Advice for stripped threads upstream oxygen sensor exhaust manifold

[Arlen Holder]

Car is just bought by a kid just learning to drive (he's 16).
2004 Mitsubishi Lancer ES

Neighbors asked me to teach him how to replace the oxygen sensor (due to
emissions code).

The threads were stripped and "filled" with some kind of hardened "metal
paste".

The new part is a Denso 234-4739 (marked 485000-4060, 07U05)
The old part is a Denso (marked 234000, 8643, 07E23)

What would you suggest?
- Tap the threads? (22mm hex nut)
- New exhaust manifold?

http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3234632o2sensor01.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8064061o2sensor02.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6399144o2sensor03.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1574232o2sensor04.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9418974o2sensor05.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4183674o2sensor06.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5856176o2sensor07.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3486734o2sensor08.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9694112o2sensor09.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5019152o2sensor10.jpg

[Paul in Houston TX]

Arlen Holder wrote:
> Car is just bought by a kid just learning to drive (he's 16).
> 2004 Mitsubishi Lancer ES
>
> Neighbors asked me to teach him how to replace the oxygen sensor (due to
> emissions code).
>
> The threads were stripped and "filled" with some kind of hardened "metal
> paste".
>
> The new part is a Denso 234-4739 (marked 485000-4060, 07U05)
> The old part is a Denso (marked 234000, 8643, 07E23)
>
> What would you suggest?
> - Tap the threads? (22mm hex nut)
> - New exhaust manifold?

IF it were my car and IF the manifold is steel, I would remove the manifold,
then remove the square nut, and weld or braze in a thin-ish nut of appropriate
thread size.
If no thin-ish nut is available then make one with the dremel.
The sensor needs to be in the flame and also have good thermal conductivity to
the manifold.

[Bob F]

I'm no expert on this particular situation, but perhaps a helicoil would
solve it easily.

[rbowman]

On 08/01/2018 09:31 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> What would you suggest?
> - Tap the threads? (22mm hex nut)
> - New exhaust manifold?

Back to your friendly Loctite dealer for the Form-A-Thread kit? Trip to
a junkyard for a new manifold if replacing it isn't too painful? Helicoils?

[Arlen Holder]

On 1 Aug 2018 21:25:57 GMT, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

> IF it were my car and IF the manifold is steel, I would remove the manifold,
> then remove the square nut, and weld or braze in a thin-ish nut of appropriate
> thread size.
> If no thin-ish nut is available then make one with the dremel.
> The sensor needs to be in the flame and also have good thermal conductivity to
> the manifold.

I had not thought of putting a new nut on.
I'll look in the morning to see if the nut is the only threads.
I'm sure the sensor has to be "in" the stream of hot vapors.

It seems to be cast iron. Aren't they all that way?
(It's rusty.)

[Arlen Holder]

On 1 Aug 2018 21:41:29 GMT, Bob F wrote:

> I'm no expert on this particular situation, but perhaps a helicoil would
> solve it easily.

I guess it can't hurt.
I can contact Denso to figure out the thread pitch for their O2 sensors.

I was thinking of cleaning up the threads, but they look really bad.
How on earth can ANYONE do that to a bunch of threads?

What did they do?
It's not even hard to get to ... it's right there ... in front.

[Arlen Holder]

On 1 Aug 2018 22:26:00 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> Back to your friendly Loctite dealer for the Form-A-Thread kit? Trip to
> a junkyard for a new manifold if replacing it isn't too painful? Helicoils?

Seems to me the choices are...
a. New or used manifold (if it's not too hard to replace)
b. Drill it out and helicoil it (nothing to lose really)
c. Clean it up with a tap (I don't have the tap, which won't be cheap)
d. Shove it in there with epoxy (I hate that idea so I don't want to)

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 05:39:22 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:

> b. Drill it out and helicoil it (nothing to lose really)

Googling, I'm not yet sure a helicoil will work on a through hole.

I think all lambda sensors are 18x1.5 (I'm not sure, but people said that
on the net). Some say it's the same thread as for spark plugs.

If it's the same as for spark plugs, this might work, maybe?
https://shop.advanceautoparts.com/p/dorman-help-spark-plug-non-foulers-18mm-tapered-seat-42002/5014964-P

Napa seems to sell a thread chaser for spark plugs, if it's the same thread
as spark plugs...
https://www.napaonline.com/en/p/SER730

This bung might be able to be welded on by a shop if the threads are right:
https://www.diyautotune.com/product/mild-steel-18x1-5-thread-bung-and-plug-kit-3735/

The manifold is almost five hundred bucks
https://www.carid.com/eastern-catalytic/eco-carb-direct-fit-front-manifold-mpn-808573.html?singleid=346256846&url=4700416

[Steve W.]

Same threads as a spark plug. The easy repair is a plug rethread kit. It
has an oversized insert with a self guiding fluted cutter/tap
combination. Then you trim the threads on an insert so they don't block
the sensor tip. Screw it into place and screw in the sensor. About the
third time you drive the car that insert will become a permanent part of
the manifold.

Very common repair, done all the time.

--
Steve W.

[Arlen Holder]

On 1 Aug 2018 23:30:57 GMT, Steve W. wrote:

> Same threads as a spark plug. The easy repair is a plug rethread kit. It
> has an oversized insert with a self guiding fluted cutter/tap
> combination. Then you trim the threads on an insert so they don't block
> the sensor tip. Screw it into place and screw in the sensor. About the
> third time you drive the car that insert will become a permanent part of
> the manifold.
>
> Very common repair, done all the time.

Thanks for confirming it's the same threads as a spark plug, which, at the
moment, seem to be 18x1.5 for them.

Googling, it seems cast iron isn't easy to weld, and that the plug rethread
might work, but, the heat cycling has likely hardened the bung nut, such
that it's a LOT harder (some say) to deal with than a spark plug thread
which is typically in aluminum engine blocks (they say).

Searching for this "plug rethread kit", is this the $62 kit you speak of?
https://www.amazon.com/Thread-Kits-1218-500-Repair-Kit/dp/B0025PQITU

[dsi1]

That metal paste is anti-seize compound. Use a thread chaser before installing the new sensor.

https://www.amazon.com/Lisle-12230-Oxygen-Sensor-Thread/dp/B000XETMW0/ref=sr_1_3

[fozz89]

replying to Arlen Holder, fozz89 wrote:
You could try and tap. (cant see your pictures BTW) It depends on how much
material is missing from the original threads. I dont know my way around Jap
cars too well but usually with the right equipment you can just flash the PCM
and make emissions BS go away permanently (along with your catalytic
converter) More HPs, Better mileage, more crying liberals.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/maintenance/advice-for-stripped-threads-upstream-oxygen-sensor-exhaust-m-1171791-.htm

[Bob F]

That looks just like a helicoil set.

[rbowman]

The helicoil route won't be cheap either. The epoxy route is redneck
engineering at its finest but this is a 14 year old beater, right?

As an aside, general purpose epoxy isn't a good idea for an exhaust
manifold.

https://www.jbweld.com/products/highheat-epoxy-putty

[rbowman]

On 08/02/2018 12:18 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> Napa seems to sell a thread chaser for spark plugs, if it's the same thread
> as spark plugs...
> https://www.napaonline.com/en/p/SER730

Might work if the threads just need to be cleaned up. There are quite a
few kits for stripped out oil drain plugs. The problem is the cheap ones
are just a slightly oversized tap with a selection of oversized plugs.
The kits that are more like helicoils are expensive.

> This bung might be able to be welded on by a shop if the threads are right:
> https://www.diyautotune.com/product/mild-steel-18x1-5-thread-bung-and-plug-kit-3735/

If the manifold is cast iron, welding can be tricky. Brazing may be
better. A good shop will know the best approach.

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 06:59:23 GMT, trader_4 wrote:

> I'm a conservative and I don't think it's a good idea to modify cars
> so they pollute either. Amazing that someone could turn a simple
> repair into that nonsense. Also, with the emissions BS going away
> permanently, I wouldn't be surprised to see it have lower mileage too,
> because the computer winds up running it open loop, guessing at what's
> going on, instead of running it closed loop.

There's a reason I didn't respond to that suggestion of removing emissions.
There is absolutely zero chance we are going to mess with the emissions.
Zero.

It's going to be street legal smogable or we won't do it.

[Scott Dorsey]

Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:
>On 1 Aug 2018 21:41:29 GMT, Bob F wrote:
>
>> I'm no expert on this particular situation, but perhaps a helicoil would
>> solve it easily.
>
>I guess it can't hurt.
>I can contact Denso to figure out the thread pitch for their O2 sensors.

You have it out, measure the pitch.
The helicoil is probably the easiest solution and I am generally a fan of
the things.

>I was thinking of cleaning up the threads, but they look really bad.
>How on earth can ANYONE do that to a bunch of threads?
>
>What did they do?

They tried to remove a stuck oxygen sensor cold, maybe without even using
a proper penetrating oil, and they just put force on it until it deformed
and eventually tore itself out.

>It's not even hard to get to ... it's right there ... in front.

Are you absolutely sure it's the problem also?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 07:10:52 GMT, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> You have it out, measure the pitch.

From research since yesterday, all oxygen sensors seem to be M18x1.5 so I'm
clear on that.

> The helicoil is probably the easiest solution and I am generally a fan of
> the things.

Thanks. I think my current plan is:
a. Pick up a thread chaser & try that
b. If that can'd be found, consider a junkyard exhaust manifold
c. If that fails, consider a new one
d. If that's too pricey, consider a helicoil kit (but they're pricey too)
e. Maybe even consider drilling and then inserting a threaded bung

> They tried to remove a stuck oxygen sensor cold, maybe without even using
> a proper penetrating oil, and they just put force on it until it deformed
> and eventually tore itself out.

Jesus. Who would do that. I have never stripped a thread coming out!
(I've stripped threads going in, but never coming out.)

