NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
Well, I put the Jeep into a local emissions repair centre, who charged
me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
RPM 198
DWELL DEG 22.9
SEC KV 10.2
COIL + 11.0
COIL - 0.94
VOLTS 11.3
AMPS -151
HC PPM 148
VAC "HG 1.9
TEMP F 204
Actual compression:
Cylinder 1: 80
Cylinder 2: 85
Cylinder 3: 80
Cylinder 4: 85
Cylinder 5: 50
Cylinder 6: 75
Cylinder 7: 65
Cylinder 8: 80
I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
car at all but with the gasoline.
So I'm stumped.
--
Blue Moon
me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
RPM 198
DWELL DEG 22.9
SEC KV 10.2
COIL + 11.0
COIL - 0.94
VOLTS 11.3
AMPS -151
HC PPM 148
VAC "HG 1.9
TEMP F 204
Actual compression:
Cylinder 1: 80
Cylinder 2: 85
Cylinder 3: 80
Cylinder 4: 85
Cylinder 5: 50
Cylinder 6: 75
Cylinder 7: 65
Cylinder 8: 80
I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
car at all but with the gasoline.
So I'm stumped.
--
Blue Moon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
Well, I put the Jeep into a local emissions repair centre, who charged
me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
RPM 198
DWELL DEG 22.9
SEC KV 10.2
COIL + 11.0
COIL - 0.94
VOLTS 11.3
AMPS -151
HC PPM 148
VAC "HG 1.9
TEMP F 204
Actual compression:
Cylinder 1: 80
Cylinder 2: 85
Cylinder 3: 80
Cylinder 4: 85
Cylinder 5: 50
Cylinder 6: 75
Cylinder 7: 65
Cylinder 8: 80
I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
car at all but with the gasoline.
So I'm stumped.
--
Blue Moon
me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
RPM 198
DWELL DEG 22.9
SEC KV 10.2
COIL + 11.0
COIL - 0.94
VOLTS 11.3
AMPS -151
HC PPM 148
VAC "HG 1.9
TEMP F 204
Actual compression:
Cylinder 1: 80
Cylinder 2: 85
Cylinder 3: 80
Cylinder 4: 85
Cylinder 5: 50
Cylinder 6: 75
Cylinder 7: 65
Cylinder 8: 80
I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
car at all but with the gasoline.
So I'm stumped.
--
Blue Moon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
Well, I put the Jeep into a local emissions repair centre, who charged
me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
RPM 198
DWELL DEG 22.9
SEC KV 10.2
COIL + 11.0
COIL - 0.94
VOLTS 11.3
AMPS -151
HC PPM 148
VAC "HG 1.9
TEMP F 204
Actual compression:
Cylinder 1: 80
Cylinder 2: 85
Cylinder 3: 80
Cylinder 4: 85
Cylinder 5: 50
Cylinder 6: 75
Cylinder 7: 65
Cylinder 8: 80
I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
car at all but with the gasoline.
So I'm stumped.
--
Blue Moon
me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
RPM 198
DWELL DEG 22.9
SEC KV 10.2
COIL + 11.0
COIL - 0.94
VOLTS 11.3
AMPS -151
HC PPM 148
VAC "HG 1.9
TEMP F 204
Actual compression:
Cylinder 1: 80
Cylinder 2: 85
Cylinder 3: 80
Cylinder 4: 85
Cylinder 5: 50
Cylinder 6: 75
Cylinder 7: 65
Cylinder 8: 80
I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
car at all but with the gasoline.
So I'm stumped.
--
Blue Moon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
I can't believe there's a car on the road without at least throttle
body electronic injection for '94.
She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
before you would have needed to touch that engine.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well, I put the Jeep into a local emissions repair centre, who charged
> me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
>
> They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
> concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
> checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
> All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
> check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
> repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
>
> I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
>
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> RPM 198
> DWELL DEG 22.9
> SEC KV 10.2
> COIL + 11.0
> COIL - 0.94
> VOLTS 11.3
> AMPS -151
> HC PPM 148
> VAC "HG 1.9
> TEMP F 204
>
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
> I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
> would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
> excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
> car at all but with the gasoline.
>
> So I'm stumped.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
body electronic injection for '94.
She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
before you would have needed to touch that engine.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well, I put the Jeep into a local emissions repair centre, who charged
> me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
>
> They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
> concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
> checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
> All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
> check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
> repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
>
> I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
>
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> RPM 198
> DWELL DEG 22.9
> SEC KV 10.2
> COIL + 11.0
> COIL - 0.94
> VOLTS 11.3
> AMPS -151
> HC PPM 148
> VAC "HG 1.9
> TEMP F 204
>
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
> I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
> would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
> excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
> car at all but with the gasoline.
>
> So I'm stumped.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
I can't believe there's a car on the road without at least throttle
body electronic injection for '94.
She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
before you would have needed to touch that engine.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well, I put the Jeep into a local emissions repair centre, who charged
> me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
>
> They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
> concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
> checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
> All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
> check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
> repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
>
> I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
>
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> RPM 198
> DWELL DEG 22.9
> SEC KV 10.2
> COIL + 11.0
> COIL - 0.94
> VOLTS 11.3
> AMPS -151
> HC PPM 148
> VAC "HG 1.9
> TEMP F 204
>
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
> I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
> would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
> excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
> car at all but with the gasoline.
