meep

same structure. GT has stiffer damping (shocks). both have the extended bearing spacing that results in the odd offset but more stable wheel control. mike

none of my sube engines ever showed rust. Methinks you have engine number 2, first overheated and blew the heads, leaving residue behind in the overflow tank. A 98 should have dings. It's been painted. Look beneath for signs of clamp marks from body straightening. New paint is fine. Clamp marks are not. Pay $50 for professional inspection. Mike

1. do you have ABS? 2. Does the TCU interface with the ECU? 3. Personally, I REALLY LIKE your manual switch solution. Mike

filter: NAPA Gold, Purolator, WIX if you can find them. AVOID FRAM!! I think delco also makes a good one, but not Bosch, champion. Mike

does the 01 use chain driven cams?? My H2O pump died at 105,000. Not quite long enough to make 2nd T-belt change. I've heard that's just about right for soobe pumps. Bosch replacement cost $50. DITTO THE OEM T-BELT ONLY!!!!!!!!!!! mike

Agree with above. I'm starting to think that thicker is generally better. Ex: Honda specs 0-20 for the new cars, but show a marked decrease in expected lifespan. Lots of US cars run thinner oils than their overseas counterparts, strictly for CAFE reasons. 1/4 Qt overfill won't hurt. Consider a bottle of viscosity thickener, like the STP in the blue bottle at wally world. Works nicely in our miata, easy fix. With 215k and these symptoms, use 10-40, 20-40, straight 30 (unless you live somewhere COLD), or even 15-50/20-50. mike

Don't think I'd worry, especially at those temps: metal shrinks, things are tight and the oil is thick. You might consider draining fluid and replacing with full synthetic dexron III ATF. Less stiction with this fluid may be a great benefit at these low temps. Mike

our '97 2.2L used screws. At 90,000 miles the intake clearances were all .001 of spec. All exh were _just_ out of spec, barely, or maybe at the outside edge of spec. Tightening them up maybe quieted some clatter, but little. Did feel a bit stronger pull, though. I was suprised they were so tight, clean, and in great cond. Note: Mobile 1 oil used exclusively. Mike

Regular valvoline is comparable to mobile 1 in most oil tests. They vary in a couple of categories, especially cold start resistance, but the important ones are very close. "Blend" oils are a joke from my experience. Tried a blend ATF in our truck-- No benefits seen until I replaced with a full synth. I recall reading that "blend" often meant basically dino oil with a synthetic additive package. While our mileage vehicles get M1 every 10,000, the lower mileage car gets good-ole valvoline. mike

nah-- the VW 1.6 didn't come close to 85HP. The smaller ones (1.3-ish) were around 36. I think 55 was the most the bugs saw. Remember, most production beetles struggled to reach 60 mph. Even the big bore flat four waterbox in the vanagon only put out 82HP, that was in 1984!! 130HP in a sub-2000lb car-- + the high torque of the 2.2L, geesh. You'll REALLY want to weight the front end down-- battery, fuel, etc, cuz it'll get squirelly at high speeds, esp with the boosted power. AWESOME JOB!!!! Mikey

I had an oem put in my 97 2.2 a bit more than a year ago. It was touchy for the first week, then did fine. Cost $14 to have them replace the main rear seal while they were in there. Mikey

The newer mobile 1 MT lube is really good. I dumped it in our newly acquired well-worn miata 5spd. Second was so shot the synchros literally would not allow engagement--- and still often does not until warm. Adding M1 lube make a big difference, using the tricks above in combination has almost returned it to "normal," though it's still touchy. Mike

modify shifting technique. 1: ensure you use the absolute least amount of force on the stick. Over time it will adjust and improve. 2: press ever so lightly, wait for it to start to move into gear and THEN press it through the gate 3: rev-match first while in neutral and clutch released (foot off), then snick it in using 2 above. 4: always pause for a split second in N before entering the next gear. Effects are not immediate, but you'll start to feel a difference in a couple 100 miles, big differences. Mike

Yes on both accounts. It can be hurtful (unfriendly) to ram into 1st while in motion. It can also be done very nicely if you rev-match first. It was the only way to do it in our 97. The newer ones are a bit more forgiving. Some other cars (we have a miata in the stable) are even more finicky, despite rev-matching. Oops-- yeah, they're metal-- I was trying to write around that "rubbery" feel. OTOH, I don't think the engine side of the trans is any beefier due to the 4wd. In earlier soobs they weren't. You also would not find a beefier trans in a GM, daimlerchrysler, or any other make, where the only change is the added xfer case off the tailshaft. My manuals on earlier soobs certainly didn't specify a difference. Admittedly I could be wrong... :-) Mike

