1985 2.8L ESC ?
Danny G.
Its a 1985 S10 4x4 Tahoe 2.8-carb that is 100% stock. (or rebuilt)
calif. emissions label #UDW, vin #1GCDT14B4F8194102
The parts and location of controls via Chilton's manual is vague at best.
Let alone trouble shooting so it be awesome if someone can confirm
a couple things are correct (or not) for me.
It does have a ESC module.
It does not have a knock sensor. (searched for a hour easy)
The ESC is on the firewall near the distributor. (has a #P2002.8-1)
The timing can fail to full advance with no error code.
A ESC problem could cause 'spark knock' even at idle when the engine is cold.
Thank you
Danny
--end
SnoMan
wrote:
There is supposed to be a knock sensor in the lower drain plug on
block on passanger side. Higher octane fuel will cure spark knock too
with sacrificing power too.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com
Danny G.
"SnoMan" <ad...@snoman.com> wrote in message news:mmk1m2h8dou3s6cbj...@4ax.com...
hmm, are you sure?
I just called the local dealers part counter and then autozone. Both
places said it does not have one.
HeatWave
dan...@pacbell.net says...
>
> "SnoMan" <ad...@snoman.com> the drunk wrote in message news:mmk1m2h8dou3s6cbj...@4ax.com...
> > There is supposed to be a knock sensor in the lower drain plug on
> > block on passanger side. Higher octane fuel will cure spark knock too
> > with sacrificing power too.
> > -----------------
>
>
> hmm, are you sure?
> I just called the local dealers part counter and then autozone. Both
> places said it does not have one.
Look at Snoballs previous postings here... Notice anything? Yeah just
throw everything he just said out. You have no knock sensor.
SnoMan
>Look at Snoballs previous postings here... Notice anything? Yeah just
>throw everything he just said out. You have no knock sensor.
Until some other wise asses around here, I was around and driving when
ESC came out and they made a big deal about how it worked in media. It
uses a piezo eectic crystal to sence motor vibration and it would
retard spark some when it heard it. The ESC module (if it really has
one) needs a exteranl sensor to hear the knock to begin with and GM
used the lower drain hole for it until they placed it under the intake
on modular V8 that came out in 99 (where it was easy to change before
it is a pain in the butt to change now) You could forgo the ECS and
use better fuel or just retard base line spark if you must use 87
octane fuel to limit knock. THere are under informed "children" here
in news groups that know nothing about designs and how thing work but
they claim to be experts and attack those that may know something that
they do not. THe whole idea or concept behind ESC was to allow for mre
tolerance of lower octane fuel with higher compression ratios in a
attempt to boost MPG and power a bit overall. GM pioneered knock
control in early 80's and it is pretty mature today. So mature in fact
that it makes people beleive that 87 is all they even need because
current generation knock control is so good that it quells knock
before you hear it. It is too good really because if it was not there
you would know that you need more octane. The problem with this whole
concept is though that when it retatrd spark to control it it take
away power and MPG because peak cylinder combustion pressure is
reached at a less favorable time in crank shaft rotation so less
energy is extracted from mixture. Know it alls such as the one who
made nasty comment have no really understand of how and why a engine
works and how to make it nmost efficent . Their abilty or knowledge is
limited to inserting the key and twisting it to make it run and little
more. One more thing engine octane requirement are not constant and
will increase with tempature and this is why you might get by and car
runs great on 87 octane in cold damp weather. THe only reason there is
a knock sensor is so that unknowning people such as the comment maker
can be blistfully happy on the cheapest gas they can find though most
of the time it is actually costing them more to run it in increased
fuel consumption and lower power.
-----------------
TheSnoMan.com
aarcuda69062
"Danny G." <dan...@pacbell.net> wrote:
My Mitchell On Demand does NOT show an 85 S-10 2.8 w/California
emissions as having an ESC system.
It DOES show it as having an EGR control module which -might- be
confused as being an ESC module.
