2seater

What would you like to do? The RT version will read real time data for display on a laptop/tablet and also record for review. It can also be used to make changes in the file to enable burning/modifying although that requires additional equipment. I believe it can also be used to emulate the factory prom so the engine will operate from the laptop for changes on the fly, but I have never ventured into that area, and also requires additional equipment. You will need a ALDL adapter cable to connect to the laptop. Hopefully one of the more tech savvy will chime in.

I searched through my old receipts and found the original part number for the ones I purchased way back when: 3540944. These were purchased from VanDeVeere Buick in Ohio from a parts guy, Dallas Slabaugh. This was 20ish years ago. The part shows up as discontinued on most common sites except one: oemautopartsand accessories.com The price is way lower, like $5.64 ea, so I don't know about the quality? This a link to an old forum discussion with part numbers for the clamps as well as the bushings:

Agreed on the 21mm sounding more like the rear bar diameter, but it was definitely listed as for the front. Of course that doesn't mean it is correct. Take a look at what is listed for 3800 rocker arms sometime. They show the old shaft mount stuff for the 3.8, so bad info. abounds. The new bushing does have a saddle appearance with raised flanges on each side, and my experience shows the wear to be on the interior where the hole gets egg shaped, sometimes bad enough the bar contacts the frame causing a knocking sound. I thought all Reatta's had heavy duty suspension, F41? and maybe Barney can confirm?

I jotted down the multiple part numbers embossed on the new insulator and looked at GM Parts Giant and GM Parts Direct to see if I could find any additional information. There are three numbers listed all beginning 354: 5376 blue, 5378 white and 5380 orange. The colors appear to be a paint streak across the numbers, likely to make it easy for the parts guys to locate easily? The new insulator I have appears to have the white stripe on it and is for a small diameter bar, approx. 3/4" opening, and is likely why it is still laying around, it's too small for mine Looking up those numbers show 5376 blue to be for some other GM model but 5378 white is for the 90-91 Reatta as well as 5380 orange. Clicking on details only brings up the same year Toronado, which is also an E-body, but 3545378 is standard suspension and 3545380 is sport suspension (F41??) I don't know if this will help, as bar diameters are not listed but that info. is likely out there somewhere. Doing a little research shows all sorts of conflicting information on the web. 21mm, 29mm and 31mm, the last two sound about right. Is that 21mm on a convertible by chance? It seems pretty small.

I have a takeout bushing and a new one for my '90 in my spare parts bin. The used and somewhat worn one is almost exactly 1.5" between the raised "flanges". The brand new one is slightly narrower, closer to 1.375" on the flat between the flanges, and it was purchased many years ago from a GM dealer, If memory serves, they are a very tight fit and are designed to flatten and extrude as they are clamped. The description of the parts sounds correct, at least for mine? I would guess at least the '90 and '91 would be similar as they use the same mini tie rod style end links but maybe not? My car is in storage but I would swear the bar is bigger diameter than 21mm?

I believe the opening is a 1.5 Din, common to GM and Chrysler products of the era, and that is what I installed 20 years ago. There has never been a great selection of aftermarket Din and a half units and no idea what may be available today. Good luck

The process illustrated is correct but as far as I remember, the "standard" adjustment is to pull the outer sheath toward the rear with the button pressed, release the button and then apply full throttle through the accelerator. The TV cable will then be pulled through the ratchet mechanism to the "normal" adjustment dimension, this ratcheting only occurs during the adjustment process. I can understand why you may want to extend it a bit more if you desire earlier shifts but I am not sure this is doing the trans. any favors?

Agree the smoke on start up is most typically valve seals. I suspect the reason it can be seen at first is the cat. isn't up to temperature yet. Do the simple things first, the PCV is a good idea but there is really no hose involved on the 3800, just the valve inserted in the grommet and another grommet with a short hose type extension for the other end. Changing the grommet isn't the worst, but the location does make it difficult. Even if the grommet comes apart, there isn't a great danger to the engine since there is a pan on the underside of the intake manifold and the air to be sucked up by the pcv enters the pan on the other end through a couple of 3/8" diameter holes. One other possibility, although rare, would be from the vacuum modulator on the transmission. Easy to check to see if there is oil in the line.

I know you have thought about many solutions to this issue and perhaps the nasty access angle prevents driving one side of the plug into the hole causing it to spin in place and then grip and pull out, which is usually how they are removed? Even if the worst happened; it falls inside, and can't be retrieved, I doubt it will do an real harm. It is in a relatively dead area, as far from the water pump as possible and in a sort of dead area at the bottom of the cylinders. Perhaps could hook a bent wire in the existing screw hole as fishin' line? JMO

It does sound like the way my Crank Sensor failed also. Off and on stutter while driving, then failure to start, and later ran as if nothing wrong. What shape is the coil pack and module in? Fuel pressure easy to check with a gauge.

I think Jim suggested you contact him directly at the email address listed. I have purchased several parts from Jim and prices are fair and shipped promptly.

The simplest thing would be to switch PROM's to see if the lost performance returns. Is there any chance one of the proms was reprogrammed at some point? I suggest looking through the various sensor readings as it right now to see if the timing looks correct, check to see the TPS responds properly, the MAF looks about right etc... It may just be coincidence something else has gone astray?