"There is more inertia in the transmission compared to most other cars, because of the four-wheel-drive." Well, yes and no. The trans capacity is matched to motor output, not # of driven wheels. The wheel side of the gearing is always spinning with the wheels-- the intertia you're speaking of is on the engine side. Clutch and axle and powered gear side inertia must be overcome by the synchros, but 2x4 or 4x4 makes no difference here. ALL five sets of gears are ALWAYS engaged and in motion (except at 0 mph). A gear is selected by sliding an engagement ring between the gear and axle. This ring is what would grind, if the synchro was shot. The synchro uses friction to match axle-gear speed before the ring slides in place. If the rpms don't match, it won't let the ring slide in. At 15 mph, first gear is spinning at the equivalent engine speed of 3 grand. That means, if the clutch goes in and the engine side axle slows to 0 rpm, forcing into 1st gear requires the syncro to spin that axle and connected components to 3000 rpm. That's alot of work for a piece of rubber. This is why the "double-de-clutching" method mentioned above can help. It uses revved engine rpm to get those parts up to speed first, prefferably slightly over, so the syncro can catch it as it passes the same rpm on its way down. This "heel-toe" shifting is good for any gear, and especially the lower ones during downshifts. It is generally not reccomended to enter first while moving. may even mention it in the owner's manual. Mike

1. The chrysler ATF+4 is a synthetic version of ATF+3. Same friction properties, just synthetic. It's a good oil and has a 75,000 mile life, 50,000 under "severe" conditions. May have a smoother (lower friction) property than dexron-- which causes premature engagement in chrysler ATs (we have a minivan and are well-studied on this...). It's a good oil, but I'd listen to make sure nothing is slipping on harder shifts. 2. Driving with that fuse in won't hurt a darn thing. "10%" is really misleading... since under "2wd" conditions it's not a solid connection, but a friction-based connection. If the car is accelerating in a straight line with no slip, the front end does the pulling and the end is under a zero-strain condition. If you'r turning or have very mild slippage, it adds it's motive force up to the point where the clutch kicks it a bit. Besides, that trans looks ALOT like, like, nearly identical to the 4wd with manual 4x4 engagement that shipped on earlier soobees, which could certainly handle 100% to the front end. Or, if you don't want to believe me, always drive with less than 90% throttle... Stick it in and save your money until your ready for a pack rebuild, tailshaft replacement and possible solenoid R/R. 3. Enjoy the car!! Mikey:D

Mine did fine for a while under the seat, lifted above the heat ducts to allow heat/A/C circulation. Next best would be in the storage compartment right rear, OR-- your trunk floor has 1.25" or so of foam beneath it. Cut the foam.... In my '97 I had a lockable steel box that was bolted to the trunk floor-- an old ammo case I'd fitted with a lock, cooling fan and vent. It didnt' look like there was a stereo in it, and therefore the 2 amps, changer and EQ always stayed there... I even mounted the box a bit crooked for that "just thrown in there" effect. Mike

"Yakety Yak." ROFLMAO!! This topic does come up alot, and as much as we debate it for weeks, we really can't tell empirically what difference it makes... Mike

Awwww that's awful. The 2.2 is a beautiful engine. I feel bad for it. Please make it happy. Yes, it is a terrific motor, despite gripes about chronic pin knock. Can't attest to the AT-- we had a 5spd. Mike

Dump it in, enjoy it. Our 97 went 10,000 miles between changes and was really, really happy about it. M1 does get thinner as it ages. You'll know it's time if your valve clatter is increasing. I could go up to 12,000 before they'd starting talking to me. The standard 911 interval with 6 qts in the sump is 15,000 miles. Synth has more detergent than dino oil, typically, which is why its' cleaner. Also, instead of a 5 min flush, run 1 qt of dexron ATF in the motor for a few days instead. It's a 5-30 base oil, additivies focus on detergent and rubber protection instead of oxidation inhibitors, etc. It's fine for a short while and WILL clean the motor. BTW-- I like Royal Purple products, but their scores are starting to equal that of the better dino oils, a bit below Mobile, which is being surpassed by a couple of the others (see the BITOG study in the other current oil thread). Have fun. Mike

I disagree with "synthetics totally better." While I use them in some cars, not all. The margins are getting smaller as dino oil catches up. Also, Mobile 1 is not clearly better than its competitors. A couple of resources: http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/oil-life.html See paste from BITOG site below. Notice how dino is catching up-- compare M1 to valvoline, for instance. Mikey ---------------------- These are the most comprehensive and recent ones I could find. They date to March 2003 and May 2003. I will post the numbers, add a comment or two, and answer any questions you may care to pose. These tests were commisioned by Amsoil, but since they use standardized ASTM protocols, they could easily be verified, and any deception challenged. Based on my experiences with the products from all these companies, and the results of similar but less comprehensive tests posted elsewhere, these do not look doctored or suspect. But as I did not oversee them, I cannot and will not be accountable for any discrepancies, real or imagined. This was a lot of work to type, and I strived to get them right. 1. All the oils were 10w30 viscosity 2. The oils tested were: Amsoil (syn) Castrol GTX Drive Hard (mineral) Valvoline Synpower (syn) Mobil Drive Clean (min) - isn't this the rebadged Honda oil? Pennzoil Purebase (min) Quaker State (Syn) Quaker State Peak Perf (min) Castrol Syntec (syn) Valvoline (min) Pennzoil Synthetic (syn) Mobil1 SuperSyn (syn) The following ASTM tests were run: Thin-film Oxygen Uptake ( D-4742) High Temp/High Shear ( D-4683) NOACK Volatility ( D-5900) Pout Point (D-97) Total Base Number (D-2896) Cold Cranking Simulator D-5293) 4-Ball Wear (D-4172) ********************************************************* Test 1: Thin Film Oxygen Uptake: Measures the oxidation stability of an oil. The induction time (break point) in minutes is measured. The test uses standard amounts of fuel dilution, soluble metals, and water to offer a real-world applicability. Results for this test(all units in minutes): Amsoil: >500 (no break) Mobil1: 397 Pennzoil Purebase: 242 Castrol Syntec: 221 Valvoline: 219 Vavoline SynPower: 211 Mobil Drive Clean: 209 Quaker State Peak Performance: 192 Pennzoil Synthetic: 159 Quaker State Synthetic: 159 Castrol GTX Drive Hard: 132 Test 2: High Temperature/High Shear (HT/HS) Measures a lube's performance under severe heat and shear (mechanical stress) as would be found in the journal bearings under heavy load. The units displayed are viscosity based, using the centipose unit (cP). The minimum spec for a 30w is 2.9 cP. Results for this test (all units in cP): Amsoil: 3.51 Quaker State Peak Performance: 3.37 Castrol GTX Drive Hard: 3.35 Vavoline SynPower: 3.30 Mobil1: 3.30 Valvoline: 3.30 Mobil Drive Clean: 3.28 Pennzoil Purebase: 3.16 Quaker State Synthetic: 3.15 Pennzoil Synthetic: 3.14 Castrol Syntec: 3.13 Test 3: NOACK Volatility. Measures the evaporative loss of lubricants in high temperature conditions. The higher the number, the thicker the lubricant will become. API SL and GF-3 specs allow for a 15% evaporation limit. In this test, obviously, lower is better. Syns almost always have an advantage due to their monomolecularity. Results for this test (% weight loss): Amsoil: 4.86 Vavoline SynPower: 7.03 Castrol Syntec: 7.77 Quaker State Synthetic: 7.80 Pennzoil Synthetic: 8.15 Mobil1: 8.92 Castrol GTX Drive Hard: 8.93 Quaker State Peak Performance: 10.63 Mobil Drive Clean: 10.83 Pennzoil Purebase: 10.93 Valvoline: 12.18 Test 4: Pour Point This test reveals the lowest temperature at which a lubricant will flow when cooled under test conditions. The lower, the better the product will perform in getting from the oil pan to the upper oil galleys, and in providing oil pressure quickly. Synoils generally are the best, because they are free of wax crystals, but today's mineral oils are better refined to remove wax impurities, and use advanced pour point depressant additives to help offset the synoils' intrinsically better properties. Results for this test (all units in degrees Centigrade): Amsoil: -48 Mobil1: -46 Vavoline SynPower: -46 Castrol Syntec: -43 Pennzoil Synthetic: -40 Quaker State Synthetic: -40 Pennzoil Purebase: -37 Valvoline: -37 Mobil Drive Clean: -37 Castrol GTX Drive Hard: -37 Quaker State Peak Performance: -34 Test 5: Total Base Number (TBN) TBN displays the lubricant's reserve alkalinity, and is, of course, the opposite of TAN (total acid number). A high TBN will help resist the formation of acids from sulfur and other sources. It is also a good indicator of reserve resistance to oxidation. The higher the number, the superior ability to suspend contaminants and the greater the ability to provide long-drain intervals Results for this test (all units in mg KOH/g): Amsoil: 12.34 Vavoline SynPower: 11.38 Castrol Syntec: 10.39 Pennzoil Synthetic: 9.73 Mobil1: 8.57 Valvoline: 7.88 Quaker State Synthetic: 7.82 Castrol GTX Drive Hard: 7.74 Mobil Drive Clean: 7.71 Quaker State Peak Performance: 7.55 Pennzoil Purebase: 7.40 RR's comments: I was very impressed with all the oils, as the mineral oils have significantly improved, consistent with previous comments about how mineral oils are closing in, and that the GF-3 spec has resulted in very good performing products. Mobil1's showing is the best i have seen for that product, which usually was in the 5-6 range previously. It certainly also supports my previous comments that the 3K oil change "necessity" is out of place with current technology. Like an enema for a dead man, while it may not help to do a 3K change, it wouldn't hurt I guess. Test 6: Cold Crank Sumulator This one determines the apparent viscosity of the oils at low temperatures and high shear rates, simulating the dreaded cold start. It has direct applicability to engine cranking, the lower the number the better in terms of stress on the battery, starter, etc. A 10w is tested at -25degF and must show a vis <7000 cP to pass. Results for this test (all units cP at -25degC): Pennzoil Synthetic: 3538 Amsoil: 3590 Mobil1: 3967 Quaker State Synthetic: 4142 Vavoline SynPower: 4541 Quaker State Peak Performance: 4620 Castrol Syntec: 4783 Castrol GTX Drive Hard: 5804 Pennzoil Purebase: 5936 Mobil Drive Clean: 6448 Valvoline: 6458 RR Comments: If you live and drive your car in very cold climates, the advantage of the synoils is obvious. Keep in mind that the NOACK performance figures here as well, as this tests hows the performance of fresh oil - after a few thousand miles, the oils with higher volatility will likely have thickened, unless there has been high dilution from fuel, such as can occur if excessive startup idling warmups are employed. Test 7: Four Ball Wear This one is a good indicator of the wear protection of a lubricant, although in the real-world it is should be factored in with the TBN of the oil. Three metal balls are clamped together, and a rotating 4th one is pressed against them in sliding contact. A scar is produced, since at some point the film strength (resistance to being squeezed out) of the oil will be exceeded. The scar is then measured, and the smaller the average wear scar, the better. This test is affected by both the base stock of the oil, and its additive package. Results for this test (all units in inches): Amsoil: 0.40 Castrol Syntec: 0.45 Vavoline SynPower: 0.55 Quaker State Synthetic: 0.55 Mobil Drive Clean: 0.55 Pennzoil Synthetic: 0.60 Mobil1: 0.60 Valvoline: 0.60 Castrol GTX Drive Hard: 0.60 Quaker State Peak Performance: 0.60 Pennzoil Purebase: 0.65 RR Comments: Amsoil and Castrol Syntec are the clear frontrunners, indicating excellent chemistry and use of anti-wear additives. Once again, the high performance of the mineral oils against the 2nd tier synoils is notable, although one cannot dismiss the superiroity of the synoils across the board. ************************************************************** Final comments: I think that except for one of the lubes, there was a wide discrepancy of performance for the others - one might be good here, not so good there. As in life, consistency of performance is what sets apart the great from the good. As Voltaire said, "The best is the enemy of the good". Perfectly good performance can be found in any of these products, and a thinking owner would factor his/her driving styles, operating conditions (environmental), maintenance schedule (intervals between changes), cost constraints, buy vs lease, and expected length of ownership into making a choice. Now, what about the other top synoils? Well, they were not tested here, but certainly the industry giants were. Based on tests I have run or seen from sources I trust in the industry, Red Line, NEO, Motul, and others would likely score in the top quartile of these tests. The tests anmd UOA's I have seen for Royal Purple have never shown it to be other than mid-tier, competitive with the synoil or GIII mineral oils from the major companies. Hope this is useful to you - I found it fascinating to watch the goo go head to head. Happy Motoring!!

Standard halogen bulbs run at 3200k color temp. This is as close to natural light as you'll get from a filament (generally, there are some exceptions) and is standard in most halogen applications, including TV studios, theatrical lighting, etc. Avoid anything that filters color, like, um, Blue. A blue paint filters out the light that would otherwise be on the road. ALSO, blue is a BAD color for visibility-- it tends to scatter more than lower freqs, creating harshness and even worse, glare. Even HID does not look blue to the driver. Oncomer's see the fringe which does have a blue tint, but that's not what the driver gets on the road, which is "whiter," with a higher color temp. It was posted a while back that the oem wiring sees a voltage drop due to thin wiring up to 1 volt or so, and that this last volt is responsible for 10-15% of the bulb's output potential. Therefore, upgrading the wiring can provide a very useable improvement while using normal bulbs. Mike

answers many questions: http://www.strappe.com/plugs.html mike

Cool longetivity study in progress: http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/oil-life.html Mike

There are similar grumblings on other boards regarding amsoil's test setup. OTOH, not an amsoil user, I found the comparisons with the other oils better than the typical, "I use X and I like it because...." claims. Went ahead and put valvoline in the miata after reading this (not enough of a mileage car for synth in our case). mike