c150L

Looking for links or info on timing belt replacement in a 96 2.5 DOHC OBW. I've done a number of mid-late 80s 1.8 timing belts, but not the DOHC engine. I would also like to do any seals that should be done at that time. Any tips or info would be much appreciated. I also need a new front accessory (crank) pulley. Advcanced thanks for any help locating one. Anyone have a phone number for S-Wings in CO?

Not sure, but the 5 hose solenoid you mention sound much like the black air dryer that is mounted to the outlet of the compressor. That is held on with 1 screw and one flat metal retaining clip. I may have one here I could part with. PM me if interested. I also have some PDF files that may help you repair, troubleshoot, understand your air suspension, but would need to email them to you.

Thank you for the info. As for the EA engines pully, that would explain one of my last EA82 timing belt capers where I did not remember finding a key connection to the pulley.

I'm looking for the accy pully for a 95 Outback with 2.5L engine. (Pulley and bolt) Anyone have one laying around? Would the one fit off the front of my 89 XT6? (Before it goes to the junk yard?) I need to fix a friends Outback. Is that common for the pulley to strip like that? Oddly enough, I saw 2 yesterday. This Outback and a 91 Impresa at an auction. Both had the front engine pullies off and key had stripped the hole in the pully identically. (Vehicals from totally different parts of the country.)

Just the kind of response I would expect the vast majority, but I don't hold that against anyone that feels such is true, but think outside the box man. My home brewed adaptation I had on the Dodge gave me about 3-4 mpg. Was a bit afraid to lower F/A ratio any further. If I had that car today, I'd get the EGT&CHT senors on it and lean that puppy till she got rather hot. Maybe even further, if I could pick up your carb controlled H2O injector system to "QUENCH THE FLAME", I would think I could lower the F/A ratio furher yet with out causing a melt down. The thinking today is such, with all our great electronic controlled sensor/injector crap to "QUENCH THE FLAME" with more gas. Can't we even imagine anything better than that? The rig on the Dodge cost me about 10 bux total to build back in 82. (I could do it cheaper yet today, if I had a carbed road car to play with.) At 3 mpg (even one mpg) these days, wouldn't have to run it very long to pay for it. Waste of money bro? Guess I don't understand the logic in that either. Keebler, not knocking your words or opinion on the matter, I hear those same words very regularly. You are not alone. I just think it's a shame that so many people think that we have been taught and supplied with the best technology that is possible.

If you look at the pic of the carb economizer, you will see a hose, a tee fitting and a needle valve. The principle is simple. Put the tee in a manifold vacuum line, run hose to metering valve, run more hose from the metering valve up into air cleaner. just before the bowl vent. Just pretend for a minute that the float bowl vent tube sticking out the top of the carb has a 3/16" ID. So, from the hose coming from the vacuum metering valve, we will put on a piece of 1/8" OD copper tubing. This 1/8" tube gets slid down into the float chamber, making sure it does not go in too far and suck the gas out of the bowl. (That would be extremely counter productive!) Now having the 1/8" OD vacuum tube inside the 3/16" ID vent of the bowl chamber, we have a known (assumed) amount of metered vacuum leak/venting space leading into the bowl. When you start the car and the manifold vac comes up to normal, we adjust (open) the metering valve to create a vacuum (lower atmospheric pressure) on top of the fuel in the bowl. Open the meter valve further, more vacuum in the bowl, the harder the engine (carb venturies) have to pull to get the same amount of fuel. Thus, leaned out the mixture. Step on the gas, vacuum drops to about zero, carb supplies normal F/A ratio, normal power. Vac come back up, reduced F/A ratio should (does) equal better economy. Given the tube sizes I gave, for example, is a quite a vacuum leak for the system, so the metering valve will need to be open quite a ways before the F/A mixture will be reduced. My set up on the Chager was a bit tighter, so the changes were much more pronounced. This also does cause some "VAPOR" to be taken from the bowl into the engine to be burned, so there's some slight benefits from that too. Fuel level in the bowl remains constant, so nothing needs to be done there, if it is already set correctly. The scheme I used, I believe came from an old Mother Earth News mag or some other popular magazine, so I don't believe I'm giving anyones secret out. My previous reference to "Carb Enhancer" is just coincidental as some one called my setup that, when I shown what I did on that car a LONG, LONG TIME AGO.