If you post the number count and color codes of the wires exiting
the module in question, I'd be happy to verify if it is the EGR
module.
As far as I can tell, this system should be a CCC type system
with feedback carburetor and EST, and should be capable of giving
flash codes thru the check engine light.
California emissions are different enough that you'd be best off
ditching the Chiltons and use only the OEM diagnostic procedures.
Your 2002.8-1 part number is not a GM part number...
aarcuda69062
SnoMan <ad...@snoman.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 23:58:30 GMT, HeatWave <M3L...@YAH00.COM> wrote:
>
> >Look at Snoballs previous postings here... Notice anything? Yeah just
> >throw everything he just said out. You have no knock sensor.
>
> Until some other wise asses around here, I was around and driving when
> ESC came out and they made a big deal about how it worked in media.
By that logic, since I've been brushing my own teeth since 1958
or so, I'm qualified to be a Dentist.
> It uses a piezo eectic crystal to sence motor vibration
Hooda-haada-wadda?
Do you mean "it uses a piezo electric crystal to sense motor
vibration?'
> and it would
> retard spark some when it heard it. The ESC module (if it really has
> one) needs a exteranl sensor to hear the knock to begin with and GM
> used the lower drain hole for it until they placed it under the intake
> on modular V8 that came out in 99 (where it was easy to change before
> it is a pain in the butt to change now)
That which you deem a "pain in the butt" is another mans skilled
trade. On the other hand, jobs for snow plow drivers are always
found in the miscellaneous section of the want ads...
> You could forgo the ECS and
> use better fuel or just retard base line spark if you must use 87
> octane fuel to limit knock.
Hack repair.
> THere are under informed "children" here
> in news groups that know nothing about designs and how thing work but
> they claim to be experts and attack those that may know something that
> they do not.
Sez the guy who advocates shit canning that which he can't
diagnose.
> THe whole idea or concept behind ESC was to allow for mre
'Meals Ready to Eat?'
> tolerance of lower octane fuel with higher compression ratios in a
> attempt to boost MPG and power a bit overall. GM pioneered knock
> control in early 80's
Mid 70s actually.
> and it is pretty mature today. So mature in fact
> that it makes people beleive that 87 is all they even need because
> current generation knock control is so good that it quells knock
> before you hear it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's a good thing, dumbass!
> It is too good really because if it was not there
> you would know that you need more octane. The problem with this whole
> concept is though that when it retatrd spark to control it it take
> away power and MPG because peak cylinder combustion pressure is
> reached at a less favorable time in crank shaft rotation so less
> energy is extracted from mixture.
Gee, too bad GM and the other OEMs can't thumb their noses at the
EPA like you do.
> Know it alls such as the one who
> made nasty comment have no really understand of how and why a engine
> works and how to make it nmost efficent .
Neither do you.
> Their abilty or knowledge is
> limited to inserting the key and twisting it to make it run and little
> more.
And yours is limited to backyard hack fixes and illegal work
arounds.
> One more thing engine octane requirement are not constant and
> will increase with tempature and this is why you might get by and car
> runs great on 87 octane in cold damp weather. THe only reason there is
> a knock sensor is so that unknowning people such as the comment maker
> can be blistfully happy on the cheapest gas they can find though most
> of the time it is actually costing them more to run it in increased
> fuel consumption and lower power.
Can that Parrot say anything else?
Danny G.
"HeatWave" <M3L...@YAH00.COM> wrote in message news:MPG.1fcab8712...@news-server.woh.rr.com...
Wow! No way am I going to stick my big nose in that battle. But I would
like to thank both of you for the help. Both replies really helped me get some
troubleshooting information I need in different ways.
Bottom line:
TRUE It does have a ESC module. (part #14028830)
TRUE It does not have a knock sensor. (searched for a hour easy)
FALSE The ESC is on the firewall near the distributor. (Haynes manual)
TRUE The timing can fail to full advance with no error code.
