General Motors reportedly spent 3 Billion dollars on the H-Body cars, about the same amount of money Ford spent on the Taurus/Sable. Or another solution would have been to forget developing the GM-10 W-body cars and pump redevelopment money back into the B-bodies for all of the customers that were crying foul and reintroduce “proper” DeVilles, Electras and Ninety Eights for 1991. But GM was too willing to milk the cash cow. If General Motors had any real ego left, the Cutlass Supreme would have disappeared/been rebadged as the new aero-back Cutlass Ciera Coupe in 1986 to make room for the new Eighty Eight. “You want me to pay more for ‘less?’ Show me that Cutlass Supreme with a ‘real’ rocket.” Add in the fact that the Cutlasses still had a V8… and… we can see where some of the backlash became legitimate. Nearly 2 feet shorter than they had been, once again playing that awkward showroom game of having “mid sized” Cutlasses actually being slightly larger (and cheaper). Although the FWD C bodies first went out the door to meet the disaster, the former B-bodies became Wagon only, and their sedan and coupe nameplate mates became the “H” Bodies. Get a little overzealous with the engineering and the blowtorch, that’s what. ![]() New CAFE Standards, threats of $3.00 a gallon gas, and tanking sales of the B-bodies? What is General Motors to do? Although they were more rational than what proceeded them, They were not much more than the Cutlass Supreme across the lot in a crisply tailored pair of bell bottoms. And I’m here to offer the counter defense that you are far better off in rain, sleet or snow and at the gas pump if you embrace the H-body.Īlthough the 1977 B-bodies were downsized, they weren’t (overall length-wise) all that much smaller than the 1961-64 B-body cars. I understand that for a lot of people, there’s no other way to make your average American sedan other than an overhead valve V8 mated to a driveshaft driving the rear wheels. Between the puffs of exhaust gas flow, the momentum creates little puffs of vacuum that can draw in outside air where the oxygen is detected as a lean condition.( first posted ) I’m well aware of the Church of the B-body. O2 sensors only measure oxygen, not fuel, so they will see the lean condition again.įinally, a less common cause is a leak in the exhaust system in front of the oxygen sensor. Next, a misfiring cylinder due to worn spark plugs, wires, or ignition coil will send that unburned oxygen and fuel into the exhaust. ![]() The unburned oxygen that's really there is what keeps the O2 sensor lean too long. It thinks there's less air so it give it less fuel. That will let air sneak in that isn't measured so the computer won't add that to its fuel metering calculation. One of the common things to look for includes a leak in the fresh air tube between the mass air flow sensor and throttle body. The low engine speed is likely in response to something the Engine Computer is trying to do to correct the lean condition. You were right to suspect a vacuum leak but that will cause a high idle speed. ![]() It refers to the condition being detected, in this case, too much unburned oxygen in the exhaust system. The code you described doesn't point to a sensor problem. The number of oxygen sensors depends on which engine you have but in general, on a car that age there will be just one.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |