Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2005 13:13:41 -0400 From: Malt_Hound <""Malt_Hound\"nospamm-me not*yahoo.com"> Subject: Re: SAAB Quality Since GM?
Johannes wrote: > > Pooh Bear wrote: > >>mattleibovitchnospaml.com wrote: >> >> >>>I agree. The DIC shouldn't even be a replacement item. GM's various >>>distributorless ignition setups (since 1984) have proven to be pretty >>>much trouble free and will last "forever" much like any other >>>solid-state electronics. Why is Saab's version so very different? >> >>Because the're too much clever electronics is in that DI cassette ? >> >>As an electronics designer, I'd like to know what the typical failure >>mode(s) is (are). I'll bet there's something(s) straighforward that's >>fixable by design. >> >>Graham > > > The failure is related to the heat and lack of cooling possibilities when > mounted on top of the engine. I took mine apart, the insulation in one of > the coils had burned through, I guess it short circuited. > > It also help if you diagnose any overheating problem immediately, i.e. > don't drive round with the temperature gauge at 3/4 mark. It must always > be at a healthy 1/2 mark. With the way the cooling systems were designed in the late 80's early 90's, I would guess that you are probably right on the money about the overheating being related to DIC failues. I mean, it doesn't make any sense to me that you would use an 89 degree C thermostat, and use a thermosensor switch in the radiator that first turns the fan on at 87 and doesn't put the fan at high speed until 92!! How did the designers suppose that we were going to cool the engine down (and regulate it) to 89 degrees with > 92 degree coolant at the outlet of the radiator? And this most certainly was not a GM design issue... -- -Fred W Toys for sale, Hey get your toys here: <http://users.adelphia.net/~fredwills/>
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
