'94 Voyager - what is code 32 ????

Help!

My '94 Plymouth Voyager 3.0 L keeps lighting the "check engine" light. When
I check the code, it comes up as 32.

This has me puzzled - according to the Haynes manual, code 32 means EGR
failure on California models.

Since my car is a Canadian model, does this code still apply?
(There doesn't seem to be any circuitry for the EGR valve on the Van - it
appears strictly vacuum operated)

What could be causing this fault to occur?

I plan on taking the vehicle on a long trip soon and I want to get this
sorted out before I go.

Thank you,

Greg
greg.gall AT mail.com

"Greg Gall" > wrote in message
news:d117e.989273$6l.47492@pd7tw2no...
> Help!
>
> My '94 Plymouth Voyager 3.0 L keeps lighting the "check engine" light. When
> I check the code, it comes up as 32.
>
> This has me puzzled - according to the Haynes manual, code 32 means EGR
> failure on California models.
>
> Since my car is a Canadian model, does this code still apply?
> (There doesn't seem to be any circuitry for the EGR valve on the Van - it
> appears strictly vacuum operated)
>
> What could be causing this fault to occur?
>
> I plan on taking the vehicle on a long trip soon and I want to get this
> sorted out before I go.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Greg
> greg.gall AT mail.com

32 (1984 only) power loss/limited lamp or circuit
32 EGR gases not working (1988) - check vacuum, valve
32 (1990-92, all but Turbo) computer didn't see change in air/'fuel ratio when
EGR activated - check valve, vacuum lines, and EGR electrical
http://www.allpar.com/fix/80s-codes.html

Do you mean that outside of California, the vehicles do not have EGR valves if
they are made in 1994?

I see your confusion. Can you still the sticker on the bottom side of you hood
which lists perhaps the layout of your emissions control system? Does it
mention any clues?

Generally, how are your vacuum or emission lines and the PCV valve and things
like that? I am not a mechanic so I don't know if they segue into code 32.
Someone here might know exactly what Code 32 means for the 1994 3.0 Voyager.
You can also check your VIN to make sure your engine is not the California
variant. I often thought, perhaps erroneously, that Canada had strict
regulations which were near what California had. But I could be very wrong
about that in this case.

In Canada, generally the emissions requirements are a lot looser than
they are anywhere in the US. Most vehicles that are sold here just use
standard 49-state US emissions equipment. Some companies (such as
Honda in the past) have chosen to release Canadian-specific cars,
which have less emissions control equipment. Because the population
density is much lower in Canada, we haven't see a bad enough pollution
problem to warrant a lot of fuss over emissions equipment on vehicles.
Personally, I think it is stupid for the government to wait for a
problem to exist before they take action!

Thanks for the codes,

It does give me a hint as to what is wrong. The Haynes manual only
mentions that code as being applicable for California models, which
have an electronically controlled EGR valve (has an electrical
solenoid in it). Looking at my EGR valve, it is completely mechanical
(no electronics), operating strictly off of vacuum. The
troubleshooting procedure in the Haynes manual suggested checking for
opens or shorts in the solenoid - obviously not applicable to my car.

The following code:
> 32 (1990-92, all but Turbo) computer didn't see change in air/'fuel ratio when
> EGR activated - check valve, vacuum lines, and EGR electrical

Suggests that operation of the EGR valve is monitored by a change in
the air-fuel ration (from the O2 sensor, I guess), so that gives me
some more to check.

I can manually operate the EGR valve and know that it functions, but
perhaps the vacuum line routing has a problem (something failed or
disconnected).

