considering buying a chevy...

audiobliss

No offense, but who in the world would buy a regular cab truck? They just look so stupid, imo. Anyhoo...

PBD - You definitely need to make the leap into GM territory! But, a 2003 Toyota Tacoma would be real nice, too. I'd sure love to hae a 4-door one!

Cody - Have you not worked on the 8.1L engine yet? Do you get to drive your customer's trucks around a little bit, at least around the yard? If so, I sure hope you can get your hands on an 8.1. That'd be fun!!

exalted512

the 8.1L diesel? No, havent been able to play with one yet. I do know the cummins engines though. Ive had a couple of stick shift dualies come through. If it rains, its really hard NOT to spin the tires going up the ramp into the bay. I'll be slowly letting off the clutch and holding the brake at the same time(the beauty of big manual trucks, you dont even have to hit the gas for it to take off), if I'm not careful all 4 back tires will start spinning...kind of dangerous since our bay entrance isnt that wide and if the back end slides then there goes the back fender...
-Cody

audiobliss

Nope. The DuraMax is a 6.1L, if I'm not mistaken. I'm talking about the awe-inspiring 8.1L (or maybe it's just 8.0L) gasoline engine that's available in the 2500 series and up Suburbans/trucks. One of Dad's customers had it in her 2500 Suburban, and it's smoke the tires from a stand still.

MacLeod

The Duramax is a 6.6 liter and the new big block is an 8.1.

audiobliss wrote:

No offense, but who in the world would buy a regular cab truck? They just look so stupid, imo. Anyhoo...

PoweredByDodge

update

---

in the freezing cold of Tuk-tay-uk-tuk Arctic Buffalo, I pulled the starter out today... flywheel is not shredded, but it is scored.... starter is scored up a lot worse - looks like the starter never actually fully engaged itself, like it would pop half out and not all the way into the flywheel...

so i returned it and got a new one under warranty - put the new starter in only to find that the last **** who worked on the truck stripped the mounting stud where the starter bolts down. top bolt was fine, bottom bolt hole was stripped... well i drilled it out with a 7/16th's (size of hole in starter mounting tab) and grabbed a grade 8 to put in there with a nut and bolt and lock washer. well on the back of the bellhousing it's not "flat" -- the hole is right under where the bell housing starts to belly out ... so the bolt wouldn't go all the way in... so i took a die grinder and cut off about 1/3 of the head of the 7/16th grade 8 bolt... then it slipped right in and locked itself in place and wouldn't turn (so it was perfect)... put that sucker on good. dealer probably would have said "oh you need a new tranny cuz we're **** and stripped the hole". ****.

anyway... so now it starts fine... we'll see how long htat holds out for though. turned the motor by hand with the starter out to see the flywheel - while its scratched up, it's not warped, nor are the teeth knocked off or badly messed up - just all shiney and scratched lookin. so we'll see how long it lasts.

.... then i went to the oxygen sensor - rather than trust the truck to another **** dealer, and lose my mind in the process, i just up and bought a new oxygen sensor (downdraft #2) even though its under warranty - cut and spliced the wiring harness, heat shrink tubed it, and then installed it - ran the truck at idle for half an hour - then at 1,000 rpm for 15 minutes, and the check engine light didn't come back on - so i'm considering it a successful repair - o2 sensor cost me 55 bucks...

i say that if this repair works, then 55 bucks to avoid having to deal with a dealership is 55 bucks well spent... and i know the job was done competently and properly and that nothing got damaged in the process.

i think i'm just going to start fixing everything myself until i run into high dollar parts - at which point i'll diagnose it myself, take it to my mechanic to get a 2nd opinion in writing that part XYZ is at fault, and then take it to the dealer and tell them to replace part XYZ while I watch.

....

crossover network is done - you guys gotta see this...

18 awg air core inductors...

poly metal film caps for the high pass mid and tweet...

electrolytic for the low pass and the HP on the woofers...