> Are you absolutely sure it's the problem also?

It is now. :)

[Steve W.]

Plug threads are M18 x 1.5 or M14 x 1.25 on most automobiles.
The M18 are the older plugs and O2 sensors and the M14 are the common
peanut plugs used these days.

Heat cycling will have made the iron harder to work with but the tools
used are designed to handle that.

That kit would work but I like using a solid insert myself, they hold up
better. I use timesert myself.

If you check with many of the chain parts stores they may have a thread
repair kit as a "loaner tool". You "rent" the tool use it, return it in
good shape and get your money back. You pay for the insert(s) you use.
A lot cheaper than buying the kit for a one time repair.



--
Steve W.

[Terry Coombs]

 *NO*!! That kit uses standard helicoil inserts , which are fine if
you're using spark plugs that use a crush washer to seal .  What you
want is similar to one I have and have used , mine is a NAPA auto parts
#770-3223 "Sav-A-Thread" kit  - it's for 14 mm plugs but you need the
one for 18mm plugs . For the heat cycle hardened threaded bung you need
to heat it red hot with a torch and let it cool slowly - even if (and it
has) the steel has absorbed carbon from the exhaust gasses the slow cool
will anneal the metal (will help a great deal if the manifold is hot too
...) . If you can cut it with a file , this kit will work . One
suggestion - drill the hole out enough to clean up the old threads plus
a bit , it makes the ream/tap operation much easier . This kit includes
a punch that upsets the top edge of the insert (solid metal insert)
knurling into the threads to keep it from backing out . This kit is made
by helicoil , you may be able to find it at another retailer - I bought
another from O'Reilly Auto Parts because this one was "lost" in the move
when I left Memphis for rural Arkansas .  I've used these kits twice ,
in 2 different vehicles with excellent results . Both were "hemi" type
OHC motors with the spark plug straight down the center of the valve
covers . Both required machining guide bushings to be sure I got the
hole straight (I have a machine shop , it's a "hobby") and both have run
for many thousands of miles trouble-free . Good luck !

--
Snag
Yes , I'm old
and crochety .
Get off my lawn !

[Terry Coombs]

  If it's new enough to have O2 sensors , chances are pretty good the
manifold is steel tube .

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 08:02:40 GMT, Steve W. wrote:

> If you check with many of the chain parts stores they may have a thread
> repair kit as a "loaner tool". You "rent" the tool use it, return it in
> good shape and get your money back. You pay for the insert(s) you use.
> A lot cheaper than buying the kit for a one time repair.

I went to O'Reilly's and Autozone today, where the loaner tap and die kit
at O'Reilly doesn't come close to the M18x1.5 needed here but they do sell
the M14x1.25 thread chaser for those smaller spark plugs:
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6043628o2sensor11.jpg

I bought from Autozone this M18x1.5 thread chaser and will get the kid to
work with me in a couple of hours before nightfall and report back.
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8522268o2sensor12.jpg

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 08:17:08 GMT, trader_4 wrote:

> I would not be too keen on that. To swap it you have more nuts,
> studs, bolts to screw around with and more potential for something
> else to snap, strip, refuse to come off, etc.

I understand that a used exhaust manifold is problematic.

Worse, it appears that the catalytic converter is integral with the exhaust
manifold on this vehicle, so, getting a "used" cat is problematic to start
with.

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 18:22:58 GMT, Terry Coombs wrote:

>   Are you sure Clare ? In the second photo of his original post those
> sure look like weld beads on the sides of the runner tubes . Maybe a
> formed plate/sheet metal unit ? I hadn't looked at the photos ... I do
> see that there is a crush washer to seal , so the helicoil kit he asked
> about will work . I prefer the solid insert anyway .

What should I take a picture of to help you identify if it's steel or cast?
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9421150o2sensor13.jpg>

Here is the part at Mitsubishi (where the cat is integral with it):
<https://www.mitsubishipartswarehouse.com/auto-parts/2004/mitsubishi/lancer/es-trim/2-0l-l4-gas-engine/exhaust-system-cat/exhaust-manifold-scat>

It's the 2004 Lancer ES 2.0L engine where Autozone has these brands:
Walker
<https://www.autozone.com/emission-control-and-exhaust/exhaust-manifold/walker-exhaust-manifold/461307_452518_0>
Dorman
<https://www.autozone.com/emission-control-and-exhaust/exhaust-manifold/dorman-exhaust-manifold/108344_540298_0>
MagnaFlow
<https://www.autozone.com/emission-control-and-exhaust/exhaust-manifold/magnaflow-exhaust-manifold/513806_943921_25137>
<https://www.autozone.com/emission-control-and-exhaust/exhaust-manifold/magnaflow-exhaust-manifold/435623_943944_25137>

Carid has "Eco Carb":
<https://www.carid.com/2004-mitsubishi-lancer-exhaust-manifolds/?filter=1&sub-model[Liter][]=2.0L>

Can you tell from those what it's made out of?
If you need a better picture, I'd be glad to snap it for you.

[Paul in Houston TX]

Cast iron went away for most cars a long time ago due to weight savings
needed to comply with gov't mandated fuel mileage requirements.
Take a look at the top pic on the carid.com url. That manifold is cast iron.
Notice how there are no welds. The pipe and the flange is one molded piece.

[rbowman]

On 08/02/2018 07:43 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> What should I take a picture of to help you identify if it's steel or cast?
> <http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=9421150o2sensor13.jpg>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFf_x97vcQ0

Sorting out the different alloys of steel is tricky working from the
spark color and patterns but steel versus cast iron is relatively easy.

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 16:33:44 GMT, Terry Coombs wrote:

> I bought
> another from O'Reilly Auto Parts because this one was "lost" in the move
> when I left Memphis for rural Arkansas . 

Thanks for that advice based on your experience, since I have zero
experience with these things.

I saw that kit at O'Reilly's which I photographed on their counter.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6043628o2sensor11.jpg>

The sort of good news is that the thread chaser bottomed out entirely by
hand, without any strength required whatsoever, but the sort of bad news is
that it didn't clean up much as a result:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3885168o2sensor19.jpg>

Still, at least that "jb weld" or "epoxy" or whatever it was, seems to be
cleaned out.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6998492o2sensor20.jpg>

The thread chaser really didn't clean up the threads as much as it pushed
out the jb-weld-expoxy-whatever stuff from the valleys.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6373378o2sensor21.jpg>

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 18:56:34 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> They are not even allowed to sell you a used converter - at least not
> here.

This is California, so, if there's anywhere on earth that you're not
allowed to do something, it's gonna be in California for sure.

So that knocks out a used exhaust manifold from the equation.

BTW, I think I figured out WHY the ham-fisted person cross-threaded the old
oxygen sensor.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8804034o2sensor16.jpg>

The radiator upper hose is in the way of a straight shot, so I gently
removed the upper radiator hose (which was rather loose with a hose clamp).
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1535153o2sensor17.jpg>

Then I was able to get a perfectly straight shot on the thread chaser:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3835665o2sensor18.jpg>

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 21:40:53 GMT, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

> Cast iron went away for most cars a long time ago due to weight savings
> needed to comply with gov't mandated fuel mileage requirements.
> Take a look at the top pic on the carid.com url. That manifold is cast iron.
> Notice how there are no welds. The pipe and the flange is one molded piece

This does seem to have welds, so, it must be steel then, is that right?
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3408929o2sensor13.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8568761o2sensor14.jpg
http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5285317o2sensor15.jpg

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 13:48:38 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> First step is clean out the existing threads - do NOT use a form-a
> thread type product - needs to withstand high temperature AND be
> electrically conductive. (some sensors don't need the ground, but many
> do)

Hi Clare,
You've always been right, over the years, on everything!

I will always strive to take your advice, as you have the experience I
lack.

I did clean out the threads late this afternoon just before nightfall:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5932805o2sensor28.jpg>

After removing the upper radiator hose to get a straight shot and hand
threading the oxygen sensor thread chaser a few times up and down into the
hole, I hand tightened the new oxygen sensor (which came with a crush
gasket like spark plugs do) into the threaded bung.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=2591539o2sensor22.jpg>

When it met a slight resistance, I used the crows foot, still by hand:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3871206o2sensor23.jpg>

Then, when it bottomed, I gently applied leverage ever so slightly:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8431124o2sensor25.jpg>

I figured it would be better loose than too tight, as I didn't want to risk
the threads, but I did snug it down with, oh, about 20 foot pounds in the
last 1/8 turn or so.

Then I transferred the old metal bracket to the new oxygen sensor:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=1531967o2sensor24.jpg>

And I buttoned back up the heat shield & routed the oxygen sensor wiring:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=4853481o2sensor26.jpg>

[Arlen Holder]

On 2 Aug 2018 13:34:28 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> The tap required to chase out the thread will be metric - usually an
> 18mm spark plug tap. (or thread chaser)

Hi Clare,
I had the teen run a short test (the car isn't street insured and the kid
doesn't yet have his license so I had the kid test it on a bunch of private
roads at 10 mph (if that) where it's legal to drive at least on private
property - where all the neighbors have been prior warned).

There was some smoke around the exhaust manifold where we were working, and
the car stalled a few times when it just about warmed up (so I presume the
choke went off), but I am hoping that the mist of oily smoke is just the
oil that got on the manifold when we removed the old lambda sensor.

Of course, the amber "Service Engine Soon" light was lit the whole time:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=2780083o2sensor27.jpg>

I cleared the SES light such that the SRS is the only remaining warning:
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=7936105radiator_12.jpg>

There are a few other anomalies I noticed, but the main question is how to
test if the oxygen sensor is in tight enough.

[dsi1]

On Thursday, August 2, 2018 at 8:21:36 PM UTC-10, Arlen Holder wrote:
>
> There are a few other anomalies I noticed, but the main question is how to
> test if the oxygen sensor is in tight enough.

This is not brain surgery. You torque it to whatever you feel comfortable with. If you strip out the threads, you'll have to repair it with an insert. What's the problem? If you're afraid to work on the car, then don't.

[Arlen Holder]

On 3 Aug 2018 18:03:11 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

>>http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3408929o2sensor13.jpg
>>http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=8568761o2sensor14.jpg
>>http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5285317o2sensor15.jpg

> Thanks for reposting. Yes, it is a fabricated manifold. What metal
> it is is hard to say - likely a high nickelteel - similar to
> Stainless.

Thanks Clare for your always wise and wonderful advice.

I have a friend with welding equipment lined up if I need to drill it out
to insert a bung and have it tack welded in place.

At the moment, I'm sticking with the simple plan of...
1. Hope the thread chaser worked (how would I know if it didn't work?)
2. If needed, try the M20x1.5 tap to add a M18x1.5 insert
3. If really needed, drill it out to have a bung tack welded in place

I think, as you astutely predicted early on, that #1 will suffice.

My main mental dilemma is only how to tell if gases are leaking past the
lambda sensor threads under pressure.

[Arlen Holder]

On 3 Aug 2018 18:00:56 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> What did you want it to do? A "thread chaser" is supposed to clean
> foreign material out of the thread. If the threads are not badly
> deformed, it will NOT remove metal.
>
> You now have a pretty fail percentage of a thread - - -

Thanks Clare.

To answer your question of "what did you think was gonna happen?", I pretty
much was hoping it would "feel" like I was tapping new threads, as I've
tapped things before.

But it just felt loose.

Still, it tightened the last 1/8th of a turn, so, if that's enough of a
"bite", then I'm happy.

I don't know how to *test* if the lambda sensor is leaking, but there's no
sound coming out of it (of course, the engine is loud so the sound would
have to be huge like it was when we moved the car a bit with the sensor
out).

[Arlen Holder]

On 3 Aug 2018 18:12:20 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> First of all - it has NO CHOKE. The computer may have to "relearn"
> with the new sensor. Any finger prionts or penetrating oil etc on the
> manifold will make it smoke. Let it cool down and start it again. If
> it smokes a lot less, or not al all, you are good.

Thanks for that choke advice. It must have "some" mechanism of increasing
the fuel-to-air to achieve the 14:1 stoichemotry when cold, so that's kind
of sort of what I meant by choke.

Basically, it stalls at low speed (which is all we've been able to do)
whenever it's transitioning from warm on the gauge (about 10 minutes or so
of low-speed driving). It did this *before* the oxygen sensor, so it's
unrelated to the sensor.

The OBDII tester gives us a 800 rpm reading at idle. Dunno how to increase
the idle speed yet, as this car isn't mine (mine is a bimmer which is a
drive by wire mechanism).

> As for "tight enough" - if you could get 120 foot lbs out of it it's
> tight enough. Only takes about 10 to squash the washer.

Thanks for that advice Clare, where you have always been spot on in
accuracy. I'm gonna assume it's tight enough since I did get a good last
1/8th of a turn on it with a wrench, and where I can't think of how else to
test it other than to see if the cleared codes come back under 10mph
driving (which is all we can do at this time).

> I believe the torque spec is 33 ft lbs on a Mitsu.
> Many others are spec'd as finger tight (no movement) plus 1/4 turn -
> about 18-25 ft lbs.

If that's the case, then I think the torque is fine.

The funny thing is I wonder why the mechanic who screwed it up didn't just
do what I just did. What did he gain by jb welding it (or whatever that
gray hard metal-like paste was)?

[Scott Dorsey]

Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:
>Basically, it stalls at low speed (which is all we've been able to do)
>whenever it's transitioning from warm on the gauge (about 10 minutes or so
>of low-speed driving). It did this *before* the oxygen sensor, so it's
>unrelated to the sensor.

Right. The error message you got about the sensor was ALSO unrelated to
the sensor. The error message says the output of the sensor is out of
range. It's out of range because the engine is running way too rich
or way too lean.

>The OBDII tester gives us a 800 rpm reading at idle. Dunno how to increase
>the idle speed yet, as this car isn't mine (mine is a bimmer which is a
>drive by wire mechanism).

You don't. You find the vacuum leak or the bad idle control valve or
whatever it is that is causing the mixture to be all wrong, and then
your idle speed will stabilize and you will be able to accelerate again.

[Arlen Holder]

On 3 Aug 2018 18:52:56 GMT, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> Right. The error message you got about the sensor was ALSO unrelated to
> the sensor. The error message says the output of the sensor is out of
> range. It's out of range because the engine is running way too rich
> or way too lean.

Understood. The error is just an error in the input, output, or power of
the sensor.

>>The OBDII tester gives us a 800 rpm reading at idle. Dunno how to increase
>>the idle speed yet, as this car isn't mine (mine is a bimmer which is a
>>drive by wire mechanism).
>
> You don't. You find the vacuum leak or the bad idle control valve or
> whatever it is that is causing the mixture to be all wrong, and then
> your idle speed will stabilize and you will be able to accelerate again.

Always wanted to buy a good smoke tester at a good price that a home
mechanic can make an argument for on cost/benefit analysis.

[Paul in Houston TX]

I wouldn't worry about it. Any leakage would be minor.
However, if you are worried about it you can put some high temp
sealer around it.
Don't know if a hose would work in this situation or not due to engine noise.
Get lenght of small hose, stick one end in ear, and use the other end
to listen for leaks.

[Arlen Holder]

On 3 Aug 2018 23:27:26 GMT, Paul in Houston TX wrote:

> I wouldn't worry about it. Any leakage would be minor.
> However, if you are worried about it you can put some high temp
> sealer around it.
> Don't know if a hose would work in this situation or not due to engine noise.
> Get lenght of small hose, stick one end in ear, and use the other end
> to listen for leaks.

Thanks for that advice on the high temp sealer.
Someone said that the threads are the ground for the electrical connection.

We will leave it for now (it's parked in my driveway but it's not my car).
I'll have the kid drive it on private roads until we can get the registers
to set (we might not get them all to set if they need highway speeds).

The most critical thing is to get it smogged.

I'm gonna start working on the other issues now (for example, the SRS light
is lit so I'm gonna have to figure out how to reset that first).

Thanks everyone for all the help on the stripped threads!
You guys give me the confidence to keep going!

[Arlen Holder]

On 4 Aug 2018 07:52:48 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> DO NOT put sealer on it. The "cell" needs to breathe - anything that
> would restrict or poison the air getting to the cell will kill the
> sensor.
>
> I repeat - DO NOT PUT ANY KIND OF SEALER AROUND THE BASE OF THE SENSOR
> - and yes I AM yelling!!!!

Hi Clare,
Over the decades, you have ALWAYS been right so I will follow your
instructions to the letter!

I'm an electrical engineer, by the way, but they do NOT teach us any of
this pragmatic stuff in school ... they don't even cover ground connections
in op amps, for example. So I learn a LOT of this stuff from you!

*THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR CORRECT HELP & ADVICE OVER THE YEARS!*
(and yes, I'm shouting gleefully!)

I very much appreciate that you are (a) so helpful, and (b) so experienced,
as I am not educated in automotive mechanics (other than a high school shop
class many decades ago when rwd & carbs & distributors & rusted out exhaust
pipes were the norm).

You give me the confidence to keep going, which I very much appreciate,
since I'm always helping this neighbor who is living off her savings and
whose husband died leaving her a house in need of tremendous repair and a
few kids that she loving dotes upon (whom I try to help as much as I can).

The *only* time we really differed, in all these years, is on the
feasibility of unmounting, remounting, and static balancing tires at home,
which I find so easy to do (particularly on the 14-inch wheels of this
Mitsubishi) that it takes fifteen minutes, easily, from start to finish,
where, to just drive to a shop and back would be multiple times that in
terms of time & effort.

The only other place, I think, we differ, is that I "think" alignment is
"doable" under the circumstances of whatever is "adjustable" on each
vehicle (e.g., my bimmer only has front toe, and rear camber & toe - so
those are the only three measurements & adjustments I'm talking about).

I know you guys seem to despise me simply for purchasing Harbor Freight
equipment, and, you're right in many ways as the tire changer isn't the
best tool on the planet (but at least it already paid for itself a while
ago at about the fifteenth tire) and the additional bead breaker (which is
a requirement for SUV tires) needed to be slightly modified (the base is
too short for larger diameter tires) - but it works just fine once I put a
plank of wood on the base to lengthen it for the 17-inch larger tires.

The one other thing some of you guys seem to hate is that I look things up
(e.g., I have realized that brake rotors just do not warp in normal street
use, and anyone who says they do, has actually never measured the warp (as
you would measure engine head/block warp, for example). Some of you who
hate that call that 'book knowledge', and I agree it's book knowledge - but
all knowledge is good, even book knowledge (I've read a billion textbooks
in my time, and nobody complains about them for example).

There are still six "big jobs" that I posit few people choose to do at home
(each for different main reasons), where I now have half of them under my
belt, and where I hope to do the other half before I die! :)
============
1. Habitually refuel a vehicle at home (I have been refueling for years)
2. Habitually mount, balance & patchplug tires at home (I've done 20 now)
3. Remove & repair a transmission (just did my 1st clutch, thanks to you!)
============
4. Measure & align what is designed to be adjusted (that's next on my list)
5. Prep & paint an old vehicle (that is also next on my do-b4-I-die list)
6. Remove & repair an engine (haven't done this - major downtime issue)
============

I "think" most people don't know what I know (and you know) about
re-fueling and changing tires at home, but the rest of the issues I can't
say that I know anything that most people don't already know.

I "think" the main reason most people don't do those six things are
(keep in mind the reasons below have to be short to fit on one line)
1. They don't have the room, privacy, or delivery options that I have.
2. Lots of reasons - but mostly it's that it's easier to pay someone.
3. Lots of reasons - but mostly it's too big of a job for most people.
4. I think the main reason is that they "think" it can't be done.
5. Lots of reasons - mainly that they want the results to look perfect.
6. Lots of reasons - mainly I think few can afford the lengthy downtime.

If you see a thread, in the future, about alignment checks of a Mitsubishi
Lancer ES, you'll know that I've finally tackled my first alignment job!

But first, I have to purchase toe plates that allow toe to be more easily
adjusted without having to roll the car back & forth - and I'll need to
find camber plates at a reasonable price that offset the electronic level
from the tire bulge while keeping the level parallel to the wheel.

Thanks again, Clare, for helping give me the confidence to do what most
people are afraid to try to do - where I can help others - save money - and
end up with the best parts at the lowest cost possible (and I end up with
the fun of figuring out where to store all the new tools I needed!).

[Arlen Holder]

On 4 Aug 2018 07:56:20 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> If it was P0133 it means slow response - definitely a bad sensoe

I think that's what it was, but what only matters now is what comes back!

BTW, I just bought oxygen sensors for three different vehicles, where I
*hate* throwing parts at a problem. I just hate it.

But it turns out to be difficult to *test* oxygen sensors faithfully.

Sure, you can heat them up and look for a voltage, but after trying that, I
gave up because a "really bad" oxygen sensor has its own code, but a
"slightly bad" oxygen sensor seems to, in my humble experience on two
different vehicles, cause one of two different related codes.

That is, in my experience,
a. A slightly bad lambda sensor can cause a CAT register to never set
b. A alightly bad lambda sensor can cause a "slow response" code

Given that the heat:voltage test of an oxygen sensor isn't really all that
accurate for those two things, and given that oxygen sensors are not only
relatively cheap but also known to not last more than about 100K miles, I
decided on all three vehicles to just "throw the part" at the vehicle.

In the case of the neighbor's CAT register that wouldn't set, it worked.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=5366040sensorwiring01.jpg>

The neighbor's kid's Mitsubishi is in testing.
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=6815290denso_mitsubishi_02_sensor.jpg>

I'm still working on the bimmer (having just this week replaced the two
front Bosch upstrem lambda sensors).
<http://www.bild.me/bild.php?file=3533947bosch_o2_sensor.jpg>

What's amazing, to me, is that I've never replaced an oxygen sensor before,
in my entire life, but I never worked on such old cars either (two decades
old each of them).

Having zero prior experience with oxygen sensors, I think sometimes,
"throwing parts" at the problem might be OK in the case of emissions codes
because:
a. Oxygen sensors are not permanent parts anyway, and,
b. You have to get past smog (where a ticket is far more expensive), and,
c. You can't really test them accurately (from my experiments anyway).

[Paul in Houston TX]

Arlen Holder wrote:
> On 3 Aug 2018 23:27:26 GMT, Paul in Houston TX wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't worry about it. Any leakage would be minor.
>> However, if you are worried about it you can put some high temp
>> sealer around it.
>> Don't know if a hose would work in this situation or not due to engine noise.
>> Get lenght of small hose, stick one end in ear, and use the other end
>> to listen for leaks.
>
> Thanks for that advice on the high temp sealer.
> Someone said that the threads are the ground for the electrical connection.

I did not explain well enough before.
Sealer around the sensor did not mean on the threads nor coating the sensor.
Picture a thin rubber band's worth where the sensor and manifold meet.

[Arlen Holder]

On 4 Aug 2018 20:02:46 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> Does your insurance company know?
Long ago I checked with the local fire marshall, who told me that they're
perfectly legal as long as they're in legal containers.

I also checked with the CHP 800 number who said transport of gasoline is
perfectly legal as long as it's less than 600 pounds, which is the federal
limit on "hazardous materials" transport. (It's a felony to transport more
than 600 pounds at a time, but that's more gas than a car can carry.)

I checked with CARB who said that emissions standards don't play a role
unless any one container is over 50 gallons (that's why drums, they told
me, are technically 50 gallons but actually less) and the sum total is less
than 300 gallons.

I checked with OSHA who "recommended" a spill pan, and aired enclosure, but
who said OSHA rules don't apply to homeowners.

There are zero "zoning" rules according to the local planning department
(other than structures must be 100 feet from the road or they need a
permit, but that applies to any structure that is less than 10 by 10 (as I
recall) and 12 feet high (as I recall).

> How much fuel do you keep around?

Only about 50 gallons at a time, all in legal containers.

The fire department comes by once a year, unannounced, to write up
fire-break violations - and they "see" the gasoline since it's stored in
big red jugs right out in the open. They don't even blink (and yet, they
make me clear all flammable growth 100 feet from the house and 10 feet from
the propane tanks).

In California, you can't legally fill more than 6 gallon containers at a
gas station, which is a rule that went into effect only relatively
recently, where some of my containers (the WWII style ones) are 6 gallons.

Delivery of gasoline less than 200 to 300 gallons is problematic, where my
ultimate "station" will be in 40-gallon epoxy-lined drums with an electric
pump just like the gas-station pumps. (I have plenty of room for it.)

> There are very real safety issues to address - as well as hydrocarbon
> emission issues.

I don't do things lightly - I plan them out - as you know. It's no less
safe than you storing a single 5-gallon can of gasoline - the only
difference being the amount - but my 50 gallons is exactly as safe as your
5 gallons. Exactly. The safety is the same. It's only the amount that is
different.

Of course, gasoline is flammable, and of course there are hydrocarbons, but
I am a thorough person, who checked with all the relevant authorities. I
leak as many hydrocarbons as you do when you fill your lawn mower (in fact,
I'm VERY WELL AWARE of hydrocarbons, so I might even leak less than you do
since my process takes them into account somewhat).

If the gas is stored in approved containers, you can keep hundreds of
gallons legally at home. You can fill every inch of your front lawn for
example. As long as each container is legal, there is no limit on numbers
of containers (if they're 5-gallon jugs).

There are no rules for how you get the gasoline OUT of the container with
respect to emissions either. But I'm very good about that too.

(Of course, the containers themselves are CARB/EPA approved so, as you're
well aware, the gas goes in and doesn't come out easily - due to the shitty
spouts - but that's a different beast altogether which I've solved
separately by not using them).

Sure, gas is flammable. But so is the gasoline stored at everyone elses'
house too. They just don't have as much of it. Most people with three cars
in the garage have as much as I have for example, outside.

>>2. Habitually mount, balance & patchplug tires at home (I've done 20 now)
>

> I "rough balanced" the tires on the '53 MGTD I'm currently babysitting
> and working on - to make it smooth enough to drive while I
> troubleshoot other issues - but the tires are going onto the dynamic
> balance at the first oppoertunity. I will be doing the balance - but
> on proffessional equipment.

Yup. I know all about it.

Let's not argue here, but at least you have balanced wheels so you're one
of the very rare people who knows what you're talking about when you say
you wouldn't do it at home (because you don't like the job).

Most people only talk bullshit when they cry that they can't mount,
balance, and properly patchplug repair tires at home.

If they've never done it, then they're just talking out of their asses.
I know you've done it - although I think you used professional equipment.

Even with harbor freight Chinese crap tools, it's a piece of cake to
unmount and mount a tire, particularly a non-SUV passenger-car tire. The
wheels don't take a beating, even on my bimmer despite the fact the
crybabies assume they will (it's far more gentle than what a shop typically
does).

Those who cry that it is too much work, or that it's too expensive, or that
it takes too much time, or that it's dangerous, etc., are all just
crybabies who are just scared of their own shadow and afraid to get their
hands dirty.

It's so easy that I can do it in 15 minutes easily, although I am never in
a rush so the time is just to explain how easy it is. I scrub the wheels. I
remove the old weights. I match mount if possible the new tire. I am aware
of the drop center (thanks!). I replace the valves (that stupid valve stem
removal tool is a waste of money and space in the tool drawer - although
the valve seat removal tool is a godsend).

Anyway, tires are so easy that anyone who says they are not just proves
that they are an idiot.

The only thing you can't do easily at home is dynamically balance, but the
test for dynamic imbalance is free as you're already well aware. You just
don't know which tire it is! :)

>>3. Remove & repair a transmission (just did my 1st clutch, thanks to you!)
>> ============
>>4. Measure & align what is designed to be adjusted (that's next on my list)
>

> As an ex professional mechanic, I'll do toe-in adjustment as part ofa
> front end repair - but it will go onto a REAL alignment machine before
> it gets any miles on it - because I KNOW how important it is to get it
> right - and how hard it is to do it right without proper equipment

I disagree but I understand. The reason people don't do each of the six
things is different for each item, where alignment makes the brain hurt.

It's not so much that there's trig involved, but it's more that the spec is
never in the same "thing" that you're measuring. For example, the damn
bimmer spec is in degrees of toe to the centerline. WTF.

It's not too hard to find the centerline, but you generally measure in
inches, not in degrees of toe.

At least camber is usually spec'd in degrees, which is what you measure.

Just like with tire-changing tools, every year the tools to measure camber
and toe (which is all the bimmer can adjust anyway) get better and cheaper.

You can do it with a plumb bob and ruler, but I prefer to measure toe in
inches and camber in degrees.

The hard part (other than the conversions of degrees to inches) is changing
toe without having to roll the car back and forth. Also, for the bimmer,
you need about 500 pounds of weight, but that's where all those gas cans
come in handy (filled with water). :)

>>5. Prep & paint an old vehicle (that is also next on my do-b4-I-die list)
>

> As long as you don't mind driving your screw-ups (and there WILL be
> several, at the very least - for sure -) go for it. I've painted a
> few - and never been truly happy with any of my paint jobs. They've
> been good - but not up to "my standards".

I completely understand. Remember, these cars are two decades old. Any
paint job will be a good paint job. It's like the old saying pilots have
for what a good landing is.

I think California just recently enacted a law saying you can't paint at
home anymore - but I'd have to check up on that with CARB as I haven't
spoken to them in a year (I call them up all the time and they're actually
very helpful engineers).

>>6. Remove & repair an engine (haven't done this - major downtime issue)
>

> \Go for it. Start with a lawnmower motor. Then go to a simple older
> engine like a sixties chevy, ford, or Chrysler six - on a "peoject
> car" - or start with an old tractor that you don't need - but can use
> when it's done for plowing snow or cutting grass - - -

I've taken apart some engines but the problem with a car is that it's a LOT
of stuff that has to come out, so there is a huge downtime that most people
just can't afford.

In summary, I've thought about the six jobs for years, and I've asked
people, but very few give an answer that makes sense. Your answers make
sense except for the refueling, but the rest make sense.

The main reasons, as I see them, summarized to fit on one line, are.
1. Gas: Most people just stop at a gas station; which is easy.
2. Tires: Most people pay $20 per tire; which is easy.
3. Trans: Most people just pay a mechanic $500 to $1000; which is easy.
---------- (these below I haven't done yet) ----------
4. Align: Most people's brains would explode with all the thinking.
5. Paint: A body shop will always do a far better job.
6. Engine: Nobody can afford the downtime for a daily driver.

[Arlen Holder]

On 5 Aug 2018 07:01:48 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:

> I checked with CARB who said that emissions standards don't play a role
> unless any one container is over 50 gallons (that's why drums, they told
> me, are technically 50 gallons but actually less) and the sum total is less
> than 300 gallons.

Actually, as I recall, there are two limits for CARB, one of which is the
49 gallon drum, and the other of which is the 300 gallons.

The emissions don't hit until you store more than 300 gallons and the drums
don't hit if they're a fraction under 50 gallons.

As I recall.

The point is that I currently have a dozen 5-gallon legal "jugs", any one
of which and all of which are perfectly legal as there is no limit anywhere
to how many you can store according to my research years ago.

And, I'll go to two-49-gallon drums when I upgrade to the pump system (I'm
going for a 12V pump but you can do hand-operated pumps - but why bother
since it's so easy without any pump that if you're gonna pump - you may as
well go well-grounded electrical).

The big problem is delivery.
Not the storage or refueling (both of which are utterly trivial).

[Scott Dorsey]

Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:
>BTW, I just bought oxygen sensors for three different vehicles, where I
>*hate* throwing parts at a problem. I just hate it.
>
>But it turns out to be difficult to *test* oxygen sensors faithfully.
>
>Sure, you can heat them up and look for a voltage, but after trying that, I
>gave up because a "really bad" oxygen sensor has its own code, but a
>"slightly bad" oxygen sensor seems to, in my humble experience on two
>different vehicles, cause one of two different related codes.

You don't test them on the bench. You use the scanner. You set the scanner
to give you a display of the oxygen sensor signal (and it will show the
nominal level, but if it's so bad it's setting codes you'll likely see the
pointer slammed to one side or another). So now you know what the computer
is doing.

You also know what the engine is doing. The exhaust smells rich or lean.
You can put your hand over the intake... if it runs better, the engine is
too lean.

When you know what the engine is doing and you know what the computer is
doing, you know all you need to know about the oxygen sensor. If the
computer thinks it's too rich but it's really too lean, it's likely the
sensor, but if the computer thinks it's too lean but can't enrichen it out
far enough, it's likely not.

Timing and ignition problems will produce poor combustion which will show
up as oxygen sensor errors... but you can see THOSE because the computer
gives you ignition timing information.

The scanner will tell you all of the inputs and all of the outputs.

>That is, in my experience,
>a. A slightly bad lambda sensor can cause a CAT register to never set
>b. A alightly bad lambda sensor can cause a "slow response" code

Ignore the damn codes. The codes let you know that something is out of
range but it doesn't tell you anything else. Look at the plots. If you
just spend your time staring at the codes you won't understand what is
going on inside the box.

>What's amazing, to me, is that I've never replaced an oxygen sensor before,
>in my entire life, but I never worked on such old cars either (two decades
>old each of them).

They do fail, but the vast majority of 'oxygen sensor' error codes have
absolutely nothing to do with the oxygen sensor itself. They are faithfully
recording that the exhaust is way wrong.

[Xeno]

It always amazes me the dependence people place on those codes without
really understanding the *system* that is generating the codes and, in
most cases, the *limitations* of those systems.

>
>> What's amazing, to me, is that I've never replaced an oxygen sensor before,
>> in my entire life, but I never worked on such old cars either (two decades
>> old each of them).
>
> They do fail, but the vast majority of 'oxygen sensor' error codes have
> absolutely nothing to do with the oxygen sensor itself. They are faithfully
> recording that the exhaust is way wrong.
> --scott
>


--

Xeno

"The best way to make a fire with two sticks is to make sure one of them
is a match."
-- Will Rogers

[Arlen Holder]

On 5 Aug 2018 07:31:19 GMT, Xeno wrote:

> It always amazes me the dependence people place on those codes without
> really understanding the *system* that is generating the codes and, in
> most cases, the *limitations* of those systems.

I agree with both you and Scott that *most people* (not me, but most
people), when they see a sensor code, they replace the sensor.

It could be a temperature sensor for heaven's sake, and they replace the
sensor.

As I told Scott, I'm an EE so I know how to test a sensor, but in the case
of oxygen sensors, I've had five years' experience with the toyota and
bimmer where a bad sensor will make the FTP not set the related monitors
for hundreds of miles. IN the case of the toyota, it took about 400 miles,
and it took more than a thousand in the case of the bimmer.

In *both* cases, I took it to the smog referee and passed with flying
colors, even with the registers unset (since that's what the BAR smog
referee did in years past). They don't do that anymore, so you're stuck
now.

I know the FTP inside and out, and spoke to the BAR engineers who know it
even better than I do. I went over all the dozen conditions that an engine
must be in order for a monitor to be set.

Remember, in both cases, the bar smog referee PASSED the vehicle.

The problem is much more sinister than you seem to have experience with.
But I do agree with you that *most people* just throw parts at a problem.

What I find hilarious is what happens AFTER people throw parts at a
problem. Let's take the two corner cases, assuming, for example, that a
problem can have FIVE (for argument's sake) caususes:

1. If they guess right on the first pass, they claim that they are an utter
genius, and after that, for the rest of their lives, anyone who has that
same problem, they swear the answer is that first solution.
2. If they guess wrong, and have to replace all five parts, they swear that
the first four parts were bad, until they finally get to the right part.

Anyway, the main point here is that we all agree that throwing parts at a
problem is a crazy way to "fix things" but you have to admit a lot of car
problems are fixed that way.

I find the funniest "throwing parts" at a problem to be "brake warp".
I'm sure the intelligent ones here know that street rotors just don't warp.
So I will assume you know that.
(Nobody ever measures warp - but it's easy to measure warp which you do
measure for a head, for example.)

So what do the morons do when they get a brake-related vibration at speed?
They throw rotors (& sometimes pads & even bigger calipers) at it.

Guess what?
That solves the warp!
Instantly!

They *think* they're an utter genius.
They *think* they proved they had rotor warp.

Every brake vibration for the rest of their lives, is due to "warp".
Hehhehheh ....

Q: Why does this work?
A: Because the *short term* solution is *different* than the long-term one!

While brake-related judder can be caused by many things (look up the Tire
Rack vibration flow chart as just one example), let's assume that judder
was due to uneven pad deposition.

You can't measure that stuff (not with home equipment you can't).
So the rotors measure fine (not that anyone who thinks they warp measures
anything).

What happened in the case of "warp", is that there was uneven pad
deposition (let's say for this case), and so, replacing (or machining) the
rotors "solved" the problem but - get this - the warp comes back.

The guy who *thinks* the rotors warped is dumbfounded.

The short term solution solved the "warp", but the long term solution
didn't.
Q: What's the short term solution?
A: Change your rotors (or machine them or rebed them).

Q: What's the long term solution?
A: Change your braking habits.

My point is that, while I'm not a mechanic, and while I only have the
experience of the cars that I own or that friends/neighbors own, I
generally troubleshoot a problem to the UNDERSTANDING of teh cause of the
problem.

In the case of oxygen sensors, I know, from my experience with two old
vehicles, that an o2 sensor can be just bad enough to not set codes but to
take between 400 and 1000 miles to set all the registers - even as the
emissions are perfect.

If you can diagnose *that*, you'd be my hero!
Likewise, if you can suggest a working $100 smoke machine, I'd love you!

[Arlen Holder]

On 5 Aug 2018 07:22:24 GMT, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> You don't test them on the bench. You use the scanner. You set the scanner
> to give you a display of the oxygen sensor signal (and it will show the
> nominal level, but if it's so bad it's setting codes you'll likely see the
> pointer slammed to one side or another). So now you know what the computer
> is doing.

You seem to have skills that I don't have since you can "feel" and "hear"
things that I can't.

I do have live data and freeze frame though, but I'm not sure what to look
for.

> You also know what the engine is doing. The exhaust smells rich or lean.

You seem to have sensitive powers of smelling that I don't have.

For example, it has been four or five years running now that the bimmer
wouldn't set a register after clearing the codes (two different smog
cycles) where, finally, after many hundreds of miles, the registers all
finally will set.

And trust me, I know the FTP (federal test procedure) drive cycle, and
specifically the BMW drive cycle just as well as you do. I've been on the
phone with CARB for an hour, talking with the engineers, asking why a
register wouldn't set.

I've been to the smog referee multiple times (always I pass).

No funny smells though. So you must have a very sensitive nose!

The first time I took it to the state smog referee who passed it even with
the registers unset - and they literally took almost an hour - two people
besides - to smog it. They climbed all over that car, looking for smoke,
looking at the engine - looking up stuff in their Mitchells to see if it
was modded - looking underneath, etc.

But now you can no longer effectively use the smog referee anymore.

No smells though.
So your powers of smell are far greater than mine ever will be.

