Prev: Gillard's $2k offer
Next: Racing fuel THAT good?
From: Albm&ctd on 29 Jul 2010 00:34 In article <i2lia2$el5$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, bugalugs67(a)netscape.net says... > On 27/07/2010 12:33 p.m., Crash Lander wrote: > > On Jul 26, 10:43 pm, Doug Jewell<a...(a)and.maybe.ill.tell.you> wrote: > >> Crash Lander wrote: > >>> Hi guys. > >>> My 88 tarago RV 2.2L manual won't start. > >>> It's got good spark. It turns over as if it would start, but never > >>> fires. > >>> The RACV guy sprayed some carby primer stuff into the intake, and said > >>> if it was not getting fuel, it would at least fire on this stuff, and > >>> it didn't so he's ruled out a fuel issue as well. > >>> Any other suggestions? Ignition coil maybe? Aren't the coils in these > >>> things integrated into the distributor? Would the plugs still be > >>> getting spark if it was the coil? I'm a bit stumped on this one. > >> > >> When you say the plugs have spark, how have you tested? If > >> you just removed the plug and looked for a spark, that's not > >> a real reliable test. It doesn't take much to make a spark > >> travel half a millimetre at atmospheric pressure, so a dud > >> coil or other ignition component will often be able to make > >> a spark on a removed plug, but can't make a spark under > >> compression. A more reliable test is to remove the lead from > >> the plug, pull back the hood, and look for a good long spark > >> from the end of the lead to the chassis - generally > >> somewhere around half an inch (be careful you don't get a > >> wallop.) > >> > >>> Crash Lander > >> > >> -- > >> What is the difference between a duck? > > > > Pulled the lead off a spark plug, inserted a new plug and crancked. > > Good strong spark was seen. > > Problem is sorted now it seems anyway. They called me this morning. > > "Mechanic": Um, your Tarago started this morning! > > Me: What? All by itself? > > "Mechanic": We load tested the battery, and it failed. We put a new > > battery in it and it started straight away! > > > > He claims that when a bettery has low voltage, the engine may turn > > over, but there may not be enough voltage to run everything > > adequately, such as all the injectors and everything else that needs > > power to get the engine running. When asked to explain why it didn't > > start when the racv roadside guy put his battery booster on it, he > > said it was probably flooded. > > Anyway. $59 for a new battery, and it starts. he did put a disclaimer > > on it by saying that it's not 100% guaranteed that was the whole > > problem, but at this point, it seems to have sorted it. he said see > > how it goes for a few weeks, rather than throwing more money at it > > just yet. > > Fingers crossed. > > Crash Lander > > Had that problem with a Capacitor Discharge system I built for my RX4. > > The transistors wouldn't run under about 9.5 Volts so when the battery > was low all the juice went to the starter. When you stopped cranking the > full voltage went to the ignition and that was just in time to 'catch' > the still spinning motor. > > It was almost like,l spin the motor, switch off and switch to ignition. > IIRC EA put out a circuit first then ETI for a CDI. I preferred transistor assisted ignitions with dwell extension. Al -- I don't take sides. It's more fun to insult everyone. http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html
From: D Walford on 29 Jul 2010 02:29 On 29/07/2010 7:28 AM, John_H wrote: > D Walford wrote: >> On 28/07/2010 7:47 AM, John_H wrote: >>> D Walford wrote: >>> >>>> She took the Forester for its first service today with instructions for >>>> her to not agree to any extra work. >>> >>> Does that include the Seafoam snake oil treatment? >>> >>> (It's actually part of the scheduled service, but isn't mentioned in >>> the instruction book.) >>> >> Yep, $30.36 plus GST for 2 bottles, one they used and another given to >> her to put in the fuel tank in about 3mths. > > Are you sure both bottles are the same? Seems that way from the invoice, 2 of part no. susa718. The bottle we have has Subaru labelling but it also has the name Barsleaks on the back. > > The Seafoam stuff listed in the scheduled service is sold as "Subaru > Upper Engine Cleaner", made in Oz by Bars Leaks (snake oil merchants > from way back). The 250ml bottle I have here is labelled "fuel additive". IIRC Subaru also market, and recommend, a *fuel > conditioner* (which isn't part of the scheduled service) and isn't the > same product. > > The original Seafoam (first sold as carburettor cleaner for 2-stroke > outboards running premix fuel) is claimed to be both (among other > things)... but why would the people at Subaru peddle just one bottle > of snake oil if the punter is good for two? :) Don't forget the $2.34 plus GST for a sump plug "gasket" which no doubt is a 5 cent fibre washer > >> $250 for an oil and filter change plus checking a few fluid levels is a >> bit rich. > > Ah yes, but the work was probably done by a fully qualified factory > trained mechanic, fluent in Japanese... unlike inferior makes! ;-) > Of course:-) The real reason it goes to the dealer is that SWMBO gets to spend the morning in the city shopping and denying a woman a shopping trip could be dangerous to one's health:-) Shouldn't complain because she bought a lot of good quality meat from the Vic Market, the first night I got a very nice roast lamb dinner and last night a big t bone steak:-) Daryl
From: D Walford on 29 Jul 2010 02:34 On 29/07/2010 10:24 AM, hippo wrote: > Unless it's changed recently, fuel and oil additives *aren't* part of > either FHI or Subaru Australia's recommended service schedules, although > more than a few of their dealers routinely use (and of course charge > handsomely for) them anyway, unitl the owner protests. > > 'Subaru Upper Engine Cleaner' comes in an aerosol and has been part of the > recommended service procedure in Australia for a couple of decades. It was > supposed to remove sulphur deposits from the inlet tract. IME, NOT using > it for 2 consecutive service intervals used to add about 1L/100Km to the > fuel consumption. Now that we have low sulphur fuels here, I wonder if > it's become unnecessary, or maybe only needed every 50 or 100,000Kms? > Currently without any sort of Subaru, so someone else will have to do the > experiment! Cheers > The Impreza we had was serviced by the dealer up to 30,000klm and when they wanted $450.00 for the 40,000klm service I started doing it myself. I didn't use either type of fuel treatment and as far as I could tell the car was running perfectly when we traded it in at 55,000klms so based on my limited experience I'd say it does sfa. Daryl
From: John_H on 29 Jul 2010 03:25
D Walford wrote: > >Don't forget the $2.34 plus GST for a sump plug "gasket" which no doubt >is a 5 cent fibre washer It's one of those collapsible aluminium washers intended for single use. They normally offer it with the filter, which isn't overly expensive as a genuine part... RRP around $20 inc with the washer IIRC. You could probably replace it with a fibre sump plug washer, a conventional aluminium washer, or simply reuse it. I've been buying the genuine parts while the car's still under warranty... just in case. -- John H |