The carb enhancer looks strikingly familliar with a carb enhancer I had on my 72 Charger (318ci) back around 1982. That did work to a certain extent. Jump on the gas, vacuum drops, carb/engine ran as normal. As vacuum came up, it created a lower atmospheric pressue inside the float chamber in the carb and thus leaned out the F/A mixture going to the engine. If I were to do it today, I would take that Charger and put in a couple EGT and CHT gauges and see how much more I could safely lean the F/A ratio. There are numerous other tweaks/additions one can do with about any carb'd auto, but given the industries change over to all this electronic crap hanging on under the hoods these days, a lot of what I was toying around with became impossible to do. All the "Doubting Thomas' " of the world will tell you that if such miracle devices or schemes existed, they would be on our cars today. So, good luck convincing people that there are means to achieve such dramatic gains. Wish I still had it, but a few years ago I started a thread titled the "100 MPG Sube". As I remember it then and as you may see here, most will refer huge to MPG gains as VOO DOO, black magic, myths. Answer to original ?? Yes.

I having similar problems with my 89 XT6. I'm out there now (just stopped in for a quick lunch) stumbling through the inoperative radiator fans dilemma with out a thing to go on. The XT6s thermo switch is mounted in the lower RH side tank of the radiator. (Left side, as standing in front of the car.) I have a rad in the shed from a 85 GL, it must have had a 2 pin plug that plugged directly onto that sensor. The XT6 has 2 wires coming out of the sensor and a blue plug connection about 3" from the sensor. I just unplugged this plug, jumpered across the 2 pins in the plug that goes into the wiring harness, turned on the key and both fans immediately start up. I intermittantly have the fans start by themselves, when the engine temp gets up there, but once in awhile is not good enough. I'm going to splice in to those 2 wires and run a new pair back into the cabin for manual switching when I want it. (NEED IT!) I'm picturing that the contacts or bi-metal in the thermo switch are tired. Maybe I'll check into a new thermo switch, but not this week. You might also check the fuses in your fuse box. Must be one for the fan. (Just guessing. I don't have anything to base that assumption on, other than my XT6 which indicates 2 fuses for fans. (I have 2 elect fans on rad, no engine driven fan.) Check that first, if you haven't already. Good luck.

Well, Saturday, both fans were running. Both with key on run and one in the accy position. Tonight neither ran. Even though engine was hot and gauge was near the red. Could someone scan the wiring page(s) that cover the radiator fans and controls from their Sube factory service manual for me? (89 XT6 variety)

I did a search on this order but did not quite find what I need. My 89 XT6 runs rather warm due to a less than perfect radiator. The other day I seem to have noticed the the larger of the 2 fans on the radiator does not come on. Thermoswitch (and fan relay?) seems to take care of the LH (smaller) of the 2 fans. I don't have a wiring dia for the XT6, just a std Haynes manual which only depics 81-83 models. I beleive the second fan is switched on IF the thermoswitch has closed AND perhaps an air conditioner relay is closed. My air cond has never worked, but I'm sure I have seen the second fan run. (Probably in the defrost or A/C settings?) Well, I could use a scan or such that shows the wiring of these fans and if someone could direct me to the relay(s), that would save much time. Thanks

OUCH! OOOO! HOT! HOT! Na, all in fun. (I think.) No appologies required but thanks anyway. I guess I'm going to go with the idea that higher energiy to the spark plugs will make an improvement. Doesn't higher voltage carry easier through a conductor than a lower voltage? If such would be the case, I would think there would be more on the end of the line to do the task at hand. When I put in the Mallory dual point disty and high energy Mallory coil in my Road Runner, if better handled the more fuel/air I was cramming into my 440 through the Six-Pac. Perhaps by just eliminating the "intermittant miss" as stated above. The stocjk ignition in that case was all in new condition, the the Mallory made a huge difference. No physics classes here either, so perhaps I'm wrong too.

