tricycles and
chevy luvs pulling 5th wheel trailers when I head up the
mountain passes. The truck is fine in the city, but rarely gets
driven there. Advice needed, how to legally (smoq-wise) improve
the power (especially below 3000 rpm) of this beast, without 
throwing away gas mileage or emmisions. It has 70,000 miles,
stock tires, and has incredibly clean emissions.

Ideas i've had:

change to electric, thermostat controlled cooling fan, the clutched one drags.

install free-er flowing cat-back exhaust ( will need muffler soon anyway)

improve intake breathing, larger-k&n type filter?

remove air-conditioning belt( any problems with doing this, will it buy
me anything if i don't ever use it anyway?)

messing with various aspects of the tuning, different plugs, more advance,
different mixture - everything now is to stock specs.



other, not-so-cheap options:

msd-type ignition enhancer - anyone with experiences on these?

carb work, replacement (if legal one can be found-suggestions?)
the choke is weak anyway and opens too soon, but does fully open,
and the part is $200.

cam - supposedly nissan makes a smog-legal performance cam, but i
haven't fully researched it, and i don't wan't to destroy the engine.



Any information, experiences, tips, etc. will be much appreciated.

Thanks 

Steve

POST
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: tgl@slee01.srl.ford.com (Tom Leone)
Subject: Re: Gas vs propane
Organization: Ford Motor Company Scientific Research Labs, Dearborn, MI
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 12:51:46 GMT

bmahler@javelin.sim.es.com (Brian Mahler) writes:
: What are the pro's and con's of propane verses gasoline.
: 
: 	Is you miles per gal increased?
: 	Is the life of the engin increased?
: 	Is it cheaper?
: 	What are the draw backs?
: 
: If it matters, the vehicle I'm considering converting is a 
: '90 Ford Club Wagon, 1 ton, 351 fuel enjected,

Well, propane has the POTENTIAL for higher fuel economy, if you
increase the compression ratio.  You can do that because propane
has a higher octane rating than gasoline.  This may be
partially offset by the need for a big heavy fuel tank.

Propane will produce slightly lower power in the same size
engine.  That's because it's a gaseous fuel, so it displaces
some of the intake air (and you don't get the benefit of air
cooling due to fuel vaporization).  This may be offset by the
increased power from higher compression ratio.

Theoretically, engine durability should not be affected either
way, but any conversion will not be as thoroughly tested as the
original design.

Propane is cheaper than gas (if you know where to buy it).
However, the savings may not pay off the investment for the
conversion.

The main drawback of propane is the huge, heavy, high-pressure
fuel tank.  This is less of a problem with the big van you are
considering.

This information is only from what I've read, I haven't
converted my own vehicle.

Tom Leone <tgl@slee01.srl.ford.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
From: cm@cci632.cci.com (Carl Mercer)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Big problem with a 1990 Toyota 4x4 pickup
Keywords: Help!
Date: 8 Apr 92 15:50:24 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Computer Consoles Incorporated


this is a posting for a friend without net access.  Please respond to me 
and I will forward the information to him.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

To all Toyota V6 truck owners (or anyone who has seen this problem)
 
I own a 1990 4x4 V6 Toyota pickup and I'm getting excessive carbon build-up 
on the valves and in the combustion chamber.  I first took it in to be     
looked at when it had 17K miles on it.  The dealer told me the problem was 
the gas I was using, MOBIL super unleaded.  They did a carbon flush at    
that time.  I switched to regular unleaded gas (Atlantic, Sunoco, Hess).  
I took it back in recently with 26k miles on it and have the exact same  
problem.  They again say it is the gas and that I need another carbon flush 
(this costs some bucks).  They also say that a carbon flush is part of the 
regular maintenance of the truck.  I have a problem with this since its not 
stated in any of the manuals that a carbon flush is needed on a regular basis.   
I am getting fed up with the dealers excusses, any information as to 
the possible problems and solutions for this I would be appreciated.
 