14 awg solid copper wire for all the connections because i wanted to do that wicked exposed wire like a maze thing... all those funny lines you see are the exposed copper connections for everything -- freaky ****... breadboards stacked on top of each other with nothing holding them up but solid core wire. freaky cool.

i call it the SC-Hi-5 .. Spinelli Creations 5 way Crossover... wicked cool.

install coming soon... see attached thumbnail.

neomagus00

hellohello wrote:

my car pulls to the left too, had it aligned

check your tire pressures?

this is about the only thing i understand in this thread... i'll leave you people to your 'trucks'... i much prefer small engines and turbos, thank you very much... bah! 8.0 litres... try getting 105 HP / litre outta THAT!

and if you have, i want proof

exalted512

i see youve been taking lessons from Sid on how to take pictures vince...
-Cody

MacLeod

neomagus00 wrote:

much prefer small engines and turbos, thank you very much... bah! 8.0 litres... try getting 105 HP / litre outta THAT!

and if you have, i want proof

Why would you want to? You can take a 1.6 liter and spend $25,000 to get it to make 300 horsepower or you can take an 8.1 liter and spend $5,000 and get it to make 700 horspower. On top of that, the 8.1 liter wont grenade itself everytime you make a 1/4 mile run.

audiobliss

^^ THAT's how it's done. And boy don't it sound good, too!

neomagus00

can you also get the 8.1 litRE engine to do 35 mpg? and how cool does it sound to say you have a 4-cylinder engine with 300 HP?

and i personally like the high-rev sound over the deep roar, but that's all preference... and who said anything about money? come on, you're talking to a physics major, what does the real world have to do with anything??

MacLeod

neomagus00 wrote:

and i personally like the high-rev sound over the deep roar

Yeah, I like that sound too......theyre called motorcycles.

Jstas

Oh my god. 105 HP per liter? GET REAL! It'a all about power to weight. Pfft! Most unreasonable, useless example of "power" I have ever heard any half-wit two bit punk **** little **** try and pass off as anything relevant. In the end, all that matters is who got to the end of the track first. Horsepower per liter...BAH! Stupid kids wouldn't know their **** from a hole in the ground if it didn't have hair around it. Oh, BTW, I have a buddy with a 2000 Lightning. He just laid down about ~588 horses at the real wheels on a DynoJet at JDM Engineering. Given the average drivetrain loss, he's well over 600 horses at the crank. Probably closer to 700. Out of a 5.4L engine, that's about 110-125 horses per liter. Doesn't really matter a hill of beans though. He tips the scales at about 4200 pounds in race trim. He'll run a screaming, high 11 second 1/4 mile but if he was 3200 pounds, he'd be deep into the 10's. Then again, I'd like to see someone squeeze out 700+ horses from a pissant Honduh and still be able to drive it every day like he does.

hellohello, get your struts checked. You may have a sagging shock/strut. It won't necessarily show up in an alignment but will cause the car to pull while it is rolling down the road. Also, suspension bushings in the sway bar, the control arms and even the strut/shock mounts will cause the car to wander or pull. Also check out the spring perches. If one is bad, it can cause the spring to shift in the mount and not be compressing properly. That would cause uneven suspension loading which can cause pulling. Also, if the spring perch is bad, it can be compressing itself and that would also cause a change in spring compression. Those problems usually result from high mileage though. Unless you have over say 80K on the car, I would not think that to be the problem but parts can fail prematurely. Tire pressures can do it like what was said but another more real possibility is brakes dragging. A warped rotor or a stuck caliper can cause pads to drag which will cause the wheel with the dragging brakes to move slow and feel like it is pulling to one side. The biggest problem there is not that the car is pulling but that the dragging brakes can cause the brakes to heat up and the fluid too. If the fluid gets too hot, it loses viscosity and doesn't hold pressure anymore. Your pedal gets real spongy and the brakes don't work. One last thing I can think to check is to make sure your tie rod ends are not worn. If you have a rack and pinion steering system, make sure the bushings for the rack mounts are not worn. If you have recirculating ball steering, make sure the pitman arm is not loose or the pivot point where the steering arm meets the drag link is not loose or worn. If any of that for either rack and and pinion or recirculatng ball is worn, you'll want to check the ball joints too. Hell, it's be worth it to check them anyway. They should be checked during an alignment but I've seen too many shops put the tire changing guy on the alignment rack and he just doesn't have the experience/training to know what to look for properly. The computer take care of alot of it but it still takes a manual inspection to notice/find problems like those. I wouldn't waste any more money on an alignment but tell the mechanic to look at the car and that it is pulling to one side.

Vinnie, if you successfully fixed that chewed up mounting hole, I do not think you will have any more problems unless the "fix" you did blows out. All of your starting problems were probably caused by that bolt hole being stripped out. It won't hold a starter no how if it's stripped out. What you should do is find an old starter, hook up a couple of battery cables to it and just let it sit on the floor. Take a car battery and touch the leads. That starter will kick on and jump across the floor with an incredible amount of power. Think about it. That big **** V6 under the hood is what it takes to move your truck. That starter is 1/20th the size and if you leave the truck in gear and kick it over, it'll move the truck down the road. It has enough power to wiggle hard enough to put enough stress on that bad bolt hole to torque that starter and **** it in place to cause the solenoid and bendix to bind. That will in turn cause the pinion and spur teeth to not mesh properly and break. It can also cause the whole starting system to lock up. Yep, I'll bet you just fixed your problem good and most likely won't have to worry about it any more.



Oh and one more thing, Lightnings don't come in extended cab. That would be a good reason to not buy an extended cab.

Blind brand allegiance gets you no where and only serves to keep reality at bay so that one can substitute thier own. I don't participate in these pissing matches unless someone is trying to pass off BS as facts. I have no need to justify my vehicle or why I purchased it. I bought it because I like it and I enjoy driving it. I've worked on the Chevies and Dodges, hell, I've even worked on the Honduhs too. Are they any different? No. None of them are easier to work on than the others. Sure, they all have good points but they all have bad points too. If you don't think yours has them then all that means is that you haven't found it yet. I don't even purchase a car with that in mind because I don't intend to be wrenching on it. If I am, I'm not dropping 30 large on the ride. I'll go find a junker and pull it apart and put it back together again for 1/3rd the price. One would think that all the "experts" out there on the internet who talk about which car is easier to work on would get that by now.

I could say one car sucks more than another but it's individual, anecdotal evidence. Noah thinks his truck is a pile of junk. I've had no less than 6 Rangers in my possesion over the years and I couldn't kill any of them. Believe me, I've tried. I still own my '87 and I'm not getting rid of it no way, no how. Hell, if I had an 11 year old vehicle, with a warranty, with god knows how many miles and how many different owners and all I dumped into repairs was less than $2300, I'd consider myself very much ahead of the game.

Jstas

MacLeod wrote:

Yeah, I like that sound too......theyre called motorcycles.

No, weedwhackers. 4cyl./Rotary Day at Atco Raceway...otherwise known as the Weedwhacker Nationals.

Motorcycles actually have the refined sound that you get from say...a 7 liter BMW V12 or a 5.7 liter Lambo V10 or hell, any Ferrari engine of any kind. Unless of course it's a Harley or any one of the clones. Then you get that rumpity rump from the offset rod angle on the common shaft.

I haven't heard a 4 cylinder sound like that, ever. Not even the S2000 or Integra Type R have that sweet singing sound of a perfect ignition cycle running through a perfectly balanced rotating assembly trumpeting it's glorious arrival through a tuned titanium exhaust system! Yeah, that's the sound I like and I have yet to hear a 4 cylinder sound like that.

PoweredByDodge

100 horse per litre.

---

the 500 cubic inch 8 litre cadillac motors came stock with 50 horse per litre up to '74 ... post that they were smog kitties... 500cid.com can hot rod you out a caddy motor for up to 7 or 800 horse without a problem... it'll cost to 15 to 20 large though... keith black pistons, wicked high rise intakes, dual demon 1000 cfm carburetors... etc etc... and they will just about anything else out of the water -- no nitrous, no turbo... but you can put boost on them for over 1,000 horse. so yes, i love v8's. by just removing the smogger **** and doing a light refresh on the old man's motor -- twin 3" exhaust and a big honkin air cleaner and it's pulling 23 inches of vacuum and dyno'ed out at around 390-400 horse over a semi flat curve... peaked just over 400. that's with bone stock internals and just bolt on **** that did nothing more than let it breathe properly.

Starter.

---

John I hope you're right. I've kinda gotten past my depression over the whole thing... its day 2 without a starting mishap - yet. no 02 sensor code yet either... so i'm keeping my fingers crossed. i'm really prayin this works out - i'd like to be able to have some faith in the truck. i have, since day 1 of owning a vehicle when i was like 17, had the luxory of 100% faith that at any given time i could drive to florida or whever and know i'd get there and back without the vehicle going bad on me. this truck has yet to give me such confidence... every road trip it's been on (once to chicago, once to albany) it took a **** on me for one reason or another. i'm gonna give it another chance though before i send it to the place where all bad dodge's go -- (its like hell, but instead of fire and pitch forks, there's little kids with bologna and knives, they strip paint and scratch up body panels - for eternity).