Since the new ECM is starting from scratch it will take a little time correcting the nuances of proper fueling and such but the ECM itself shouldn't have a direct effect unless there is a fault in the information exchange with the sensors. The EEPROM was swapped in from the original ECM, correct? The chip contains the bulk of the performance parameters, including the default or limp-home program. You might take a tour through the ECM diagnostics to see if any readings look out of line.

Were the wiper assemblies themselves changed at some point creating problems? I have had some issues with some styles of wiper blades that are thicker (taller) or perhaps the blade mounting adapter? They simply were too high to fit below the semi-recessed area at the rear of the hood and also caused the wiper arm to sit high.

The bearings are the same, the spring is what is different. For the engines I have for mine, the straight narrow spring has been the correct one that fits a bored hole in the nose of the cam. If memory serves, the springs will interchange on the same bearing.

I'm not sure there was ever one available for the 3.8 with a balance shaft? The chain is only six total plates in thickness so I would believe the loading is pretty high per tooth?

The short answer is yes, it will all come off as an assembly if desired. It really depends on how much other maintenance you desire to perform. Slate points out some other common items although I find them to be easier on my arthritic self to do so on the bench I know I personally had some issues with the throttle body coolant pipes and since my car is summer only, I eliminated them with pipe plugs at the manifold openings. Purely a personal choice and it has caused no issues. That said, it is easier and lighter, to reinstall the manifold without the other impediments in the way and assemble in place. I also found pulling all the sensor wiring to be a pain depending on how it is routed. I am pretty sure yours is different than my '90 so I can't comment too much on that and the presently installed engine with the '91 manifold was different again. A good time to renew the wiring loom if deteriorated. You will get coolant into the oil, no matter how careful, so plan on an oil change soon after. Regarding the cam sensor causing a no-start. Some engines did use the cam sensor in concert with the crank sensor to determine the cylinder to fire, the earlier GN engines for one. Our twin shutter wheel crank sensor eliminates that requirement. As a matter of fact, the 3800's little brother, the 3300 from the early '90's had no cam sensor and batch fired them, but the crank sensor system is similar to ours. I believe that is why the ICM from that engine is not compatible with ours.

I think Slates notes are on the money. The only thing I would add is: check the surface of the intake manifold where it seals the water passage, particularly the driver's side rear corner, for erosion where the gasket seals. If it isn't too deep, just clean it up and install new gasket. If it is fairly deep or extends out from the sealing surface, I have had good luck with cleaning the area thoroughly, apply JB Weld to fill and then file/sand flat. As for gaskets, I have used both Fel Pro and Victor Reinz (O.E.?) and both work fine although my personal preference is the Victor. I'll second the "no abrasives" near the engine.

Just my personal preference, and as long as the toe dimension is around zero, I like 3/4*-1* negative in the rear and up to -1.5* in the front. Radials are pretty forgiving as long as they are rolling straight as Padgett mentioned. I believe the negative camber will increase with weight added. JMO

Not 100% sure, but unlikely, as the ECM is different due to the electronic transaxle.

Slate made a good reply. I am a bit in the dark as to what specific part you are concerned with? If it is the bump stop on the strut rod, it should make little difference as the suspension doesn't ride on it full time? Were the struts changed at the same time? There does seem to be a perceived ride difference between brands. Was the ride quality an issue before the change?

Ahh, that calculates out better. Thanks for clarifying. The '95 S/C engine was still Series I, the '95 N/A engines had the lower deck.

Stout numbers for sure. Was the 1/4 mile after the additional changes? It would need more hp. or lighter weight for that sort of performance number.

With something over a +100 shot it is possible. I have heard of this "build" before and I can't make the numbers come out right but maybe I am missing something? I never received the details I asked about at that time. Perhaps with some machining, or a special flexplate and torque converter, the GN crank may fit and there is a .225" stroker available, but even if those items are in place, the '96 engines are all Series II which has a much shorter deck dimension, something like 1.0" less, so the rods and pistons are all too short for our 9.5" deck block? The only way it sort of works is using the early rods, which are about 6.328 long, the 1.197" compression height '96 s/c pistons and the 3.625" stroker crank for a total around 9.338", so over .100" down the hole for a pretty low compression ratio. Might work good with a bunch of boost and/or nitrous. I am not sure the stock GN crank is stronger than the stock LN3 crank, it has the same rolled fillets, but an aftermarket crank probably is. No comment on the rest.

I must admit the details of the tuning are outside of my pay grade on this install. It has been done successfully, no matter if a complete engine or just the S/C, as the ECM has been decoded for the S/C tune so the info is available. Some do not use EGR and I believe the years that do are a different style, so that likely has to be turned off. The MAF chart extends to 170 gm/sec (10.4kHz) and I have seen as high as 172 on my very low boost install (stock '90 engine with '88 cam), so that calculates to somewhere around 225 hp. That is probably somewhat optimistic, but someone with an S/C installed could comment on what they see for a maximum. I know Ryan @ GM Tuners can do a chip for it for not a lot of money. There is another option if you run out of range, and that is the 3" inline mounted MAF available in the U-Pick yards that has the exact same frequency range but approx. 50% greater flow within that range. That is something I hope to quantify this winter as a flowbench project for my higher boost install since that turbo install maxed the MAF very quickly and led to tuning issues.