>
> So I'm stumped.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
body electronic injection for '94.
She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
before you would have needed to touch that engine.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well, I put the Jeep into a local emissions repair centre, who charged
> me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
>
> They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
> concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
> checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
> All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
> check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
> repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
>
> I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
>
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> RPM 198
> DWELL DEG 22.9
> SEC KV 10.2
> COIL + 11.0
> COIL - 0.94
> VOLTS 11.3
> AMPS -151
> HC PPM 148
> VAC "HG 1.9
> TEMP F 204
>
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
> I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
> would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
> excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
> car at all but with the gasoline.
>
> So I'm stumped.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
I can't believe there's a car on the road without at least throttle
body electronic injection for '94.
She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
before you would have needed to touch that engine.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well, I put the Jeep into a local emissions repair centre, who charged
> me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
>
> They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
> concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
> checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
> All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
> check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
> repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
>
> I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
>
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> RPM 198
> DWELL DEG 22.9
> SEC KV 10.2
> COIL + 11.0
> COIL - 0.94
> VOLTS 11.3
> AMPS -151
> HC PPM 148
> VAC "HG 1.9
> TEMP F 204
>
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
> I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
> would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
> excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
> car at all but with the gasoline.
>
> So I'm stumped.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
body electronic injection for '94.
She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
before you would have needed to touch that engine.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well, I put the Jeep into a local emissions repair centre, who charged
> me $85 for the privilege of telling me what they believe is wrong.
>
> They reported back that a "worn engine" is the problem. They
> concluded this with a compression test. Their paperwork states "Smoke
> checked for vacuum leaks none found. New tune up parts and o2 sensor.
> All checked good. Verified failure results on dynometer. Compression
> check revealed low compression across all cylinders. Recommend
> repairing cylinder problems to get through inspection".
>
> I asked for details of the test results, and was given the following:
>
> 1993 Jeep (wrong, it's a 1994)
> 5.2L V8 EFI (wrong, it's a 5.2L V8, with carb)
>
> RPM 198
> DWELL DEG 22.9
> SEC KV 10.2
> COIL + 11.0
> COIL - 0.94
> VOLTS 11.3
> AMPS -151
> HC PPM 148
> VAC "HG 1.9
> TEMP F 204
>
> Actual compression:
> Cylinder 1: 80
> Cylinder 2: 85
> Cylinder 3: 80
> Cylinder 4: 85
> Cylinder 5: 50
> Cylinder 6: 75
> Cylinder 7: 65
> Cylinder 8: 80
>
> I spoke to the original mechanic, who said if it's compression then I
> would be getting misfiring problems (which I'm not - the car runs
> excellently). It seems his theory is that the problem is not with the
> car at all but with the gasoline.
>
> So I'm stumped.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:56:46 -0800, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> I can't believe there's a car on the road without at least throttle
>body electronic injection for '94.
> She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
>proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
>and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
>before you would have needed to touch that engine.
Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
else didn't do before.
--
Blue Moon
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> I can't believe there's a car on the road without at least throttle
>body electronic injection for '94.
> She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
>proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
>and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
>before you would have needed to touch that engine.
Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
else didn't do before.
--
Blue Moon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:56:46 -0800, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> I can't believe there's a car on the road without at least throttle
>body electronic injection for '94.
> She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
>proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
>and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
>before you would have needed to touch that engine.
Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
else didn't do before.
--
Blue Moon
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> I can't believe there's a car on the road without at least throttle
>body electronic injection for '94.
> She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
>proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
>and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
>before you would have needed to touch that engine.
Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
else didn't do before.
--
Blue Moon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 15:56:46 -0800, L.W.(ßill) ------ III
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> I can't believe there's a car on the road without at least throttle
>body electronic injection for '94.
> She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
>proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
>and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
>before you would have needed to touch that engine.
Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
else didn't do before.
--
Blue Moon
<----------@***.net> wrote:
> I can't believe there's a car on the road without at least throttle
>body electronic injection for '94.
> She's tired, more than ten pounds difference between cylinders
>proves it. All you had to do is change oil every three thousand miles
>and the doors would have fallen off at over three hundred thousand miles
>before you would have needed to touch that engine.
Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
else didn't do before.
--
Blue Moon
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: NJ Emissions problem: 94 Jeep GC V8
Rebuild the engine, or sell it using your mechanic to vouch for it.
Of course don't give him your compression readings, something he would
have seen in about a minute with a scope's, balance test.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
> ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
> over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
> What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
> else didn't do before.
>
> --
> Blue Moon
Of course don't give him your compression readings, something he would
have seen in about a minute with a scope's, balance test.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Blue Moon wrote:
>
> Well considering I only bought the thing fairly recently, I had no
> ability to change the oil every 3000 miles. And even a mechanic with
> over 45 years' experience says the engine is running fine and strong.
> What I need to know is what I am supposed to do now, not what someone
> else didn't do before.
>
> --
> Blue Moon