mborkow

when i was diagnosed as needing a valve job i took my car for a second opinion, and then a third...i still ended up with the valve job, but i was reasonably sure i needed one.

pcar964

To recommend thousands of dollars of needless engine work for the sole purpose of turning off a stupid light on your dash, is thievery in my opinion, and I would never trust a mechanic who would suggest such a solution. Whether you need a valve job or not is a separate issue and has nothing do with SAI ports.

mborkow

what do you suggest a person do if they get the CEL for SAI, the flush doesn't work and they need to get that CEL light off?

98993c2s

My mechanic says he's never failed to have a successful flush. And he wasn't talking about the plumbing.

He's one of the most respected mechanics in the area (unlike others who would just as soon convince you of a dire need of a $10k rebuild.)

mborkow

how many flushes has he performed?

hawk993

If there is nothing really wrong with your car, and there usually isn't, buy a $99.00 code analyis fob and reset the code.

Allen

But if the port is clogged, the CEL will come right back on...no?

mborkow

correct, and you can't pass emmisions that way (you need to 2 trip cycles).

pcar964

First, I have to ask WHY you need the light off. Second, there were some RL'ers looking into building a chip board that can bypass the signals that trigger the OBD-II SAI failure light, thereby eliminating the problem of passing emissions.

And third, (and I don't know why people don't just do this), find an emissions tech locally that can be bribed, and slip him a $50 every two years = problem solved.

I cannot imagine ANY situation where I would even consider spending thousands of dollars in order to pass a stupid emissions test.

hawk993

ah...for you hard heads...I say again, there is usually nothing really wrong with your car and you can check that or if you take it to a Porsche mechanic with the $15,000 porche fob, he will basically give you the same info as your Autozone readout will, or you can reset the code and drive on...that's the case the majority of the time, there are some people with real problems, but this usually isn't the case...or you can be a hard head and rebuild your engine when it doesn't need it, but it will be real shiney and you will be $15,000+ poorer...LOL

JasonAndreas

F. Diagnostic Readiness Codes

Because of the considerable confusion regarding the setting and
clearing of diagnostic readiness codes, or I/M readiness codes, this
section serves to provide EPA's interpretation of its regulations on
these codes. The original OBD final rulemaking of February 1993,
required that, absent the presence of any fault codes, separate status
codes shall be used to identify correctly functioning emission control
systems and those systems which need further vehicle operation to be
fully evaluated. The purpose behind the readiness code is to allow an
inspection and maintenance (I/M) official to determine whether or not a
vehicle has undergone sufficient operation to allow the OBD system to
fully evaluate the emission control system. This way, the I/M official
could be certain that the lack of OBD diagnostic trouble codes could be
interpreted to mean that the vehicle was operating cleanly, rather than
perhaps being an indication that the OBD system simply had not had time
to fully evaluate the vehicle.
Many manufacturers have had difficulty interpreting exactly what
was expected via this requirement. Some manufacturers have interpreted
the requirement to mean that with every ``key-on,'' the readiness codes
should be set to ``not ready'' status. However, such an approach
effectively defeats the purpose behind the readiness code since any
vehicle having been turned off while waiting for the I/M inspection
would subsequently be interpreted as ``not ready'' for I/M inspection.
Therefore, to clarify, the readiness code, for those monitors
having associated readiness codes, should be set to ``ready'' status
only after sufficient vehicle operation such that the monitor has been
properly exercised and a valid determination can be made as to the
component's or system's operational status. Generally, this equates to
two driving cycles, where driving cycle is defined as vehicle operation
during which a particular monitor is exercised. Note that a driving
cycle may be different for different monitors, and not all monitors
have associated readiness codes. For example, continuously operating
monitors are considered ``ready'' since they operate continuously
rather than during only limited operating conditions; therefore, such
monitors may not have an associated readiness code.
The readiness codes should never be set to ``not ready'' status by
any means other than intentional resetting via a scan tool or perhaps
due to battery power interruption. Further, when setting a readiness
code to ``not ready'' status using a scan tool (after conducting any
necessary repairs), all readiness codes should be set to ``not ready''
rather than resetting only the readiness code associated with the
repaired component. In other words, readiness codes should be set to
``not ready'' status as a group rather than individually. This will
serve to ensure adequate vehicle operation and OBD system evaluation
following vehicle repairs and prior to subsequent I/M inspections.

trojanman

Hey hawk... I don't think there are many (if any) of us who would charge down the road to a top end rebuild without exhausting/eliminating other less expensive options. The bottom line, though, is that clogged ports can and do in fact indicate a larger problem sometimes... ask me how I know.

And $15k for a repair? Mine was a third of that.

pcar964

I find it funny that the most echoed "problem" with 993s is actually not even a problem. Funnier still that people willingly spend $6000 to fix something that has zero impact on performance or reliability.

98993c2s

I tend to agree that there is nothing technically 'wrong' with the car in a strict sense, but that doesn't mean it isn't a problem.

I wouldn't want to have an expensive car that couldn't legally drive on public roads because it can't pass a simple test.

That is definitely a problem.

mborkow

tampering with your emissions is, i believe, a federal crime.

the reason why a person would need to fix the CEL is that you can't pass emissions with a CEL light on..that is why you have to get it fixed (why is that hard to understand?)

and yes, i realize that there is nothing wrong with the car. the problem is the law, but i am not going to get them to fix that for less than $5k either.