"c" <c@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:R7w%h.163293$DE1.64686@pd7urf2no...
>
>
> BTW, you've been reported for cross posting.
>
>


Nobody cares about cross posting a reply to a post that was cross posted
originally, unless the person that replies adds new groups to the cross
post.

I'm not sure what your beef is with Bill, but clearly you are an idiot. Take
a chill pill and a shot of Scotch ...

 

"c" <c@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:R7w%h.163293$DE1.64686@pd7urf2no...
>
>
> BTW, you've been reported for cross posting.
>
>


Nobody cares about cross posting a reply to a post that was cross posted
originally, unless the person that replies adds new groups to the cross
post.

I'm not sure what your beef is with Bill, but clearly you are an idiot. Take
a chill pill and a shot of Scotch ...

 

"c" <c@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:R7w%h.163293$DE1.64686@pd7urf2no...
>
>
> BTW, you've been reported for cross posting.
>
>


Nobody cares about cross posting a reply to a post that was cross posted
originally, unless the person that replies adds new groups to the cross
post.

I'm not sure what your beef is with Bill, but clearly you are an idiot. Take
a chill pill and a shot of Scotch ...

 

On Mon, 07 May 2007 03:33:52 +0000, Jeff Strickland wrote:

> but clearly you are an idiot.

Befogged opinion noted.

> Take
> a chill pill and a shot of Scotch ...

Dangerous advice noted.


Thank you for sharing.

 

On Mon, 07 May 2007 03:33:52 +0000, Jeff Strickland wrote:

> but clearly you are an idiot.

Befogged opinion noted.

> Take
> a chill pill and a shot of Scotch ...

Dangerous advice noted.


Thank you for sharing.

 

On Mon, 07 May 2007 03:33:52 +0000, Jeff Strickland wrote:

> but clearly you are an idiot.

Befogged opinion noted.

> Take
> a chill pill and a shot of Scotch ...

Dangerous advice noted.


Thank you for sharing.

 

On Mon, 07 May 2007 03:33:52 +0000, Jeff Strickland wrote:

> but clearly you are an idiot.

Befogged opinion noted.

> Take
> a chill pill and a shot of Scotch ...

Dangerous advice noted.


Thank you for sharing.

 

Well... Chrysler screwed up the programming on some of the computers.
I'm pretty sure my cat is bad (it rattled like crazy for a couple of
months then stooped at around 100k miles) but the check engine light
never came on until about 250k, when it started coming on
intermittently. When I had the engine replaced at 300k they scanned it
and told me the rear 02 sensor was bad, so I replaced it and the light
went out.

Then I get a recall notice from Chrysler that they want me to bring the
Jeep in so they can reflash the computer and replace the cat if it was
rattling. It seems the computers weren't picking up failing cats, and
no , they wouldn't replace the converter if it had been rattling but
stopped.

So if I took it in for the recall I would have driven in with a healthy
Jeep and driven out with the Check Engine light on.

Needless to say I didn't take it in!

So if the Jeep the OP was looking at was effected by this same problem
it could very well be that the check engine light never came on.

Jeff DeWitt

Jerry Bransford wrote:
> There is likely to be an 02 sensor after the cat, even my '97 has an 02
> sensor mounted into the cat at the tail-end of it. That 02 sensor's job
> is to check for proper 02 sensor function so I'm surprised there's no
> Check Engine light.
>

 

Well... Chrysler screwed up the programming on some of the computers.
I'm pretty sure my cat is bad (it rattled like crazy for a couple of
months then stooped at around 100k miles) but the check engine light
never came on until about 250k, when it started coming on
intermittently. When I had the engine replaced at 300k they scanned it
and told me the rear 02 sensor was bad, so I replaced it and the light
went out.

Then I get a recall notice from Chrysler that they want me to bring the
Jeep in so they can reflash the computer and replace the cat if it was
rattling. It seems the computers weren't picking up failing cats, and
no , they wouldn't replace the converter if it had been rattling but
stopped.

So if I took it in for the recall I would have driven in with a healthy
Jeep and driven out with the Check Engine light on.

Needless to say I didn't take it in!

So if the Jeep the OP was looking at was effected by this same problem
it could very well be that the check engine light never came on.

Jeff DeWitt

Jerry Bransford wrote:
> There is likely to be an 02 sensor after the cat, even my '97 has an 02
> sensor mounted into the cat at the tail-end of it. That 02 sensor's job
> is to check for proper 02 sensor function so I'm surprised there's no
> Check Engine light.
>

 

Well... Chrysler screwed up the programming on some of the computers.
I'm pretty sure my cat is bad (it rattled like crazy for a couple of
months then stooped at around 100k miles) but the check engine light
never came on until about 250k, when it started coming on
intermittently. When I had the engine replaced at 300k they scanned it
and told me the rear 02 sensor was bad, so I replaced it and the light
went out.

Then I get a recall notice from Chrysler that they want me to bring the
Jeep in so they can reflash the computer and replace the cat if it was
rattling. It seems the computers weren't picking up failing cats, and
no , they wouldn't replace the converter if it had been rattling but
stopped.

So if I took it in for the recall I would have driven in with a healthy
Jeep and driven out with the Check Engine light on.

Needless to say I didn't take it in!

So if the Jeep the OP was looking at was effected by this same problem
it could very well be that the check engine light never came on.

Jeff DeWitt

Jerry Bransford wrote:
> There is likely to be an 02 sensor after the cat, even my '97 has an 02
> sensor mounted into the cat at the tail-end of it. That 02 sensor's job
> is to check for proper 02 sensor function so I'm surprised there's no
> Check Engine light.
>