Are there any simple cars left?

[CAP1]

None of the manufacturers rebuild thier own ecus they're all done by A1 cardone or blue streak.....maybe one more reman. company.

GM computers haven't had the prom since the mid 90s.............the same year that ford traded in the prom for flash memory.exactly as i said. mid 90's= 1996, the year that OBD2 was required. ford was running the EEC4 system since 1983 or 1984. no PROM on the EEC4, and if i recall, none onn the EEC3 either in all my years, i haven't replaced a ford computer since 1993.

Chrysler did so way earlier.i've replaced at least 3 chrysler computers in the last 4 years.

GM ecus are more diverse with the exact same hardware being able to run a V8 or a V6 and only the flash determined application........again this happened while ford was still using application specific ecus.until OBD2, gm computers were using PROMS. i gotta admit though, i never tried swapping a 2.8 computer into a 5.0 car, although i've done that with fords. if i suspected a computer as the cause(on a ford) for the car to not start, i'd go grab another computer, and plug it in. i tested this after someone told me any EEC4 computer would run any EEC4 car. they were right. i could use a computer out of a 2.3 tempo to start a 5.0 crown vic. granted it only ran on 4 cylinders, but it ran.
 so i started making that part of my testing.

I had six thousand ford ecus at my disposal and millions of dollars worth or equipment that we used to test every single bit of functionality of an ecu.

EECIV was not a miracle ecu and EECV is far and away better.i never said EEC4 was a miracle system. i said it was a stand alone that can easily be fitted into an older ford....and it was years ahead of gm and chrysler.
 if i recall, one of the biggest changes in EEC5 is/was the ignition system control. it allowed the ecu to control spark timing, duration,and intensity individually per cylinder, and in real time. this gave ford nearly 30% increase in power, as well as fuel mileage. it was also in 1994, BEFORE OBD2. and yes, although it is very similar to the EEC4, it is a LOT better of a system.

If you want to discuss modifications, sure, ford had a connector on the back but the same type of interfacing was available on most other ecus....it just wasn't conveniently located on the rear.the service port(your connector on the back) is not what i was referencing.
 since it was known that ford computers would "learn, and adjust things to bring readings into the realm of what they "wanted" to see, several aftermarket companies, along with ford motorsports developed a "piggyback" system. you disconnected the 104 pin connector, and placed the connector for this programmer in its place, then plugged the 104 pin connector in to that.
 now you have full control of the fuel timing maps, spark timing maps, etc. the early systems like the ones accel made were basic. the ford PMS(yes, they really did call it that) was pretty dam complete.
 one thing i don't know, as i've never looked into it.....is if the EEC5 is a stand alone system like the EEC4 was. it would be very interesting, and could be very fun if it was.

I'm not trying to argue....I'm stating what I have learned of the state of engine management from the late 70s to current hardware.

nor am i trying to argue. it's actually a pretty fun discussion. i state what i do, from so dam many years of diagnosing and repairing these dam things. i really don't like chryslers computer systems...and don't forget....i drive a jeep, and a dakota right now....but my least favorite thing is their use of the pcm and bcm to control the charging system. bad idea in my opinion. i don't see nearly as many problems as i used to with that, but it used to be horribly common.
 a local alternator rebuilder used to install voltage regulators into those alternators, so we could avoid the expense(for the customer) of replacing the computer when absolutely nothing else was wrong.
 other than that, i think i've replaced nearly as many chrysler computers(including one on a 93 jeep wrangler last summer) as i have gm computers.
 to be honest, i know nothing about the actual control systems from the 70s. i can easily diagnose and repair them though, as they're stupidly simple compared to what we work on every day.
 80's up i know, and i know very well. i've taken very few "classes" though. my classrooms have always been my work bay, and a 12" thick book. my first diagnosis(it was that tempo i mentioned in the last post), the shop owner told me to push it in, told me where the mitchells manuals(dam i miss actual books) were, and said if ineeded help, to go get mike(he taught me 2/3 of what i know. now he asks me for advice.  we were slow.....they let me go at that car for 2 days.
 that's how i've always learned.....by doing. the only drawback to that, is that sometimes i may have to look further for the technical reasons of a failure. but i do know what i find bad, and i never replace a part without being 100% sure of myself.

[CAP1]

I don't know, it may be my age, but plugging a computer into the eec Tweecer in my 95 gt is a heck of a lot more simple than trying to tune a carb. I never even figured out how to tune the carb on my friggen dirt bike. 

 i had at one point become VERY good at tuning holley carbs.

 that being said......i will never EVER build a street performance car with a carb again.

[CAP1]

This is exactly the crap I'm dealing with in my minivan.  I've got a broken something that makes my driver side window stay up, and my passenger side window stay down.  I replaced the switches, and holy hell they're complicated bastards.  I guess they over engineer them like that so they can justify the outrageous prices I paid for them.  Anyways, after I installed the new switches it only fixed the passenger side.

Crap like this makes me long for a crank handle windows.

 what kind of minivan? year/make/model? what exactly is the window doing that it shouldn't, or isn't it doing that it should>?

[Noir]

Check out the Dacia brand, I don't know if it's being sold in the US tho. Modern yet simple (carburator) and cheap cars.

[CAP1]

Check out the Dacia brand, I don't know if it's being sold in the US tho. Modern yet simple (carburator) and cheap cars.

carbs are only good on race cars. anything on the street.....modern that is.......fi is the way to go. period.

[CAP1]

IN GENERAL cars are actually becoming easier to work on... at least the mechanical aspects of it all.  At the same time they are becoming many times harder on the electrical side of things, and yes I agree.. they are also going crazy with the entire "overengineering" aspect.

I remember several years ago working on a Trailblazer with a Check Engine light on.  It had set a code for "cooling fan overspeed" and while looking at it I saw a traditional-looking fan clutch attaching the radiator fan to the engine, and yes it was locked up.  The fan sounded like a jet engine!

Anyway, I couldn't believe the price of a replacement.  I found one aftermarket brand that was making them at the time and while about 40% cheaper than what GM wanted for one I let the customer make up his mind which one to have me install.  The prices were (parts and labor) either $1000 or $750.  He chose the $750 option.if i recall, there's also an electrical connector on that clutch. i just had a customer traded in his trailblazer because he wasn't going to spend that kind of money on the fan clutch.

Keep in mind, this is for a FAN CLUTCH!

The replacement was relatively simple, even though the fan shroud was a bit of a PITA, but I've dealt with much worse over the years.  After I got it out while looking at the parts I realized why the price was so high.  This was not a normal fan clutch.. this was an electro-viscous design that used an electric charge to change the viscosity of the fluid, thus changing the fan speed.  Also one of the fan blades had a small magnet installed, and there was a sensor on the fan shroud itself to determine how fast the fan was spinning.  On one hand I was thinking this was pretty smart and ingenious but then it occurred to me... why go through all of this hassle using such an expensive design when they could have just simply installed an electric fan???

And I see this sort of thing all of the time.  Power windows for example no longer have simple wiring going from one switch to another and then to the motor... oh no.. there is a computer module in EACH DOOR that controls the window motor.  When you press DOWN the switch tells the module you want the window to go down.  The driver's module communicates with the passenger module (using protocols not much different than computer networks) so if you want the passenger window down, the drivers switch tells the drivers module you want the passenger window down and the drivers module tells the passenger module and the passenger module lowers the window.

Also cars have front and rear lighting modules, vans have sliding door (and power liftgate) modules, climate control modules... security modules... power seat modules.. restraints modules... the list goes on and on and while some of it I completely agree with, much more of it makes little sense at all.  Most of it is there to accommodate "luxury" systems such as keyless entry, automatic headlights, GPS, automatic doors.. etc.  and people being the SHEEPLE they are have falling victim to the huge advertising campaigns over the last decade or so and actually feel a need for a lot of this stuff.  They've become addicted to it and can't imagine a life without it.

Two quick stories:

1> Older woman (looked to be in her 70's) came into a Ford dealer I used to work at just before closing with two small children in a Toyota Sienna, complaining that the DVD player quit working.  As a courtesy I took a quick look and noticed the unit was turning on, but there was no picture and no sound.  I explained to her that since it was a Toyota and we were a Ford dealer that there wasn't anything I could do being we didn't have any diagnostic information or wiring diagrams or anything for it.  Then she got irate and demanded I start checking fuses and I told her.. no it has power so it isn't a fuse problem, and that the problem is probably in the unit itself and she'll need to visit Toyota.  She then get extremely angry and started cussing me out and yelling (in front of the kids) and said "You have no <censored> idea what it is like to travel with two children with a broken <censored> DVD player!"  I told her to have a nice day and simple turned around and walked away.

2> A young man (early 20's) came into my shop for an oil change with a late-model Chevy and also asked me to program it to automatically unlock the doors when it is put in PARK.  It was set up to automatically lock the doors when driving but there was no way to set it to automatically unlock them once the vehicle was parked.  I told him I could disable the auto-lock feature altogether but that's it.  He then started getting angry because he could set his Ford up to do that, and then went on throw a huge fit in front of my other customers about how he'll never buy another GM product again because it is ABSURD for people to expect him to have to press the unlock button to get out of the vehicle!!!  After that I simply pulled his car out, went inside and in front of my customers told him I didn't want his business and to take the car elsewhere for his oil change.

I have many other similar stories, but these two were the first to come to mind.

The sad truth here is that automakers don't build 'simple' cars anymore because people don't WANT simple cars anymore.  They've been conditioned to believe that without Airbags, they'll die.. and that without GPS they'll get lost.. without ABS they'll crash.. and without traction control they'll get stuck in the rain...  and without an automatic parallel parking system they won't be able to park on the street!  It's pretty sad really and automakers have done a really good job creating a demand for these luxury options.. so much that the average price of cars has increased so much that we think $20k for a new car is now a pretty good deal!

On the up-side... I have seen it become a lot easier to actually work on the mechanical systems of cars.  Tune-ups for the most part are easier requiring only the replacement of spark plugs and an occasional coil or two (except some V6 and V8 engines may require you to remove the upper intake to access the rear bank of plugs).  Belts and hoses rarely require replacement anymore and suspension/brakes parts are much easier to replace.  Exhaust almost never fails these days.. ever since they switched to low grade stainless in the 90's.youi really think changing plugs is easier? taking the intake off makes it easier? 

As far as engine management goes.. that has improved dramatically over the years.  I don't feel that computers are our enemies as far as that is concerned.  You can invest in a $200 scanner and diagnose about 90% of driveability issues yourself... it's those 10% that you can't that can get you into trouble!

If you want a simple, cheap car check out the Tata Nano for about $3000 brand new http://youtu.be/3sZitve3SUw but I doubt it would meet US safety and emissions regulations.  If they were smart, someone should come up with something under $8000 here that gets 50+ MPG in a true no-frills car.  I was hoping the new Fiesta would fit that bill, but apparently not.  It blows my mind that the little "smart car" still only gets 36MPG combined.

In the mean time, I'll be tooling around in my $500 Escort and my $800 Windstar...

[CAP1]

Go find yourself a late 70's early 80's Chevy, GMC, Ford, or Dodge truck with a straight frame. Nothing else matters more than that. The body can be in decent shape, those trucks are easy to do body work on. Anyway you should be able to find one that's not running for several hundred bucks. Pull the motor and transmission and buy a Crate motor with a carb instead of fuel injection. Small V8 like the 302 or 305, maybe a straight or slant 6, bolt a new transmission to it and drop the works into the truck.

For around $8000 you can buy and restore an old truck like that. It will be rock solid, simple to work on yourself, you don't have to screw with emissions, and you have a cool ride when your done that will lst for years. It's cheaper than buying a new car that will only depreciate after driving off the lot, your "old" truck fully restored will increase in value as long as you take care of it.

My old neighbor does this all the time. Buys old trucks dirt cheap, restores them himself over 5-6 months and sells them for a nice proffit but he still dirves a 74 Ford F-250 crew cab 4X4 that he's owned for 15 years as his daily driver.

if ya wanna do something like this, go to the 60's, to early 70's.

 mid/late 70's to the early 80's are the absolute worst american cars/trucks ever built.

[Shuffler]

Modified stock ecus are always a good bet up to a certain performance/functionality but you will spend a ton of money having someone wire up a stand-alone setup.

Once you start going with boost by gear or nitrous by gear, you have to go aftermarket

We've had good luck with Motec, Big Stuff3 (former developer of Accel's "DFI and "F.A.S.T."), and megasquirt.

Ice.... we Camaro folks would like to crack the dang chip on the V6s. They have yet to be able to tune a 2010/2011 V6 Camaro. ARD, Hennessey, both sponsors of our club, and many others are working on it.

[CAP1]

Ice.... we Camaro folks would like to crack the dang chip on the V6s. They have yet to be able to tune a 2010/2011 V6 Camaro. ARD, Hennessey, both sponsors of our club, and many others are working on it.

'cause that's the only way they're gonna keep up with the v-6 mustangs. 

[Hornet33]

if ya wanna do something like this, go to the 60's, to early 70's.

 mid/late 70's to the early 80's are the absolute worst american cars/trucks ever built.

Oh I don't know about that. Had an 82 GMC Suburban with the Heavy Half option that was an absolute tank. Rock solid, simple to work on, was actually pretty good on gas for such a heavy truck and being 4X4. What's nice with those year trucks is that so many parts are interchangeable between models. If I needed a part I'd normally go to a junk yard and pull them. If they had a vehicle (van, blazer, suburban, or pickup) based on a Chevy or GMC truck frame, the parts were all interchangeable. Ford and Dodge gets a little harder to find some parts for late 70's early 80's trucks. Now I'll admit that the body styles for the 60's to early 70's trucks look better, but finding parts can be a problem and they tend to be more expensive. The biggest problem trucks from that time frame have is rust. Mechanically they were pretty solid but the body panels would rust like no tomorrow and the plastic trim pieces would crack if you looked at them wrong. Restoring one today with new aftermarket body panels and trim pieces, new manufactured crate motor and tranny, apply new paint and underbody coating, the thing will last for another 30-40 years.

[Shuffler]

'cause that's the only way they're gonna keep up with the v-6 mustangs. 

lol well the 2010 and 2011 camaro have more hp (312). The new one for 45th anniversary is rated 323hp. hehe

[CAP1]

lol well the 2010 and 2011 camaro have more hp (312). The new one for 45th anniversary is rated 323hp. hehe

i somehow don't suspect ford'll have any problems topping that. they always have, and always will. 

[icepac]

We got 80hp more than vinciperformance did out of the crane cams street shark the other day.

[CAP1]

We got 80hp more than vinciperformance did out of the crane cams street shark the other day.

(Image removed from quote.)

i used crane once. only once. didn't like it.