Bretm1 Posted January 6, 2006 Author Share Posted January 6, 2006 Update: Picked car up this evening. They did an engine clean to remove carbon deposits from valves and drove car for 70 miles between yesterday and today. I hope this did it. Work Done so far-2 coils,fuel tank filter clean out, fuel injector clean out, engine carbon clean out for valves, oil change back to regular(not synthetic). Cost for me $100.00 deductible from my subaru extended warranty.(which cost me 1200.00 and is good for five yr/100,000 miles) They provided me a loaner for a week as well. This is not my beautiful car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bicster Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 I hope it stays fixed. Please keep us posted if it doesn't! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondas123 Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 +1 - The Mortgage Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccorry Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 +2.... I sure hope it is fixed now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
specinvstr Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Er... this thread is making ME nervous... and it isn't even my car! +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bretm1 Posted January 7, 2006 Author Share Posted January 7, 2006 First-thanks all for your support and comments (this Is a long one) The stuff they used to clean the carbon out of the engine absolutely stunk the whole car up almost to the point of being unbearable. Especially coupled with the deodorizer they used to counteract the kerosene like smell. I have to drive with my windows open. I'll update this in a few. I have a feeling that turbo powered engines that aren't run strongly often will have a tendency to cook unspent (unused) gas in the cylinders with the hot (spent) exhaust that gets introduced into the cylinders thus causing excess carbon buildup in the cylinder walls and valves. There are four valves per cylinder as many of you know but they are pretty small and it does not take much to clog them ultimately causing misfires and poor performance. I don't baby this thing, but when you look at the fact that we have five gears in this automatic under even "heavier" normal driving the car spents most of its time below 3000 rpm. My feeling is that turbos need to be driven more often at or near higher limits than normally aspirated engines in order to operate efficiently. The fact of the matter is that under even a heavy footed normal driving condition, that these cars arent burning carbon deposits like they should. That is why in a warranty situation (such as mine) they will get really peculiar about oil &gas used, plug/filter changes exhaust/engine mods etcetera. These things need to be driven hard. Turbos initially were developed due to the need to power underpowered gas or deisel engines for relatively cheap cost. I don't mean to be a killjoy and I really like the Legacy, but I think in the future I will avoid turbo vehicles. The idea of a US Legacy 3.0r hypo vehicle is sounding better and better.(Only exception would be a twin turbo Porsche) I really don't know how accurate my statement is, it is just based on general working knowledge of the engine. I won't get pissy at any comments. If you read this whole thing you get a prize. I needed to vent. This is not my beautiful car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccorry Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 OK.. where is my prize? But seriously, I take METICULOUS care of my vehicles and do all of the work myself... but I agree... you have to run them hard and "clean em out". This is true, however, for all engines... not just turbocharged ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bretm1 Posted January 7, 2006 Author Share Posted January 7, 2006 By the way mccorry, that is one fine looking camaro. 69 rs ss???????? big block/small block-details please:) This is not my beautiful car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccorry Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 By the way mccorry, that is one fine looking camaro. 69 rs ss???????? big block/small block-details please:) Thanks, Bretm1.... It is a documented RS/SS-350 car (now has a NOM 355ci SB), 11:1 compression, TH350 transmission w/ shift kit, 3.31 positraction 12-bolt rear-end. She has a lot of nice options, too.... Tilt wheel, console w/ gauges, AM/FM, A/C, P/S, etc.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccorry Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Here is a better picture..... http://www.wideopenwest.com/~mccorry/images/misc/Marie3.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MotoFanatic Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I remember when I purchased a Honda back in the day and attended a "Honda clinic", they highly recommended rev'ing the car out close to redline at least once a day and that it was good for the engine. (of course they didn't need to tell me twice. ) ... you have to run them hard and "clean em out". This is true, however, for all engines... not just turbocharged ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bretm1 Posted January 10, 2006 Author Share Posted January 10, 2006 Here is a better picture..... Beautiful-This is what it is all about. http://www.wideopenwest.com/~mccorry/images/misc/Marie3.jpg This is not my beautiful car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legacy2005 Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 Here is a better picture..... http://www.wideopenwest.com/~mccorry/images/misc/Marie3.jpg dam that car looks great Work hard. Play even harder. My Garage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bretm1 Posted January 15, 2006 Author Share Posted January 15, 2006 My car went back in today. Same behavior as mentioned earlier. This is not my beautiful car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bicster Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 My car went back in today. Same behavior as mentioned earlier. Meh. To state the obvious: that really sucks. Sorry to hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mlloydlgt Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Doesn't a state lemon law usually mean that if a car is in for the same repair 3 or 4 times within a certain year that they owe you a fair trade value toward a new one? Me thinks you got a jinxed LGT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilh Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Sorry to hear that Bret. --Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bicster Posted January 15, 2006 Share Posted January 15, 2006 Doesn't a state lemon law usually mean that if a car is in for the same repair 3 or 4 times within a certain year that they owe you a fair trade value toward a new one? Me thinks you got a jinxed LGT. Most states lemon laws expire when the warranty expires or after 12mos/12,000 miles up to 24mos/24,000 miles (depending on what state you live in), whichever comes first. I still vote for an ECU replacement, based on the weird electrical behavior Bret described earlier... But I don't know squat about cars, just electronics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bretm1 Posted January 17, 2006 Author Share Posted January 17, 2006 My money is still on the ECU. It could be a one-cent resistor that failed. It doesn't always take much. New ECU being put in today. I hope you are right Bicster. This is not my beautiful car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bretm1 Posted January 17, 2006 Author Share Posted January 17, 2006 New ECU installed. Drove car away at 1pm & it started again with the same problem??????????SOA tech coming in tommorow. This is not my beautiful car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondas123 Posted January 17, 2006 Share Posted January 17, 2006 Bret, sorry to hear about this reoccuring problem. I've been following this thread since you day 1. I thought the ECU was the fix too, now I'm stumped. - The Mortgage Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mccorry Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 WOW! That car is jinxed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bicster Posted January 18, 2006 Share Posted January 18, 2006 Yikes. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bicster Posted January 19, 2006 Share Posted January 19, 2006 Bump for update. Bret? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bretm1 Posted January 20, 2006 Author Share Posted January 20, 2006 Today I called in to see the situation. They had the head off and were replacing the valves on the number 2 and number 4 cylinders, which are what comes up as the cylinders involved when the cel codes come. When the car dies and starts running choppy the code since I brought this car in on December 29, comes up as misfires in cylinder 2 & 4. What scares me is that they said although the valves were a little dirty, (with carbon)they weren't that bad. They also mentioned that the cylinder walls and piston heads look fine. We'll see what happens after the valves are replaced. So Far 2 ignition coils injector & fuel filter cleaning engine de-carb new ecu new valves being put in on 2&4 cylinders.................................................... This is not my beautiful car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.