Remember, the sensor is working as the code is NOT an oxygen sensor code.
There is no code on the bimmer. The register just won't set.

> You can put your hand over the intake... if it runs better, the engine is
> too lean.

Again, you have powers of sense that I just will never have.

Anyway, lean is so easy to know about that it's not funny.

If the bimmer is running lean (and they all do, if you own a bimmer, you'll
know why I can confidently say that), then you get a lean condition code.

The bimmer is filled with them.

The way I've learned to diagnose a lean condition is a good smoke machine.
At least on a bimmer it is.

The CCV hoses, for example, are deep in the bowels of the engine.
The secondary air tubes, for example, are way hidden near the top.

I made my own smoke machine, but it sucks.

> When you know what the engine is doing and you know what the computer is
> doing, you know all you need to know about the oxygen sensor.

Maybe. I think you know far more than I do.
The only reliable data I would have is freeze frame and live data.
On the Bimmer, I have INPA/EDIABAS on a PC (and DIS, Progman, etc.) so that
tells me a lot.

But you have to know exactly what to look for.
I don't.

> If the
> computer thinks it's too rich but it's really too lean, it's likely the
> sensor, but if the computer thinks it's too lean but can't enrichen it out
> far enough, it's likely not.

I don't understand.

> Timing and ignition problems will produce poor combustion which will show
> up as oxygen sensor errors... but you can see THOSE because the computer
> gives you ignition timing information.

Timing, nowadays, isn't usually an issue.

> The scanner will tell you all of the inputs and all of the outputs.

You have to realize that I "think" that an "almost good almost bad" sensor
is hard to diagnose. It won't set a sensor code. It will just prevent the
related register from being set.

> Ignore the damn codes. The codes let you know that something is out of
> range but it doesn't tell you anything else. Look at the plots. If you
> just spend your time staring at the codes you won't understand what is
> going on inside the box.

You have to understand that I'm an electrical engineer.
I'm not your typical person.

You may think I'm the typical person.
But I'm not.
(Being an EE doesn't make me automatically a car mechanic though.)

The typical person, both you and I agree, sees a code "related to X", so
they replace the sensor X.

Me?
I test things.

If the sensor related to X has a code for X, then that just tells me
something is wrong with:
a. the power to sensor x
b. the data inputs to sensor x
c. the data outputs of sensor x

The problem you have to realize that the bimmer and toyota had, which the
mitsubishi did not have, is that there were zero codes. The only problem
was the cat-related register wouldn't set.

After speaking to CARB on the phone, who gave me all the reasons that could
happen, we agreed, together, that the only thing that made sense was that
the sensor was good enough not to set a code but just bad enough not to
allow the cat-related readiness monitor to set.

On the Mitsubishi, it was different as it's a "new" used car so, since I
didn't know the history of the sensor, I decided to replace it anyway since
it could be as old as 175K miles for all I knew.

> They do fail, but the vast majority of 'oxygen sensor' error codes have
> absolutely nothing to do with the oxygen sensor itself.

Yup. A slightly bad sensor can be nursed for five years & pass smog.
(Ask me how I know that.)

> They are faithfully
> recording that the exhaust is way wrong.

It seems that you may not have had the experience I have with a sensor that
is good enough to pass smog wonderfully, even by the BAR referee, but which
is bad enough not to allow a cat-related register to set.

If you can diagnose that, from the live data and freeze frame data, I'd
love to know how because that would be an art unto itself.

[Scott Dorsey]

Arlen Holder <arlen...@nospam.net> wrote:
>I do have live data and freeze frame though, but I'm not sure what to look
>for.

Well, THERE is your problem. Look at what is going on with a correctly
running engine.

It is a closed loop system. Data comes in from the lambda sensor, and
once the machine is warmed-up and the system is running closed-loop, the
oxygen concentration is used by the computer to set the mixture control.

You can watch it on the scanner... watch the sensor value when you open
and close the throttle by hand, watch it when you squirt a little WD-40
in there. The output of the lambda sensor goes into a second order
function that is nonlinear but time-invariant and what comes out is the
error for the mixture. The mixture is adjusted in realtime based on that
error value.

If you do not understand that this is a simple single-loop feeback system,
we have a problem.

>For example, it has been four or five years running now that the bimmer
>wouldn't set a register after clearing the codes (two different smog
>cycles) where, finally, after many hundreds of miles, the registers all
>finally will set.

All that is nice, but who cares? Get the engine running well. When the
engine runs well, you won't have to worry about smog testing. The key
is to get the engine running well.

>Remember, the sensor is working as the code is NOT an oxygen sensor code.
>There is no code on the bimmer. The register just won't set.

The bit gets set when a certain amount of time has taken place without
particular parameters being out of range. If the bit isn't being set,
something is going out of the nominal range. Looking at the values in the
scanner will tell you what the inputs and outputs are, and if you have the
BMW scanner you can see a lot of the intermediate calculations going on as
well.

Stop wasting your time worrying about the bits not being set and worry about
why the engine isn't running as well as it could be.

[irrelevant junk removed about diagnosing vacuum leaks]

>> When you know what the engine is doing and you know what the computer is
>> doing, you know all you need to know about the oxygen sensor.
>
>Maybe. I think you know far more than I do.
>The only reliable data I would have is freeze frame and live data.
>On the Bimmer, I have INPA/EDIABAS on a PC (and DIS, Progman, etc.) so that
>tells me a lot.
>
>But you have to know exactly what to look for.
>I don't.

That tells you EVERYTHING you need to know about what is going on with the
computer. You get to see all the inputs and all the outputs, and you should
have a pretty good notion of what the computer algorithm is if you have read
the manuals.

NOW you need to learn to know what is going on with the engine, using your
basic senses. When what is going on with the engine is at variance with
what the computer sees, you have found the problem.

>> If the
>> computer thinks it's too rich but it's really too lean, it's likely the
>> sensor, but if the computer thinks it's too lean but can't enrichen it out
>> far enough, it's likely not.
>
>I don't understand.

It's clear that you don't. It's a feedback loop. Do you remember control
theory in school? The computer sees the input, it uses it to adjust the
output. If the input is wrong, the output will be wrong in the opposite
direction.

>> Timing and ignition problems will produce poor combustion which will show
>> up as oxygen sensor errors... but you can see THOSE because the computer
>> gives you ignition timing information.
>
>Timing, nowadays, isn't usually an issue.

Ignition timing is OFTEN an issue. Valve timing isn't so often an issue,
but you get a free valve timing test when you're checking the ignition
timing anyway.

The computer controls the ignition timing, and it does so based on a number
of inputs most notably the ping sensor. The computer will advance and retard
the timing, and you can see it happening on the scanner display. It does
not always do so properly.

In fact on some modern engines (like BMWs with VANOS), the computer has control
over the valve timing and that might be based on feedback or it might just be
a lookup table where RPM goes into the function and VANOS servo position comes
out. Again, the scanner will let you watch it happening, the manual will
describe how it's supposed to happen, and your brain can correlate the two.

>> The scanner will tell you all of the inputs and all of the outputs.
>
>You have to realize that I "think" that an "almost good almost bad" sensor
>is hard to diagnose. It won't set a sensor code. It will just prevent the
>related register from being set.

This is because you're fixated on the codes. Stop worrying about the codes,
stop worrying about the register bits, start worrying about how well the
engine is running.

>> Ignore the damn codes. The codes let you know that something is out of
>> range but it doesn't tell you anything else. Look at the plots. If you
>> just spend your time staring at the codes you won't understand what is
>> going on inside the box.
>
>You have to understand that I'm an electrical engineer.
>I'm not your typical person.

Then start acting like an engineer and stop acting like a board swapper.

>It seems that you may not have had the experience I have with a sensor that
>is good enough to pass smog wonderfully, even by the BAR referee, but which
>is bad enough not to allow a cat-related register to set.
>
>If you can diagnose that, from the live data and freeze frame data, I'd
>love to know how because that would be an art unto itself.

Of COURSE you can diagnose that from the realtime scanner data. That's what
the scanner is FOR. Stop worrying about the stupid codes, stop worrying
about errors and register bits, start thinking about what it takes for the
mixture to be correct and how far off the mixture is likely to be.

If the oxygen sensor output is in the normal range, but the injector duty
cycles are all way out of the normal range, you have a mixture problem.
Because the computer is working hard to move the sensor values into that
normal range.

It won't set any codes, it won't produce any errors, but the car won't run
right. Maybe you have a leak, maybe you have a plugged injector, maybe you
have low fuel rail pressure. The computer lets you see that there is a
problem, THEN you can start measuring things to see where it is.

Because the system is closed-loop, the computer will compensate for problems
in the system... until it no longer can and THEN once it get catastrophically
bad and something is totally out range, THEN it will set an error.

[rbowman]

On 08/05/2018 01:01 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> (Of course, the containers themselves are CARB/EPA approved so, as you're
> well aware, the gas goes in and doesn't come out easily - due to the shitty
> spouts - but that's a different beast altogether which I've solved
> separately by not using them).

'Repair kits' are popular around here and include a free flowing spout
and vent. Of course, they should only be used to repair older containers.

The asshole who mandated those spouts should spend eternity filling a
lawnmower with a full 5 gallon jug equipped with the monstrosity.

[Arlen Holder]

On 5 Aug 2018 11:28:32 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> 'Repair kits' are popular around here and include a free flowing spout
> and vent. Of course, they should only be used to repair older containers.
>
> The asshole who mandated those spouts should spend eternity filling a
> lawnmower with a full 5 gallon jug equipped with the monstrosity.

I've spent a lot of time on the phone with CARB who says that they don't
"design" the things ... they just mandate that the gas has to stay inside
them.

I joked back that it stays inside - it just won't come out.

I know all about the gas jug mods that people do (mostly to get air to come
in while the gas is pouring out).