                                                          Bob McElroy
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
NOTE:  I also own a 1990 Toyota V6 4x4 pickup.  I have 37k miles on it 
and I have never had, nor needed a carbon flush.  The plugs were changed 
2K miles ago and were a nice light gray/tan color.  I use the same gas as
Bob (hes, Atlantic).
From: Steve.Kaess@f417.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Steve Kaess)
Sender: Uucp@blkcat.UUCP
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: loss of power, etc.
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 1992 17:07:15 -0500

1)Check that you have not messed up the fireing order, and that the 
cap is not shorting inside.
2)Check that when the rotor points to where the #1 lead would be 
that the timing mark is prety close to tdc
3)check the wires for shorting out, and proper spacing to avoid cross 
firing
4) buy some beer...u will need it!!!
From: dpeterso@mipos2.intel.com (David Peterson)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Question on affect of caster, camber, toe.
Summary: A second opinion.
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:51:24 GMT
Reply-To: dpeterso@mipos3.UUCP (David Peterson)
Organization: Intel Corporation, Santa Clara, CA

In article <1992Mar31.204743.10644@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com> tgl@slee01 (Tom Leone) writes:
>I've gotten quite a few requests for my method of
>"do-it-yourself" wheel alignment, so I decided to post it.  Use
>this method at your own risk.
>  ... deleted ...
>Tom Leone <tgl@slee01.srl.ford.com>

	Interesting, just this weekend, after getting tired of paying for 
bad alignments, I decided to check my car's alignment myself. I checked the 
toe by drawing a trapezoid on the garage floor using a straight edge, two 
plumb bobs, and a tape measure. I hung the plumb bobs from both ends of the 
straight edge, placed the straight edge against the front wheels, and marked 
the position of the plumb bobs on the floor. I then measured all sides and 
diagonals of the resulting trapezoid to insure I got it right. 
	What I liked about my method was that the extended ends of the straight 
edge amplified the effect of the toe angle, increasing the accuracy. Also the
equal diagonals ensured that I had the car set up right. The shape tells you 
everything about the direction of the wheels. You must, however, make sure 
that the plumb bobs are hanging from the centerline of the straight edge, that 
the straight edge is level, and that the staight edge's centerline is an 
accurate representation of the wheels' direction.

            Side View
             ___
            /   \
         __/_____\____           front of car
         | \     /   |
   mark->|  \___/    |<-mark
  point                 point

	BTW, anybody know why the toe would "go out" or is it the 
garage that did the alignment who wasted my front tires? I never hit 
curbs (even parking), though I do love a winding road to myself. ;^) 
I have a 80 VW Jetta.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David Peterson 
Intel Corp., M/S SC4-69, 2625 Walsh Ave.
Santa Clara, Ca. 95052-9940
dpeterso@mipos3.intel.com
From: gajewski@ug.cs.dal.ca (Andy)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Rolling a Civic..
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:39:46 GMT
Distribution: dal
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In <1992Apr7.153148.23534@news.cs.brandeis.edu> andyh@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Andrew J. Huang) writes:

>In article <7jnjaj=.pauly@netcom.com> pauly@netcom.com (Paul Yoshimune) writes:
>>Yes, it can be done, but you'd have to hit it just right.  In general, a car
>>like a Civic will plow the front end if subjected to a very hard turn all of
>>a sudden.  Were you to toss the car one way, then immediately go the other,
>>it would be more likely to pitch the car.  Other cars, like Rabbits, are more
>>prone to rolling the car.  In fact, you often see Rabbits, GTIs, and 2002s
>>lifting the inner rear wheel when cornering excessively hard...
>>
>>-- 
>>-Paul Yoshimune [pauly@netcom.com]

>Actually Rabbits and 2002s are lifting the rear wheel just to reduce
>tire wear.  Except for the male rabbits, which dribble brake fluid
>instead.