So, I have this new magic sparkplug in mind. It will have 2 totally individual sparks and by a secret manner, which I will not explain, both sparks are far enough apart and will not blind each other from the issue at hand. More power with my dual ignition system?

GD, I'm thinking close to same as you. Power is proportionate to the amount of fuel/air one can get into and out of an engine. but by same token, one thing one does before taking off in piston powered aircraft is to shut off one mag, back to 2, then shut off other mag. (2 plugs in each cylinder.) RPMs do drop when one does such. If the drop in RPM is too much, one might not want to take off. Also, if spark does not, why is everone putting in the HE coils?

If a person were to take 2 totally separate high power ignition systems, combine the sparks (through a mixer) and fire the single spark plugs, could that increase power?

Sorry if this is a repeat as I have not read all posts entirely. Manifold vacuum would make sense if one wants to loose any and all disty advance when ever they stepped on the gas pedal. This loss of advance will eventually come back as the engine RPMs get nearer to the the rpms that that particular throttle setting will allow. As I understand as stated in some posts, this manifold vacuum drops at higher RPMs. Guess i have not seen this, but it makes sense that it would. So, we hook up to manifold vacuum on our disty. We're sitting at the stop and go lights, full advance, jump on that gas to beat the bozo next to us that is going straight in the turning lane, loose all advance in the ignition. Would we have more power with less advance? (I don't think so, but correct me if I'm wrong.) So, here we are, cruising 55 on the highway. Hooked up to manifold vac, full advance. Need to pass. Step on the gas, vac dropps, no vacuum advance on the disty. Again, do we gain power by loosing our advance? I still don't think so. (CBR) When somewhat into stock car racing, many many moons ago, I threw in so much advance into the disty for racing that we could not even start the car. The manifold vac theory would seem to be the opposite of what I would expect. Less advance equals more power. I still don't think so. I vote for ported vacuum for the disty. Not OT, but didn't Chevy (GM) do something with the vacuum advance that it used manifold vacuum to retard the advance? (Maybe it wasn't GM.) Like a dual advance/retard setup on the disty or something? Been a long time since, but seems I have run into distys somewhere that used a manifold vac line to a disty.

Glad to hear ypou're back on a smooth air ride. Don't want to alarm you in any way, but I feel you still have the discharge solenoid issue that will manifest itself onto you in certain situations. With my XT6, the most recent cause for my most recent air suspension alert was the fronts became high due to much warmer weather, air in fronts expanding and the sjuggish discharge soleniod would not bleed the air that needed to go. Here I was, out of town and my slightly leaking rears hit bottom. Comrepssor never tried to bring them up cause the fronts were high. Popped the hood, key on, manually relesed air at a front solenoid (compressor side), relays clicked when the excess was gone and rears came back up. All i would suggest is to investigate the discharge problem, perhaps see if you can find another allegedly working compressor somewhere cheap. Only nice thing about leaky struts is that your system may recover due to that IF the discharge solenoid pukes out.

Couple ounces of tire sealant (slime or equivelent) directly in the top of each strut may well buy time on these fronts. Don't run it through the solenoids. Take hose off top of strut. With air already out of them. Don't want a hose to blow in your face. I put 2 used air struts on front of my XT6 bout 3 years ago. These were found at verious yards in the US for around 100 bux.

The compressor will not come on to raise the fronts until the air is discharged to lower the rears. I suspect a problem with the discharge solenoid. Turn the key on, carefully disconnect one airline from one of the front shock solenoids. Compressor side, not strut side of the solenoid. This will allow the rears to lower to a height that the ECU/sensors calculate as normal. At that time, the rear solenoids should close, front solenoids should open and compressor should start itself about the same time. I've found with my XT6, the fronts take the first bit of air real slow. Like it's metered when the struts are bottomed out. (Rears take real easy when bottomed out.) My fronts hold great so I have not done this in awhile, but I always took a jack under front center crossmember and raised the car enough to take the front struts off bottom. Don't raise to normal height, the sensor would close the solenoids.) I have a couple pretty good air suspension PDF troubleshooting files, but can only send to you if you have an email account that doesn't puke with file attachments. (Will not attempt attaching files going to a Hotmail account anymore.) PM me if you'd like those files.

If it is a legit/established business, go after the busihness. If it is more on the order of someone working out of his garage, go after the individaul. Get ALL your witnesses in order and document what they know. (and will say in court, need your witnesses. He'll have his!) Can be rather expensive to take the A#$ H*&^ through full a blown court case. Small claims court probably cost you less that 50 bux to file. The jerk will probably run to his lawyer, but if you have enough in witnesses, photos, documentation, etc and plan your case enough that you don't forget key elements in court, when you're nervous as hell, his lawyer, if he has one, would have problems proving the guy didn't CAUSE THIS DAMAGE to your car. This is what he was supposed to do, this is what he did thing. Get one or two professionals to go to court on your behalf to say this guy should have noticed the hose(s) were too bad to be trusted or they were OK, but appear to have been over tightened and damaged adequately good hose. Other profesionals in that field, on your side, can benefit you greatly. If the other pro says the guy did wrong, but will not appear, you might be able to get by with a signed/notarized affidavit from him. Ask that guy if he will fix your car? In small claims court, I beleive there's a limit on the amount you can go after, but I do believe you can double or tripple the actual cost of the actual damages incurred. If your motor was damaged and body damaged due to his negligence, won't be hard to get the maximun allowable through your small claims court.

That sounds like the same place my 88 wagon sprung a leak. I think what you are refering to as the regulator is some sort of surge/pulse absorber that's mounted to the top of the pump. (Could be wrong.) I drove it for a couple more weeks with a coat of JB Weld covering the top of it, but the rust was so bad, it delaminated and started leaking again. The car sat behind the shed for months. I was not going to spend a couple hundred for a new one from Sube dealer. I was also not going to spend a hundred bux for the used ones that I found on line. My boy went to a local yard, found a Sube and gave the guy 20 bux for one. Take along something to stick in the end of the hose that you disconnect from the tank to the pump. It may siphon the rest of the gas out of the tank when you remove the pump..

Just taking a stab at this. How is the fan,water pump, alt belt. (Assuming it's all one belt.) Is it tight? If it's tight, is it riding low in the VEE pullies? Even if flat serpentine belt, they wear to the point that even though tight, they won't grab well onto VEEs of the pullies. When head lights are off, this belt has to transfer less horse power to the accys it's driving and may turn the fan and water pump better with what HP those need. Adding the extra HP the altinator requires to keep up with the lights being on, may cause it to slip more. Do you have a volt gage on the dash? If so, is it dropping bout the same time the temps going up?

Somewhere around here I have an engine (tore down) and trans from a Mazda RX4. (Bout 1974 issue?) I beleive the RX4s had a bigger engine than the RX7s. Rotor chambers in the RX4 were 3" and RX7 were about 2.75" wide. Could be mistaken. I rebuilt a couple of them back in the early 80s and had this one left over. Think it needs a rotor and chamber to go back together. If anyone were interested, it's going real soon.

I have one sitting loose in the shead, never weighed it. Weight of a Sube motor.... Not looking to put it in them air, are we?

My 89 XT6 is pull back once for high beam, pull back again for low beam. If lights are off and you pull back, you will momentarly flash the high beams. If lights are down (retracted, they first have to open before the lights come on. Do a short pull with lights down and all that happens if the lights pop up then go back down. My XT6 has one little quirk with the high/low switching. I have to slightly push the directional lever in towards the steering column before I pull back to toggle low/high. If I just pull back, they will go to high, but they will not go back to low unless this inward pressure is applied BEFORE I pull back. Sometime need this inward pressure to get high. I just do it all the time. It is not a lot of pressure. I just toggle with the tip of one finger, so it actually toggles that easy. Just in BEFORE back. Someone here had mentioned something about lubing, removing and cleaning of such with this switch, but I don't have that much problem the way it is. (And it's been this way going on 4 years now, that I know of.) I don't remember the push for low and pull for high on my 88 wagon. Did it do that? I know the Explorer works this way, but don't remember it in any of my Subes.

Try rotating your front wheels with the rears. See if the sympton changes. My XT6 has good alignment, axles fairly good. XT6 needs wheels rotated bout 6-12 month intervals.