Overall horsepower-ideology.

---

i never cared whether i had the most power in the world -- or more than joe blow... i just want enough to be able to "get up and go" and not look like a terd on the road. in most instances, 225 with 250 lbs of torque is enough to do that... provided its a semi-steady curve. the 3.7 is not quite up to that in my opinion but it gets incredible mileage compared to my previous truck, so it was a sacrifice i made knowingly and willingly. hell i'm buildin a truck from basically frame up and all i aimed for with the motor was 200 - 250... and i'm projecting around 225-ish... that's plenty good...

PoweredByDodge

ok - crossover network is in - here's a better picture too... thanks to Unkie Jack and his digital camera.

anywho - the sound is great - it did the job i wanted it to do. My only complaint is that now without speakers overlapping each other and cancelling each other out and sounding like mud or whatever, i've been able to juice the volume even louder without audible distortion. While it did not result in clipping, it did result in the Blue Thunder 754 (that pushes the highs) overheating... i had it at what I call "max volume" now (as loud as my ears can take - with no audible distortion or clipping) for maybe 15 minutes and the **** just conked out... i put my hand on it - hot as hell.. checked the crossover and attached cables for signs of shorting - there were none ... it just overheated -- it came back on a moment later... but i have got to find a more efficient amp... those blue thunder 754's, thunder 304's, 6304's, etc... were all heat monsters... hottest amps i ever owned... gotta get something different that's more efficient so it gives off less heat loss.

neomagus00

Jstas wrote:

half-wit two bit punk **** little ****

i'll ignore this part and mention that i never said HP/litre was a good measure of power (it's great for bragging rights on kids with civics, but that's about it), and i'll concede the rest - power/weight (but the numbers are given as weight/power?) is clearly more important; witness my dream machine, the Lotus Elise...

pbd - that xover looks evil, in a cool way...

MacLeod

Im pretty sure he wasnt referring to you bro, more like the rice rocket jockies you see with the XXXL jogging suits and sideways hats on that you see driving around in these things with a Boeing wing on the back.

Jstas

neomagus00 wrote:

i'll ignore this part and mention that i never said HP/litre was a good measure of power (it's great for bragging rights on kids with civics, but that's about it), and i'll concede the rest - power/weight (but the numbers are given as weight/power?) is clearly more important; witness my dream machine, the Lotus Elise...

Get your panties out of a bunch, I said ANY half-wit two bit punk **** little ****. I did not specify you. If it was implied, well, that's how you decided to take it. I've heard that argument before from many backwards hat wearing know-nothings at the track, at school, on line...hell, even at the parts counter at Pep Boys.

You're a physics major, right? If that's so, why does that assinine argument even enter your mind? It is completely irrelevant and has no bearing on anything that makes a car go down the road. It's not a measure of technological advancement, it's not a measure of refinement, it's not a measure of performance, it's not even a measure efficiency. It's just a stupid kids argument that little boys with 4 cylinder Honduhs present to make themselves feel good about their purchase when they feel grossly inadequate by getting stomped in a race by some "old guy" with a car that is probably older than thier parents who probably MADE them buy a Honduh anyway because "it's safe". They make the stupid arguments, get laughed off the track and then go to the streets and race illegally and use another whole slew of sorry-assed excuses as to why they can't hack it at the track where it's relatively safe and legal. You want to make a fast Civic? GREAT! Do it! Don't TELL me about it, DO IT! Show me what you can do and don't brag to me about how great it is and you'll get my respect. I will always respect a fast car but if the owner is a jerk or a braggert, well, that's a different story. I know, I'm a jerk. Know what? I don't care. I've been there, done that and gotten a few trophies and t-shirts too. Does that make me god? No. I just walked the walk already. Kids can brag all they want and try to show me up all they want. Rarely are they going to tell me something I don't know or haven't tried before. I don't like getting fed silly lines. It's a sign of disrespect.

