quote:
Originally posted by T-Keith:
By the late 80s it was practically on every GM car engine. Honda and Toyota took years to integrate this.
Have you looked into the "PGM-FI" computer control that Honda was using for fuel injection in 1988? It's
PRIMITIVE GARBAGE compared to what's on my 1988 Mustang. 1988 Honda has 13 codes for every single malfunction. It doesn't even have a code for a dead oxygen sensor..that is indicated by "no code" and a "rough idle". Why the **** would a faulty oxygen sensor cause a rough idle? My guess: the ECU isn't sophisticated enough to recognize that the oxygen sensor isn't sending a valid signal and of course continues to use it to control the mixture, leading to a rough idle. That's why it has no code for a faulty oxygen sensor, either.
People fault Ford for not including a data stream output (they eventually started adding it beginning with 1991 models), but my view is that the extensive diagnostic capabilities built right into the ECU made up for it. (As a side note, GM models with an ECU have ALWAYS had a data stream output, even my brother's carbureted 1986 Camaro Z28 had it).
With Honda in the 80s, you got very limited self-test diagnostics and no data stream. I don't believe it even has the capability to store a memory code for an intermittent fault.
Maybe that's why I never see any 80s Hondas on the road around here. I bet they're a real joy to troubleshoot if they fail emissions. EDIT: Bring a lab scope, you'll need it.
[ September 17, 2005, 11:02 PM: Message edited by: brianl703 ]