Thanks,

Greg



"Treeline" > wrote in message news:<gjo7e.13506$Xm3.8972@trndny01>...
> "Greg Gall" > wrote in message
> news:d117e.989273$6l.47492@pd7tw2no...
> > Help!
> >
> > My '94 Plymouth Voyager 3.0 L keeps lighting the "check engine" light. When
> > I check the code, it comes up as 32.
> >
> > This has me puzzled - according to the Haynes manual, code 32 means EGR
> > failure on California models.
> >
> > Since my car is a Canadian model, does this code still apply?
> > (There doesn't seem to be any circuitry for the EGR valve on the Van - it
> > appears strictly vacuum operated)
> >
> > What could be causing this fault to occur?
> >
> > I plan on taking the vehicle on a long trip soon and I want to get this
> > sorted out before I go.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Greg
> > greg.gall AT mail.com
>
> 32 (1984 only) power loss/limited lamp or circuit
> 32 EGR gases not working (1988) - check vacuum, valve
> 32 (1990-92, all but Turbo) computer didn't see change in air/'fuel ratio when
> EGR activated - check valve, vacuum lines, and EGR electrical
> http://www.allpar.com/fix/80s-codes.html
>
> Do you mean that outside of California, the vehicles do not have EGR valves if
> they are made in 1994?
>
> I see your confusion. Can you still the sticker on the bottom side of you hood
> which lists perhaps the layout of your emissions control system? Does it
> mention any clues?
>
> Generally, how are your vacuum or emission lines and the PCV valve and things
> like that? I am not a mechanic so I don't know if they segue into code 32.
> Someone here might know exactly what Code 32 means for the 1994 3.0 Voyager.
> You can also check your VIN to make sure your engine is not the California
> variant. I often thought, perhaps erroneously, that Canada had strict
> regulations which were near what California had. But I could be very wrong
> about that in this case.

A couple of quick checks.

With Eng at normal operating temp, open the throttle quickly while watching
the EGR valve. It should open as the engine starts to pick up revs. It will
close as you back off the throttle, or as the engine RPM gets toward the
higher range. (There is often a stem that can be observed to see if the
valve opens and closes.)

With Eng off. Disconnect vacuum line to EGR from vacuum source. Manually
push open the EGR valve. It should open with out being sticky. Release it
and it should close by itself under spring pressure. If not, or it feels
sticky, replace the EGR valve. You should also notice air drawing into the
vacuum hose and them expelling as it closes.

Reopen the EGR valve and Stop the end of the vacuum line with your thumb.
The EGR valve must stay open. If it does the EGR valve vacuum diaphragm and
EGR vacuum hose are both good. The system seams ok and should operate
correctly. If it does not stay open, remove the vacuum hose from the EGR
valve itself. Manually open the valve and block the EGR valve vacuum
connection. If it now stays open, replace the vacuum hose. If it still does
not stay open, replace the EGR valve (the internal diaphragm is leaking).

Also EGR leaks/failures can be caused by a leaking EGR valve gasket under
the valve mount. Can only be checked by removing valve, and if you remove
the valve, then for sure you need a new gasket anyway. Some Chrysler EGR
systems also use an EGR tube to get exhaust gas from the manifold or
exhaust, to the EGR valve - if this is present, a cracked, broken or
otherwise leaking EGR supply tube can cause EGR system failure and codes.

"Greg Gall" > wrote in message
om...
> In Canada, generally the emissions requirements are a lot looser than
> they are anywhere in the US. Most vehicles that are sold here just use
> standard 49-state US emissions equipment. Some companies (such as
> Honda in the past) have chosen to release Canadian-specific cars,
> which have less emissions control equipment. Because the population
> density is much lower in Canada, we haven't see a bad enough pollution
> problem to warrant a lot of fuss over emissions equipment on vehicles.
> Personally, I think it is stupid for the government to wait for a
> problem to exist before they take action!
>
> Thanks for the codes,
>
> It does give me a hint as to what is wrong. The Haynes manual only
> mentions that code as being applicable for California models, which
> have an electronically controlled EGR valve (has an electrical
> solenoid in it). Looking at my EGR valve, it is completely mechanical
> (no electronics), operating strictly off of vacuum. The
> troubleshooting procedure in the Haynes manual suggested checking for
> opens or shorts in the solenoid - obviously not applicable to my car.
>
> The following code:
>> 32 (1990-92, all but Turbo) computer didn't see change in air/'fuel ratio
>> when
>> EGR activated - check valve, vacuum lines, and EGR electrical
>
> Suggests that operation of the EGR valve is monitored by a change in
> the air-fuel ration (from the O2 sensor, I guess), so that gives me
> some more to check.
>
> I can manually operate the EGR valve and know that it functions, but
> perhaps the vacuum line routing has a problem (something failed or
> disconnected).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> "Treeline" > wrote in message
> news:<gjo7e.13506$Xm3.8972@trndny01>...
>> "Greg Gall" > wrote in message
>> news:d117e.989273$6l.47492@pd7tw2no...
>> > Help!
>> >
>> > My '94 Plymouth Voyager 3.0 L keeps lighting the "check engine" light.
>> > When
>> > I check the code, it comes up as 32.
>> >
>> > This has me puzzled - according to the Haynes manual, code 32 means EGR
>> > failure on California models.
>> >
>> > Since my car is a Canadian model, does this code still apply?
>> > (There doesn't seem to be any circuitry for the EGR valve on the Van -
>> > it
>> > appears strictly vacuum operated)
>> >
>> > What could be causing this fault to occur?
>> >
>> > I plan on taking the vehicle on a long trip soon and I want to get this
>> > sorted out before I go.
>> >
>> > Thank you,
>> >
>> > Greg
>> > greg.gall AT mail.com
>>
>> 32 (1984 only) power loss/limited lamp or circuit
>> 32 EGR gases not working (1988) - check vacuum, valve
>> 32 (1990-92, all but Turbo) computer didn't see change in air/'fuel ratio
>> when
>> EGR activated - check valve, vacuum lines, and EGR electrical
>> http://www.allpar.com/fix/80s-codes.html
>>
>> Do you mean that outside of California, the vehicles do not have EGR
>> valves if
>> they are made in 1994?
>>
>> I see your confusion. Can you still the sticker on the bottom side of you
>> hood
>> which lists perhaps the layout of your emissions control system? Does it
>> mention any clues?
>>
>> Generally, how are your vacuum or emission lines and the PCV valve and
>> things
>> like that? I am not a mechanic so I don't know if they segue into code
>> 32.
>> Someone here might know exactly what Code 32 means for the 1994 3.0
>> Voyager.
>> You can also check your VIN to make sure your engine is not the
>> California
>> variant. I often thought, perhaps erroneously, that Canada had strict
>> regulations which were near what California had. But I could be very
>> wrong
>> about that in this case.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, Greg Gall wrote:

> In Canada, generally the emissions requirements are a lot looser than
> they are anywhere in the US.

False. US Federal "49-state" and Canadian emissions requirements have been
virtually identical, except for minor labelling requirements, since 1988.

> Some companies (such as Honda in the past) have chosen to release
> Canadian-specific cars, which have less emissions control equipment.

The key being "in the past". This greatly declined in the late 1970s, when
GM stopped offering cars with optional non-catalyst exhaust systems, and
went away in the mid 1980s, when Volvo stopped selling carbureted(!) 240s,
for instance.

> Because the population density is much lower in Canada

False. Overall population density is lower, sure, but population density
*in populated areas* is similar to analogous US areas.

> we haven't see a bad enough pollution problem to warrant a lot of fuss
> over emissions equipment on vehicles.

False. Been to Toronto? Vancouver, Calgary? Canada's big cities have
major, major air quality problems, of such magnitude that unhealthy air is
measured in rural areas far from those cities. Environment Canada has
known about this for many years, which is why emission requirements have
tightened considerably over the last few decades.

> It does give me a hint as to what is wrong. The Haynes manual only
> mentions that code as being applicable for California models

Haynes = trash. Get a *FACTORY* service manual.

> 32 (1990-92, all but Turbo) computer didn't see change in air/'fuel
> ratio when EGR activated - check valve, vacuum lines, and EGR
> electrical

Not a completely accurate description of what the code means. It means
that the EGR system is seen not to be working -- on some systems it's
checked via the O2S, and on some systems it's checked via the crankshaft
sensor, and on some systems other methods are used.

DS

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, Mike wrote:

> With Eng at normal operating temp, open the throttle quickly while
> watching the EGR valve. It should open as the engine starts to pick up
> revs.

This kind of test was valid in the 1970s and '80s when EGR controls were
strictly vacuum operated. It is no longer a reliable test now that EGR
operation is controlled by the ECM (SBEC, in this case).

> With Eng off. Disconnect vacuum line to EGR from vacuum source. Manually
> push open the EGR valve.

Again, this is a '70s-'80s test. Most EGR valves used in the last 2
decades don't have an accessible stem that can be manually pushed open.

The guy's working on a '94 Voyager, not a '74 Duster.

DS

Thanks for the advice Daniel,

How do you suggest I check the crankshaft sensor, if that is the method used
on my car?

Regarding pollution problems, yes, I have been to Vancouver and Toronto and
currently live in Calgary. I see the pollution problem but I also hear
everyone else saying, "this is nothing compared to X" where X is LA or NY or
some even larger place. I don't really care about how bad it is there - I
just care about how bad it is here and think that more action ought to be
taken immediately. I think it is inexcusable that we don't have emissions
testing here! It seems like I am always stuck behind a taxi that has 500,000
Km on the engine and is at the point that it consumes as much oil as gas -
these guys should be off the road!