Oh boy, now I get to check a unknown wiring harness without accurate schematics. 8(
Danny G.
"SnoMan" <ad...@snoman.com> wrote in message news:fv63m25fn1rqe5f3k...@4ax.com...
Wow! No way am I going to stick my big nose in that battle. But I would
aarcuda69062
"Danny G." <dan...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> Bottom line:
> TRUE It does have a ESC module. (part #14028830)
Is that part number directly off of the one on your truck?
14028830 cross references to be an EFE relay
Looks like this:
http://partimages2.genpt.com/partimages/347322.jpg
HeatWave
dan...@pacbell.net says...
> Bottom line:
> TRUE It does have a ESC module. (part #14028830)
14028830 is a relay that is used for a few diff things. Your Cali
emissions 2.8 should have the HEI-EST ignition system.
> TRUE It does not have a knock sensor. (searched for a hour easy)
Correct. I got a 87 2.8L out in the barn (havent hauled the pos off yet)
and by that time they actually had a knock sensor. In 85 the 2.8 had
8.5:1 compression. In 87 it went up to 8.9:1. Hence why yours has no
need for one.
> FALSE The ESC is on the firewall near the distributor. (Haynes manual)
You're looking at a relay. Your HEI-EST module is in the distributor (7
terminals). A 4 wire pigtail should exit the distributor to link to the
ECM. Another big 2 wire pigtail goes to the coil. Are you seeing any of
this?
> TRUE The timing can fail to full advance with no error code.
>
> Oh boy, now I get to check a unknown wiring harness without accurate schematics. 8(
You might have a good schematic once you know what you're looking at.
;-)
HeatWave
@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com>, none...@sbcglobal.net says...
> In article <fv63m25fn1rqe5f3k...@4ax.com>,
> SnoMan <ad...@snoman.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 19 Nov 2006 23:58:30 GMT, HeatWave <M3L...@YAH00.COM> wrote:
> >
> > >Look at Snoballs previous postings here... Notice anything? Yeah just
> > >throw everything he just said out. You have no knock sensor.
> >
> > Until some other wise asses around here, I was around and driving when
> > ESC came out and they made a big deal about how it worked in media.
>
> By that logic, since I've been brushing my own teeth since 1958
> or so, I'm qualified to be a Dentist.
LOL. Wow you actually read that big huge block of letters? I guess they
never covered "paragraphs" and "spell checking" in the "mediduh".
Danny G.
"aarcuda69062" <none...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:nonelson-178033...@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
Awesome, thanks.
That part 2002.8-1 is a error I made from using the haynes manual. Turned
out to actually the a/c relay. The ESC module was actually near the brake
power booster.
I gave the parts counter a call just to be sure relay (#14028830) I have in
my hand is actually labeled a ESC module and it does not have a knock sensor..
---------------------------------------------------------
ESC module #14028830 (other labels 2-2940 and 5072)
A - pink
B - brown
C - green and 1 blue/yellow << two wires
D - pink/black
E - red
The "red" might actually be pink.
The "pink" might actually be some other color.
The part seems to be a normally closed two pole single throw relay that's sealed so I'm not sure.
It looks like one set of contacts open low or both with higher coil voltage.
----------------------------------------------------------
Do you know what A - E should be? T hat would save me lots of time.
My VIN# is 1GCDT14B4F8194102
ca emission control UDW
Danny G.
"aarcuda69062" <none...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:nonelson-8BEA9F...@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com...
Wow, your correct. Thanks
The funny thing is the Chevy parts counter person said
that part was a ESC module when I called and said
"Can you tell me what this part # 14028830 is?"
I think Heatwave straightened me out.
Thanks again 8)
Danny G.
That's has to be it! All the information I have found said this truck has the ESC and
it just was making me crazy. Reading your post makes it all add up.
Thanks
Dan
Steve W.