>I don't think that lifting the wheel is an indication that the car is
>more likely to roll.  It's certainly an indication of rear roll
>stiffness, but with so much of the mass in the front, lifting a rear
>wheel isn't much of an issue.  The best driven rabbits at Bryar NH try
>to get the wheel lifted throughout the entirety of turn 1.  With a
>2002, you lose power so it isn't such a good move.

>/andy

I totally agree, I have a GTI and the wheel always lifts if I take a corner
over app 40 km/h. I have good tires. Once for fun I put on my winters and
took some corners, The back end just swung out like it was ice, although
it was dry. When the back lifts if VW it means nothing. Start worrying when
you get the front to lift off.

Andy
-- 
ANdy ***********************************************************************
     ___                     "Igoddago, Takideezy & Guluk"        
    /...\___           gajewski@ug.cs.dal.ca     goaway@ac.dal.ca
   |-O----O->                                   
From: Steve.Kaess@f417.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Steve Kaess)
Sender: Uucp@blkcat.UUCP
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Fuel Pump in a 82 Jetta
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 21:04:40 -0500

The jetta fuel pump does not energize unless
1)The engine is runing
2)or the key is in the start position.
I recomend you get a copy of how to keep your rabbit alive, and follow 
the procedure to check out the fi
I think your cold start switch might be the problem.....
keep on smiling
farvignugin forever
From: bohdan@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (bohdan.l.bodnar)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Mustang V6 pings
Keywords: mustang
Date: 13 Apr 92 13:38:03 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <bell.1@flounder.nosc.mil> bell@flounder.nosc.mil (Tom T. Bell) writes:
>I have an '85 Mustang 3.8L V6 that has a pinging problem.  I've tried using
>different gas and octane boosters to no avail.  I've replaced the ignition
>coil, thick film ignition unit, distributer stator, rotor, and cap, and the
>plugs and wires.  I've also adjusted the timing within specs.  The car
>has 130,000 miles on it so I figure it must be carbon build-up.  Does this
>sound likely?  Is there any way to remove carbon in the combustion chamber
>without removing the head?  Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
>
>Tom Bell
>bell@nosc.mil
>_____________________________________________________________
>Tom Bell                                email:  bell@nosc.mil
>NCCOSC RDT&E (NRaD)
>San Diego, CA
>-------------------------------------------------------------


I had a similar problem in a 1986 Mustang.  The engine knock would occur only
on a *hot* engine (not overheated -- just warmed up after driving on a highway
for several minutes).  The knock was caused by lack of exhaust gas
recirculation (EGR) which was due to a plugged port on the carburetor.  I
removed the carburetor, cleaned out the port, flooded the barrel with
carburetor cleaner, and now have a nicely humming engine.  Send me e-amil if
you want details.

Bohdan Bodnar
Organisation: European Space Operation Centre (E.S.O.C)
Date: Monday, 6 Apr 1992 15:10:59 CET
From: Jon <JBEST@ESOC.BITNET>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Braking: Use brakes or transmission ?
Distribution: usa

Perhaps being brought up in the UK where manual boxes are the norm means
that nobody worries too much about this, but one of the reasons I gave up
reading rec.autos.driving was the interminable discussions about engine
braking and double declutching/heel-and-toeing (don't US manufacturers
put synchromesh into their gearboxes?). If you want to slow down, leave
the clutch alone, take your foot off the gas, and use the brake. When you
reach the bottom end of the rev range for that gear, shift down a gear
(this will provide some engine braking). Clutch/gearbox/transmission wear
is negligible. I invariably drive cars with over 60,000 miles on them cos
all my money goes on motorbikes and I've never had trouble with wear in
these bits - the only part that seems to wear significantly is the
brakes (not suprising considering the abuse they get).