I believe that I did state that most Canadian-spec cars are now virtually
identical to 49-state cars:
> they are anywhere in the US. Most vehicles that are sold here just use
> standard 49-state US emissions equipment. Some companies (such as


As an aside, I was recently visiting LA and was amazed at how breathable the
air was compared to my last visit around 1980. I commend the agressive
approach they have taken to vehicle emissions.

Anyhow, this has little to do with fixing my car, "Treeline" had simply
asked why a Canadian spec Voyager would have the vacuum based EGR valve and
not the fancy electronic one fitted to California models.

Greg

"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message
n.umich.edu...
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2005, Greg Gall wrote:
>
>> In Canada, generally the emissions requirements are a lot looser than
>> they are anywhere in the US.
>
> False. US Federal "49-state" and Canadian emissions requirements have been
> virtually identical, except for minor labelling requirements, since 1988.
>
>> Some companies (such as Honda in the past) have chosen to release
>> Canadian-specific cars, which have less emissions control equipment.
>
> The key being "in the past". This greatly declined in the late 1970s, when
> GM stopped offering cars with optional non-catalyst exhaust systems, and
> went away in the mid 1980s, when Volvo stopped selling carbureted(!) 240s,
> for instance.
>
>> Because the population density is much lower in Canada
>
> False. Overall population density is lower, sure, but population density
> *in populated areas* is similar to analogous US areas.
>
>> we haven't see a bad enough pollution problem to warrant a lot of fuss
>> over emissions equipment on vehicles.
>
> False. Been to Toronto? Vancouver, Calgary? Canada's big cities have
> major, major air quality problems, of such magnitude that unhealthy air is
> measured in rural areas far from those cities. Environment Canada has
> known about this for many years, which is why emission requirements have
> tightened considerably over the last few decades.
>
>> It does give me a hint as to what is wrong. The Haynes manual only
>> mentions that code as being applicable for California models
>
> Haynes = trash. Get a *FACTORY* service manual.
>
>> 32 (1990-92, all but Turbo) computer didn't see change in air/'fuel
>> ratio when EGR activated - check valve, vacuum lines, and EGR
>> electrical
>
> Not a completely accurate description of what the code means. It means
> that the EGR system is seen not to be working -- on some systems it's
> checked via the O2S, and on some systems it's checked via the crankshaft
> sensor, and on some systems other methods are used.
>
> DS

Thanks for the excellent advice Mike!

I will give it a go.

Since the EGR valve is just as you describe - vacuum operated, it should be
very helpful to my diagnostics...