Me?
The only mod I make is the trivial one that makes the cap child proof.
I just cut off the tap or remove the clip.

I don't ever use the spouts though.
They are nothing, to me, other than bung caps.

All I use is a 10 foot 1/2 inch clear vinyl hose.
I have four of them so that the siphoning is always dry.
(Each hose gives me five gallons - they dry out in a few hours.)

I also put a steel pipe that is a few inches longer than the depth of the
jug, but that's just finesse to keep the bottom of the hose at the bottom
corner. I also have a wooden triangle ramp that tilts the can slightly, but
again, that's just finesse. A long funnel with a few inches of flexible
half-inch hose on the output end completes the gas-station tack.

It's so easy and trivial to refuel that it's not funny.
Filling up is also easy, since I fill the car at the same time.

The main lesson I learned is that the more gas cans you pack in the trunk
the better, because I live on a very windy hill so the trunk has to be
packed such that nothing can tilt and everything will be at a 9% grade for
a very long time.

I generally flip all the cans upside down after filling to ensure they
don't leak.

All I need, in terms of gas caps, is a bung. The simpler the better.
It just needs a cap and nothing else.

Filling a lawn mower or other equipment I do the old school way from a one
or two gallon gas can (which I don't use for the cars).

Same with a chainsaw (I keep a German coke bottle of the right size to fill
the tank of the chainsaw.)

I have it down to a science. I used to stuff a rag in the top around the
hose, but then I realized the vapors are gonna leak when I remove4 the rag
anyway. The inside of a jug is about 22psi (depending on temp) for the
vapor pressure of gasoline, as I recall.

The real problem for most people is they can't keep a dozen gas jugs on
their lawn, but I'm rural so there's nobody to be bothered by the eyesore.

I do get comments when filling up at a gas station by morons though.
They think filling a gas jug is unsafe.

I wonder how many cars have plastic gas tanks nowadays?

[rbowman]

On 08/05/2018 11:30 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> The only mod I make is the trivial one that makes the cap child proof.
> I just cut off the tap or remove the clip.

But, but, but.... It's for the children...

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/hr814

Fortunately I don't have to deal with CARB, just stupid California ideas
that escape from the state.

[Arlen Holder]

On 5 Aug 2018 20:51:15 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> If it glows it can warp. I;ve seen a lot of rotors glowing red - and
> a few almost orange hot - - you could see the glow in daylight.

I don't take anything at face value - I look things up.

However, I am not a metallurgist, so I first admit I didn't know if a rotor
"can" or "cannot" truly warp (as in potato chip) at street speeds - so I
looked up a few things about the temperature needed to cause true warpage
of a cast-iron rotor...

Raybestos says:
"Brake rotors do not warp from heat..."
<http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/article_archive/results/details?id=1787>

This says:
"Rotors are cast in extreme heat — three to five times greater than
the most aggressive braking situation. Physically “warping” a rotor
would require a similar application of extreme heat, which is
impossible."
<http://www.brakeandfrontend.com/warped-rotors-myth/>

This says:
"...the temperature required to make metal that resilient soft enough to
simply bend would be tremendous."
<https://www.yourmechanic.com/article/why-do-brake-rotors-warp>

This says that there are adverse effects starting at 1200dF:
"When this local temperature reaches around 1200 or 1300 degrees F.
the cast iron under the deposit begins to transform into cementite
(an iron carbide in which three atoms of iron combine with one atom
of carbon). Cementite is very hard, very abrasive and is a poor heat
sink. If severe use continues the system will enter a self-defeating
spiral - the amount and depth of the cementite increases with
increasing temperature and so does the brake roughness."
<https://alconkits.com/technical-info/brake-tech/56-the-myth-of-warped-brake-discs>

This says:
"in more than 40 years of professional racing, including the Shelby/Ford
GT 40s – one of the most intense brake development program in history
- I have never seen a warped brake disc."
<http://www.stoptech.com/technical-support/technical-white-papers/-warped-brake-disc-and-other-myths>

These say the myth of warped rotors started in the 1970's:
<http://www.brakeandfrontend.com/brake-tech-feature-8-myths-that-could-be-holding-you-back-from-performing-the-best-brake-job/>
<https://www.onallcylinders.com/2017/05/19/6-biggest-brake-rotor-myths-debunked/>

This non-scientific thread, which we can quickly assume isn't scientific so
let's just take it as a reasonable point of view only, says that the
surface may get to 600dF but the rest of the rotor is at a lower
temperature than the surface.
<https://www.reddit.com/r/cars/comments/3dxoli/the_myth_of_brake_rotor_warping/>

I know you guys hate me for "book knowledge", but the answer on temperature
seems pretty clear so I will argue no further unless actual references are
supplied, as I already know tons of people *think* rotors warp, but it
seems that anyone who has actually measured it, apparently thinks not
(where true warpage would be easy to measure if you have the equipment to
measure head warp).

[Arlen Holder]

On 6 Aug 2018 07:16:52 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> But, but, but.... It's for the children...
>
> https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/110/hr814
>
> Fortunately I don't have to deal with CARB, just stupid California ideas
> that escape from the state.

I do think about things, before, during, and after I do them.
Life isn't without risks (e.g., nobody would own a chainsaw, if it was).

Whenever CARB tells me I shouldn't "modify" the can, I remind them over the
phone that they shouldn't have modified the gas can, which was working just
fine.

All we're doing is making it work for the job its intended to do.

I don't mind the gas staying inside the can.
It's the fact the gas doesn't come out that I mind.

To that end, I never use the spout (it's just a cap) for filling vehicles.

Besides, hefting five or six gallons and pouring for a few minutes into a
modern day vehicle isn't as easy as one might think. The funnel has to be
deep enough to flip the spring-operated lid and you have to hold the can
well above that so that it won't drip.

What I do is a simple two-step process.
a. Using a hose, I siphon almost all the gas into the vehicle, and, then,
b. Using a modified funnel, I pour the remaining dribble into the tank.

The reason for the second step isn't so much to get the gas, as it's only a
dribble since the pipe keeps the hose in the bottom corner where the wood
ramp keeps the gas just slightly elevated to put all the liquid into that
corner.

The reason for the second step is simply emissions. All that dribble will
vaporize, at about 22 psi (depending on temperature) vapor pressure. If I
lock the cap tightly, that vapor will NOT get into the atmosphere UNTIL I
open the cap, and then virtually all of that gas WILL go into the
atmosphere.

There's no way around that, other than to pour all that dribble into the
gas tank of the car while it's still liquid.

Plus, the vapor pressure of even 22 psi will bulge out the gas can (which
they can handle with aplomb, but why bother - I just spend an extra 30
seconds per gas can shaking out the liquid droplets - as an emissions
amelioration only).

That's the only reason the wide-mouthed funnel is needed. It's modified to
be longer than most funnels are simply by the addition of a flexible hose
on the end so that it stays inside the vehicle's gas opening so that one
person can easily use it on the dribble.

It's insanely easy to refuel a vehicle at home (if you have the space).

My approach is so simple it's easier than filling at a gas station.
1. I park next to a tall retaining wall that meets with the garage.
2. A stepladder allows me to put the gas jugs in the flat spot at top.
3. An optional wood ramp slightly elevates the front of the gas jug.
4. A rigid sleeve keeps the hose at the back lowest corner of the jug.
5. By mouth, I siphon the liquid, always having plenty of safety time.
6. Generally I go about my business to come back about 5 minutes later.
7. About 4-1/2 minutes later, the siphoning has stopped, gas in the bend.
8. Lifting only the hose from the top, I drain the remaining liquid.
9. Using the modified funnel, I shake out the dribble from the gas can.
10. I loosely recap the can (allowing fumes to evaporate) for storage.

If you can think of any step to *improve* this insanely easy process, let
me know. The only improvement step that I can come up with is "delivery"
and "storage" of a few hundred gallons using an electric pump from Granger
(yes, I know gas has an oxidation lifetime which is longer than just a
month or two).

55-gallon steel drums epoxy lined:
<https://www.grainger.com/category/barrels-and-drums/barrels-drums-and-covers/drums-and-drum-handling-equipment/material-handling/ecatalog/N-1574Z1yzaej6>

Electric pump for the barrels:
<https://www.grainger.com/category/fuel-transfer-pumps/fuel-and-oil-transfer-pumps/pumps/ecatalog/N-11t0>

Safety storage for the 5-gallon jugs:
<http://www.safety1industries.com/product-reviews-blog/what-to-look-for-in-a-gas-storage-cabinet>
<https://www.uline.com/Grp_451/Safety-Storage>
<http://www.usasafety.com/gas-cylinder-cabinet-c-54.html>

Even though it's far more convenient to refuel at home than at a gas
station, I'm always looking for ways to improve the process.

BTW, I used to put a rag around the top of the can, but I doubt that much
gas is escaping in the 5 minutes it takes to fuel from a jug, and, even
with the rag, I doubt it prevents much, if any - since - in the end - ALL
the "wetness" of the inside of the gas jug will go into the atmosphere no
matter what you do.

[Arlen Holder]

On 7 Aug 2018 01:33:18 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:

> I'll read the rest, but the abstract talks about "runout" which is a
> completely different thing than warp

Hi Clare,

You should be warned that I'm intelligent so I can *read* a peer-reviewed
scientific paper, unlike, it seems, most people, who can't comprehend what
a paper says. I've read a billion of them, so, bear in mind that I can
understand what the authors are trying to say, even as they use words
differently than we do.

Reading onward, I think the authors make a critical mistake in not defining
their terms, particularly when they use the word "warp" in this sentence,
which is the first time it appears in the paper...
"It is known that disk warping or uneven disk thicknesses
induce pulsation during brake applications."

Clearly it is well known that "warp" (as in potato) and "uneven thickness"
are two completely different things - which means that this particular set
of Asian authors (M. W. ShinG. H. JangJ. K. KimH. Y. KimHo Jang) are likely
ignorant of what "warp" means - or - they simply assume that it means
something that it doesn't mean (i.e., warp and thickness variation are
completely different things - they just are).