   Jon
From: ericy@crchh435.bnr.ca (Eric Youngblood)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.tech
Subject: Re: Fuel octane versus power
Keywords: 41392
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:26:00 GMT
Reply-To: ericy@crchh435.bnr.ca (Eric Youngblood)

In article <17760@oasys.dt.navy.mil>, kiviat@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Brian Kiviat) writes:
|> In rec.autos.tech, JBEST@ESOC.BITNET (Jon) writes:
|> >Does anyone out there know how a change in octane rating affects power?
|> 
|> NONE if your car does not NEED higher octane.  Higher octane will deter
|> pre-ignition "pinging" in cars with higher comp ratios. If your car
|> does not show any prob's with reg 87, 92 won't help you. Octane is NOT
|> a measure of stored energy in the fuel. It is a measure of the propensity
|> of the fuek to ignite before the spark zaps it.
|> 
|> Brian

Right!
Dumping high octane gas into a vehicle that runs fine on 87 octane wont make
any difference. (Excluding the benefits that premium fuel imparts to fuel 
injectors by helping keep them clean - goes for carbs too)

Sharp-eyed readers will deduce while a car may run fine on 87 the engine
can be tuned to take advantage of 92 octane.
The idea is that you will be able to dial in a few more degrees of static
ignition timing which causes increased combustion pressures = more power.
Its this increased combustion pressure that 87 octane cant handle. If you
begin ingition too early the pressure spike will cause low octane gas to
pre-ignite. (ie some hot spot in the cylinder will start another flame)
When the flame wave from the spark plug collides with the pre-ignition wave
you get a "knock" sound. Now you've got three things occurring:

1. pre-ignition knocking
2. The pre-ignition has sped up the combustion process bringing peak cylinder
   pressure up much too quickly (ie... The PING PING PING sound you hear is
   actually the expanding combustion gases pounding down the top of the still
   upward moving piston...Ouch!)  :^o
3. If the ignition it only a little early then loss of power is the result,
   But if the ignition is very early broken connecting rods or damaged bearings.
   
The 92 octane gas will resist pre-ignition due to higher combustion pressures
and will allow advancing the static timing to the point where peak combustion
pressures occur when the piston is ready to be forced downward.

Now if you run 92 gas and "Tune-up" the engine to take advantage of the high
octane properties and the switch back to 87 you will have a knocking and pinging
engine until you "de-tune" for lower octane.
   
Remember youre not making "NEW" HP just making the engine a little more efficeint
Some ignition timing is good more is worse, even 92 has its limits.

You also have to consider emissions as increasing combustion pressures increase
the formation of nitrogen oxides which are subject to testing. Another thing to
consider is the engine control computer may get confused if emissions change and
attempt corrective measures (ie... reduce centrifigal or vacumn advance) to 
compensate. Things to think about when messing with computer controlled cars.


$0.02
Ericy
From: jim@mwhhlaw (James P. Cavanaugh III)
Newsgroups: rec.autos
Subject: Re: Japan could be skirting $30 billon in U.S. taxes annually
Date: 14 Apr 92 12:48:14 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Martin_Wade_Hartley_&_Hollingsworth

I find it ironic that, on the morning that I seal the envelope to the  
IRS (you know, the one with the big check inside) I am reminded that  
some people are bitching about other people "evading" taxes.

Everyone who buys a japaneese car ought to be happy about this "tax  
evasion", because otherwise it would be YOU paying the tax, not some  
corporation.  (Remember, corporations don't pay taxes, people do.)

If anyone thinks that his tax bill would be lower if buyers of  
japaneese cars paid more tax, then he hasn't paid much attention to to  
the way that our betters in Washington have spent the last decade  
spending it faster than it was coming in.

Sorry, but I get this way every year about this time when I add the  
total tax owed (federal and state, BEFORE withholding) and look at what  
kind of car I could have bought new last year and have completely paid  
for by now if I weren't paying for Lawrence Welk museums and  
experiments in more productive kelp farming instead.

Jim Cavanaugh