Thanks,

Greg
"Mike" > wrote in message
. ..
>A couple of quick checks.
>
> With Eng at normal operating temp, open the throttle quickly while
> watching the EGR valve. It should open as the engine starts to pick up
> revs. It will close as you back off the throttle, or as the engine RPM
> gets toward the higher range. (There is often a stem that can be observed
> to see if the valve opens and closes.)
>
> With Eng off. Disconnect vacuum line to EGR from vacuum source. Manually
> push open the EGR valve. It should open with out being sticky. Release it
> and it should close by itself under spring pressure. If not, or it feels
> sticky, replace the EGR valve. You should also notice air drawing into the
> vacuum hose and them expelling as it closes.
>
> Reopen the EGR valve and Stop the end of the vacuum line with your thumb.
> The EGR valve must stay open. If it does the EGR valve vacuum diaphragm
> and EGR vacuum hose are both good. The system seams ok and should operate
> correctly. If it does not stay open, remove the vacuum hose from the EGR
> valve itself. Manually open the valve and block the EGR valve vacuum
> connection. If it now stays open, replace the vacuum hose. If it still
> does not stay open, replace the EGR valve (the internal diaphragm is
> leaking).
>
> Also EGR leaks/failures can be caused by a leaking EGR valve gasket under
> the valve mount. Can only be checked by removing valve, and if you remove
> the valve, then for sure you need a new gasket anyway. Some Chrysler EGR
> systems also use an EGR tube to get exhaust gas from the manifold or
> exhaust, to the EGR valve - if this is present, a cracked, broken or
> otherwise leaking EGR supply tube can cause EGR system failure and codes.
>
> "Greg Gall" > wrote in message
> om...
>> In Canada, generally the emissions requirements are a lot looser than
>> they are anywhere in the US. Most vehicles that are sold here just use
>> standard 49-state US emissions equipment. Some companies (such as
>> Honda in the past) have chosen to release Canadian-specific cars,
>> which have less emissions control equipment. Because the population
>> density is much lower in Canada, we haven't see a bad enough pollution
>> problem to warrant a lot of fuss over emissions equipment on vehicles.
>> Personally, I think it is stupid for the government to wait for a
>> problem to exist before they take action!
>>
>> Thanks for the codes,
>>
>> It does give me a hint as to what is wrong. The Haynes manual only
>> mentions that code as being applicable for California models, which
>> have an electronically controlled EGR valve (has an electrical
>> solenoid in it). Looking at my EGR valve, it is completely mechanical
>> (no electronics), operating strictly off of vacuum. The
>> troubleshooting procedure in the Haynes manual suggested checking for
>> opens or shorts in the solenoid - obviously not applicable to my car.
>>
>> The following code:
>>> 32 (1990-92, all but Turbo) computer didn't see change in air/'fuel
>>> ratio when
>>> EGR activated - check valve, vacuum lines, and EGR electrical
>>
>> Suggests that operation of the EGR valve is monitored by a change in
>> the air-fuel ration (from the O2 sensor, I guess), so that gives me
>> some more to check.
>>
>> I can manually operate the EGR valve and know that it functions, but
>> perhaps the vacuum line routing has a problem (something failed or
>> disconnected).
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>
>>
>> "Treeline" > wrote in message
>> news:<gjo7e.13506$Xm3.8972@trndny01>...
>>> "Greg Gall" > wrote in message
>>> news:d117e.989273$6l.47492@pd7tw2no...
>>> > Help!
>>> >
>>> > My '94 Plymouth Voyager 3.0 L keeps lighting the "check engine" light.
>>> > When
>>> > I check the code, it comes up as 32.
>>> >
>>> > This has me puzzled - according to the Haynes manual, code 32 means
>>> > EGR
>>> > failure on California models.
>>> >
>>> > Since my car is a Canadian model, does this code still apply?
>>> > (There doesn't seem to be any circuitry for the EGR valve on the Van -
>>> > it
>>> > appears strictly vacuum operated)
>>> >
>>> > What could be causing this fault to occur?
>>> >
>>> > I plan on taking the vehicle on a long trip soon and I want to get
>>> > this
>>> > sorted out before I go.
>>> >
>>> > Thank you,
>>> >
>>> > Greg
>>> > greg.gall AT mail.com
>>>
>>> 32 (1984 only) power loss/limited lamp or circuit
>>> 32 EGR gases not working (1988) - check vacuum, valve
>>> 32 (1990-92, all but Turbo) computer didn't see change in air/'fuel
>>> ratio when
>>> EGR activated - check valve, vacuum lines, and EGR electrical
>>> http://www.allpar.com/fix/80s-codes.html
>>>
>>> Do you mean that outside of California, the vehicles do not have EGR
>>> valves if
>>> they are made in 1994?
>>>
>>> I see your confusion. Can you still the sticker on the bottom side of
>>> you hood
>>> which lists perhaps the layout of your emissions control system? Does it
>>> mention any clues?
>>>
>>> Generally, how are your vacuum or emission lines and the PCV valve and
>>> things
>>> like that? I am not a mechanic so I don't know if they segue into code
>>> 32.
>>> Someone here might know exactly what Code 32 means for the 1994 3.0
>>> Voyager.
>>> You can also check your VIN to make sure your engine is not the
>>> California
>>> variant. I often thought, perhaps erroneously, that Canada had strict
>>> regulations which were near what California had. But I could be very
>>> wrong
>>> about that in this case.
>
>

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005, Greg Gall wrote:

> Thanks for the advice Daniel,
>
> How do you suggest I check the crankshaft sensor, if that is the method
> used on my car?

With a scan tool.

DS

On Fri, 15 Apr 2005, Greg Gall wrote:

> Thanks for the excellent advice Mike!

Amazing.

A guy gives you advice that is totally irrelevant to your vehicle, and
suggests outdated tests that were last applicable in the early 1980s, and
you thank him for the "excellent" advice, based on...um...

....um...

....what, exactly?