They then compound their errors in a sentence not far from that last horrid
sentence, saying "When the disk temperature is increased by friction heat
during braking, the heat often causes dimensional instability of the disk,
permanently modifying the runout or disk thickness variation (DTV) of a
disk and producing brake judder."

WTF?

These Asian guys don't seem to comprehend the English language. It's well
known that DTV and runout are two completely different things. They just
are. Everyone knows that (except them).

I think the reason they didn't care to use correct words is that they
didn't really care about any of those things - what they cared about, it
seems, was the effect of heat treating on residual stress which resulted in
a less pronounced runout measurement.

The end of the introduction concludes with the idiotically worded sentence:
"While the disk warping during heat treatment was measured using
a static DTV measurement unit..."
Which clearly shows they're using the word "warp" differently than we are
(simply because it's a fact that warp and DTV are two different things).

It appears that Ripley and Kirstein (Ref 12) paper might be more
appropriate since they showed that the relaxation of the residual stress in
the disk could lead to disk distortion. (We have to look at that paper to
find out how they defined "disk distortion" though.)

[Arlen Holder]

On 7 Aug 2018 01:50:38 GMT, Arlen Holder wrote:

> You should be warned that I'm intelligent so I can *read* a peer-reviewed
> scientific paper, unlike, it seems, most people, who can't comprehend what
> a paper says.

I just posted a query to alt.usage.english as to why these particular Asian
authors can't seem to comprehend the difference between "warp" and "runout"
and "dtv", all of which they clearly equate in their paper - where all of
them are different things.
Why can't people figure out warp versus runout versus disc thickness variation
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.usage.english/Gqh_4X_FSw8>

Unfortunately, since the Asian authors don't even comprehend what "warp"
actually means, that paper is useless for our purposes, IMHO, simply
because they never once measured warpage. Not once.

I completely understand how they *used* the term "warp"; but it's not the
same thing that I'm talking about.

What they measured was DTV and runout, and what they were caring about was
how heat treating affected those due to the interaction of residual stress
after subsequent heating.

This article, by apparently American authors, uses the terms the way I do:
http://www.brakeandfrontend.com/warped-rotors-myth/
Stop the Warped Rotors Myth and Service Brakes the Right Way

They advise:
"Starting today, remove ´warped rotor¡ from your vocabulary."

Where they discuss "lateral runout" and "disc thickness variation", which
are NOT the same thing as warp (as in potato).

They're just not.

[Xeno]

For christ's sake, WGAF?

[rbowman]

On 08/06/2018 09:29 AM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> It's insanely easy to refuel a vehicle at home (if you have the space).

I've been known to refuel the bikes but since I pass three gas stations
on the way to work I'm not about to start my own.

[Arlen Holder]

On 6 Aug 2018 20:23:09 GMT, Clare Snyder wrote:

> Like I said - THERMAL DISTORTION - AKA warpage.
> You have a different definition?
>
> Rotors are GENERALLY made of grey iron - so it IS applicable.
> Anything that causes movement in metal constitutes WARPAGE

Hi Clare,
Let's stop this nonsense.

That paper clearly and obviously measured two things:
a. Lateral runout
b. Disc thickness variation

Never once did that paper mention measurement of warp (as in potato chip).

I'm OK if people suggest a paper because I love to learn, but you have to
assume I'm intelligent enough to know that just googling for the word warp
connected with temperature doesn't mean the paper shows *anything* about
warp happening with temperature.

Maybe most people here deal with people who can't comprehend what a paper
says, but I can read almost any paper (I read Physics papers all the time)
and if I want to, I can comprehend what they say.

That paper said absolutely nothing about warp (as in potato chip).

I'm not chastising you. I *appreciate* that you tried to show that the disc
can get to a temperature that is hot enough to cause warp, as I had already
provided multiple references which said that such temperatures are
impossible in street use.

It's a valid question.

If someone can provide a paper that proves that such temperatures actually
commonly happen, I'll *read* (and comprehend) that paper.

But don't throw a paper at me that says absolutely zero about warp.
(Please assume I'm intelligent enough to read & comprehend the paper.)

:)
I am NOT chastising you.
I'm just telling the truth - which is that paper had nothing to do with
warp even though the Korean authors used the word in the paper.

They were talking about:
a. Lateral runout, and,
b. Disc thickness variation
(among other things, like heat treating effects.)

[Arlen Holder]

On 6 Aug 2018 20:16:21 GMT, Xeno wrote:

> For christ's sake, WGAF?

WGAF?

Why Give a Fuck?

There are good reasons to give a fuck, since,
a) Clare suggested the paper, so I read it.
b) Are you chastising me for reading Clare's reference?
c) Or are you chastising me for *understanding* what it said?

Similarly, I don't know how many dollars are wasted every year on people
*thinking* their rotors warped, when they can't possibly warp (according to
the references I provided) simply because the temperatures needed are
impossible to attain for the entire rotor thickness.

Let's just assume that a billion dollars a year are *wasted* by morons who
can't comprehend the difference between disc thickness variation, lateral
runout, and true warp.

Worse - if I ever have a judder (and, at times, I do), then it matters a
lot that I *know* that warp can't possibly occur - so I know that the
long-term solution is not to buy "Tundra upgrades", which people spend
hundreds of dollars on that common but worthless imaginary panacea all the
freaking time!
<http://www.toyota-4runner.org/3rd-gen-t4rs/84240-tundra-brake-upgrade.html>

This is a group that is supposed to *understand* that which we fix, right?

If this group is supposed to *understand* a problem well enough to fix it,
then it matters that brake rotors just don't warp (they can't get hot
enough, based on the references I already quoted).

If someone can show a reference that shows that brake rotos can get hot
enough in street use to actually warp (as in potato chip), then I'll *read*
that reference.

You guys love to hate me for having "book knowledge", but having book
knowledge is better than having the wrong solution isn't it?

The reason it matters is that people implement the wrong solution because
they can't comprehend that rotors can't get hot enough to warp in street
use (according to multiple references - which hasn't been refuted by anyone
here).

Note, that Korean reference that Clare provided may have been translated
from Korean (we don't know yet), where this seems to be a portion of the
funding (apparently):
1.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringKorea University Seoul Republic of Korea
2.R&D Division Hyundai Motor Company and Kia Motors Corporation Hwaseong-si Republic of
Korea

[Xeno]

On 7/8/18 2:08 pm, Arlen Holder wrote:
> On 6 Aug 2018 20:16:21 GMT, Xeno wrote:
>
>> For christ's sake, WGAF?
>
> WGAF?
>
> Why Give a Fuck?

FFSGOY

<waffle snipped>

[Arlen Holder]

On 6 Aug 2018 20:54:54 GMT, rbowman wrote:

>> It's insanely easy to refuel a vehicle at home (if you have the space).
>
> I've been known to refuel the bikes but since I pass three gas stations
> on the way to work I'm not about to start my own.

I drive once a week, if that.
I go to Costco once a month, if that.
Costco has Tier 1 gas at the best price and no lines nowadays.
Costco is 40 miles away, but the gas stations are almost as far.
I have the room for storage - most people do not.
I have the height for fast flow - most people do not.
I have a dozen gas cans - most people do not.
I have four hoses - most people do not.
I have the modified funnel - most people do not.

In short, most people don't have the same situation that I have.
I've only been refueling for about 20 years.

Before that, I did what you do so I know the difference.

It's like mounting tires at home (which is so easy, it's not funny).
Anything who hasn't done it doesn't know what they're talking about.

Refueling is so trivially easy, that it's easier than going to the gas
station, IMHO. But I have the system down to a science where most people
probably are afraid of siphoning or they'd try to pour the gas using those
useless spouts, for example.

So they don't know what they're talking about.
I do.

[rbowman]

On 08/07/2018 03:23 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> It's like mounting tires at home (which is so easy, it's not funny).
> Anything who hasn't done it doesn't know what they're talking about.

I'll give you a call the next time I reshoe the DR650. I don't know why
but getting the bead to seat on the Kenda front was a bitch last time
around. Dunlop D606's just fall into place.

[Arlen Holder]

I did my K1200 all the time before the crash ... where tires don't seem to
last long on those big German bikes...

[Arlen Holder]

On 7 Aug 2018 19:53:34 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> At least with tubed tires the bead will seat sooner or later.

Seating the bead is trivial.

There are 6 beads to deal with, only one of which is tactically difficult
on sedan & SUV tires (I've never done anything bigger than 17 inches).

Old Tire:
1. Breaking the top bead
2. Breaking the bottom bead
3. Removing the top bead
4. Removing the bottom bead
New Tire:
5. Seating the bottom bead
6. Seating the top bead

The only hard one is the last bead (requires knowledge of the drop center).

The first bead is hard only if you don't have a good bead breaker.
(For years, I used the bead-breaker attachment instead of a separate bead
breaker. I'll never recommend that attachment except for puny 15 inch tires
or smaller - which most of mine are not - because SUV tires were difficult
using that attachment - but easy using the stand-alone bead breaker).

The rest of the beads are so easy as to not even be worth mentioning.

Sealing works in seconds if you remove the valve core and screw on the
compressor gun. It pops once or thrice and it's done before you get to
fifty psi. Then you lower the air pressure to whatever you like and you're
done seating the thing. It's that easy.

I've done about 20 tires (I stopped counting once I broke even).
I'm doing four more on the Mitsubishi (I only did the one that blew out).

The 14-inch Mitsubishi tire was so easy as to be not even worth noting.

Anyone who complains that doing a tire is too hard will have to get the
question from me as to whether they've actually done it, because it's so
easy that it's not funny (if you have the tools that I have).

[rbowman]

On 08/07/2018 09:59 PM, Arlen Holder wrote:
> Seating the bead is trivial.

Whatever you say.