> In article <gpp8h.8738$Sw1....@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>,
> dan...@pacbell.net says...
>> Bottom line:
>> TRUE It does have a ESC module. (part #14028830)
>
> 14028830 is a relay that is used for a few diff things. Your Cali
> emissions 2.8 should have the HEI-EST ignition system.
Seem to remember the one on my 85 T10 was to do with the fuel pump.
>
>> TRUE It does not have a knock sensor. (searched for a hour easy)
>
> Correct. I got a 87 2.8L out in the barn (havent hauled the pos off yet)
> and by that time they actually had a knock sensor. In 85 the 2.8 had
> 8.5:1 compression. In 87 it went up to 8.9:1. Hence why yours has no
> need for one.
VERY true. The 85 I had ate three engines. The original lost compression
in the back two holes. Pulled it down and found a bad cam. Did a
complete top end job on it and about 10K later it ate number 4 rod
bearing. Pulled that one out and dropped a "good" one out of an 89
Camaro into it. Installed an in tank pump and it ran good for the next
15K, Then that engine dropped compression on number 1!
Never found a knock sensor on the 85 block and never hooked up the one
out of the 89.
>
>> FALSE The ESC is on the firewall near the distributor. (Haynes manual)
>
> You're looking at a relay. Your HEI-EST module is in the distributor (7
> terminals). A 4 wire pigtail should exit the distributor to link to the
> ECM. Another big 2 wire pigtail goes to the coil. Are you seeing any of
> this?
Yep HEI with the small cap.
Danny G.
"Steve W." <ya...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ejtpg4$m6f$1...@aioe.server.aioe.org...
I need to burn that Haynes manual! $#%% I've never needed to look at GM electronics
before now and that manual came with the truck. So I parked my but on the couch went
thru the emissions, electrical and ignition sections with a fine tooth comb.
Then I wasted a huge amount of time visually trying to figure out what, where and how for those
systems.
Going thru the emission's went ok. But look how far off I am on understanding the trucks ignition system
let alone troubleshoot it. This trucks was not neglected or modified and so basic I would have been way
better off (and done) without that manual.
Thanks to all for everything.
Dan
HeatWave
> I need to burn that Haynes manual! $#%% I've never needed to look at GM electronics
> before now and that manual came with the truck. So I parked my but on the couch went
> thru the emissions, electrical and ignition sections with a fine tooth comb.
>
> systems.
> Going thru the emission's went ok. But look how far off I am on understanding the trucks ignition system
> better off (and done) without that manual.
The manual says what on the cover, 1982-1993? A lot of changes happened
in that time frame so if you dont look where you are at in the manual
its going to be showing you the wrong system.
You can try subscribing to Alldata
http://www.alldata.com/vehicle_owner/index.html
Its 25 bucks for 1 vehicle, 15 bucks for every vehicle after that. It
beats flipping through a Haynes anyday.
Danny G.
"HeatWave" <M3L...@YAH00.COM> wrote in message news:MPG.1fcd7eba9...@news-server.woh.rr.com...
>
>> I need to burn that Haynes manual! $#%% I've never needed to look at GM electronics
>> before now and that manual came with the truck. So I parked my but on the couch went
>> thru the emissions, electrical and ignition sections with a fine tooth comb.
>>
>> Then I wasted a huge amount of time visually trying to figure out what, where, and how for those
>> systems.
>> Going thru the emission's went ok. But look how far off I am on understanding the trucks ignition system
>> let alone troubleshoot it. This truck was not neglected or modified and so basic I would have been way
>> better off (and done) without that manual.
>
> The manual says what on the cover, 1982-1993? A lot of changes happened
> in that time frame so if you dont look where you are at in the manual
> its going to be showing you the wrong system.
I hear that. And when you look really close most everything in the ignition section
has a "used on most but not all" and located here or here on most but not all models.
That stopped me dead in my tracks. But its out the door now. :)