Power to weight, weight to power, what's the difference? You get the same concept represented slightly differently. Quit picking at silly details and use your physics major background. You made a bogus comparison that is as old as the Honduh Civic itself. Children have been running thier mouths about horsepower per liter BS as long as I can remember. Then I hear about them doing it with 35 MPG. Then I hear about efficiency. Then I head about how my pushrod V8 is outdated POS technology. You get a OHC V8 and you hear about how it's too big and will never be as efficient. Then you hear about how they could put a turbo on a Honduh and go a million miles an hour and school me. So we strap a big blower on top of that "inefficient POS" and still go faster. Then, just to show them up, we strap not one but TWO turbos to that "low-tech POS pushrod V8" and blow thier doors off. The same story, over and over again. The more efficient, better gas mileage, high tech economy car gets it's **** handed to it on a silver platter by a low tech POS from 1964 and it's nothing but excuses. None of it matters. I didn't go racing to worry about fuel mileage, engine efficiency and what my engine will put out on an engine dyno. Racing is about power and balance. Nothing else. If you want to talk street driveability and such, yeah, I lose 'cause there are many more vehicles more comfortable and economical out there. None of them that I could afford though would offer me the same level of performance in all respects that I have now. Sure, my mileage might suck and I don't drive a super efficient car but what I do drive is something that alot of people talk about, good and bad, but everyone wants. I'm one of the few that said "I will" and did. Because of that I get to drive a Lightning everyday and not a mundane jellybean shaped family car or econobox. I like it that way. Getting to drive a Lightning that is, not the envy part 'cause that really bugs me. Too many people get all uppity about it and all they have to do is see me driving, getting in or getting out of the truck. Not that there is anything wrong with a family car either. Just don't tell me how great your family car is compared to a Lightning. If you wanted a car that was as good as or better than a Lightning, why didn't you just get a Lightning? Simple because it's not what you need so you made a compromise. I have a compromise too. My fuel bill, my tires bill and my passenger capacity is horrendous. Practicality is low too and if it wasn't for the payload capacity and towing capability, it'd be a total waste. Then again, that's the fun of it too. Do I need it? No. I wanted it and I got tired of waiting. I had an opportunity to aquire one and I did and I haven't regretted it since!

Bottom line, horsepower per liter is bogus, it's a cop out. Power to weight, weight to power, however you want to say it, that's the real deal. That is physics right there.

neomagus00

i take it you missed the part where i agreed with you about everything you said, then?

and i mentioned power/weight because that's the accepted term, but the numbers are given as 4:1 or whatever, which is a weight :: power ratio... the implication was that i was curious about why there was this difference...

PoweredByDodge

it is evil -- evil-ish-ly good.

system never sounded so bloody good

hellohello

pbd, nice wiring, i indeed like it, good ol' PTP with heavy guage wire... although the fact theyre bare kinda worries me... but im a worrywart

jstas, what you say is probably true, ill have my bro look at it, its more of a drift than a pull, and the tires are good, i checked those.. its probably some minor thing. I heard stories of the old cavaliers hitting a curb slightly and destroying the suspension, I hit a bad pothole every now and then, that could be it... something is outta whack or bent.

PoweredByDodge

ya i was terrified about the bare thing too - considered dipping the whole unit in varnish, but that would severely kill the ashethics... i'm either going to put little speaker fuses on the amp (so if i get a short - i'm still ok), or very lightly hit it with clear coat spray - many many many super thin coats).

hellohello

get clear nail polish, it even has a little brush

PoweredByDodge

now thats a damn good idea...

hellohello

they happen every now and then

audiobliss

PoweredByDodge wrote:

now thats a damn good idea...

hellohello wrote:

they happen every now and then

ROFL!

hrdhtdvr

I had a 1986 S10 extended cab. I put over 300k miles on it before it finally "Died" I could have fixed it but instead just got a new truck. Now I have a 02 Silverado LT Extended cab. I don't really care for the new style so when it is time to trade in, I am thinking about getting a Ram. But, that is years away from now.

audiobliss

Yeah, I don't like the new style, either. The 2002 looks great, though.

PoweredByDodge

body style of the new ram i kinda didn't like - actually i hated at first - then i started to like it --- now i'm noticing problems with build quality on not just mine (hood doesn't line up perfect, bed isn't lined up with cab)...

i look at the hunk of scrap 88 i got and i say "you know, other than the inner wheel wells not really meeting the outer fender in a cosmetically good way, the whole truck is built like a tank from the factory".

MacLeod

Im driving a late model Chevy van at work and its a tank. Its got over 113,000 miles on it and hauls around well over its rated loads all the time up mountains and in stop and go downtown traffic and still runs like its new.

That 350/4 speed combo is the most durable ever I believe.