If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
Hi there,
Has anybody find the solution of the upcoming oil-pressure-light at idling? Hennie. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
Hennie wrote:
> Hi there, > > Has anybody find the solution of the upcoming oil-pressure-light at idling? > > Hennie. Yes. 99 times out of 100, it is simply a bad oil pressure switch turning the light on, but the pressure is actually OK. I won't go into the details (they have been discussed on here before), but you may or may not also find that the old switch is dripping oil. For the 1 chance in 100 that the pressure is actually low, you may want to pay to have a gage temporarily hooked up to measure the pressure to make sure it is in spec. Or you can simply replace the pressure switch and go on your merry way and probably be fine. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
"Bill Putney" > schreef in bericht ... > Hennie wrote: >> Hi there, >> >> Has anybody find the solution of the upcoming oil-pressure-light at >> idling? >> >> Hennie. > > Yes. 99 times out of 100, it is simply a bad oil pressure switch turning > the light on, but the pressure is actually OK. I won't go into the > details (they have been discussed on here before), but you may or may not > also find that the old switch is dripping oil. > > For the 1 chance in 100 that the pressure is actually low, you may want to > pay to have a gage temporarily hooked up to measure the pressure to make > sure it is in spec. Or you can simply replace the pressure switch and go > on your merry way and probably be fine. > > Bill Putney > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address > with the letter 'x') Thank you Bill, one of these days I gonna replace the pressure switch and I let you know the result via this NG. Regards Hennie. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
"Bill Putney" > schreef in bericht ... > Hennie wrote: >> Hi there, >> >> Has anybody find the solution of the upcoming oil-pressure-light at >> idling? >> >> Hennie. > > Yes. 99 times out of 100, it is simply a bad oil pressure switch turning > the light on, but the pressure is actually OK. I won't go into the > details (they have been discussed on here before), but you may or may not > also find that the old switch is dripping oil. > > For the 1 chance in 100 that the pressure is actually low, you may want to > pay to have a gage temporarily hooked up to measure the pressure to make > sure it is in spec. Or you can simply replace the pressure switch and go > on your merry way and probably be fine. > > Bill Putney > (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address > with the letter 'x') Today I replaced the oil pressure swich. It was not a simple job to do. The switch is hidden behind a metal shield who is hard to remove wih standard tools. Anyway, the oil pressure light stays off when idling! Thanks again Bill. Hennie. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
Hennie wrote:
> "Bill Putney" > schreef in bericht > ... > >>Hennie wrote: >> >>>Hi there, >>> >>>Has anybody find the solution of the upcoming oil-pressure-light at >>>idling? >>> >>>Hennie. >> >>Yes. 99 times out of 100, it is simply a bad oil pressure switch turning >>the light on, but the pressure is actually OK. I won't go into the >>details (they have been discussed on here before), but you may or may not >>also find that the old switch is dripping oil. >> >>For the 1 chance in 100 that the pressure is actually low, you may want to >>pay to have a gage temporarily hooked up to measure the pressure to make >>sure it is in spec. Or you can simply replace the pressure switch and go >>on your merry way and probably be fine. >> >>Bill Putney >>(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address >>with the letter 'x') > > > Today I replaced the oil pressure swich. It was not a simple job to do. The > switch is hidden behind a metal shield who is hard to remove wih standard > tools. Anyway, the oil pressure light stays off when idling! Thanks again > Bill. > > Hennie. You're welcome - glad to help. As far as the difficulty - yeah, that is just the way things are with today's cars - they are so compacted and integrated (for weight, mileage, performance, and a host of electronics - some useful, some not so useful - but it's what we the consumer and the gov't demanded of the automakers) that ain't nothin' simple. Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
In article >,
Bill Putney > wrote: > As far as the difficulty - yeah, that is just the way things are with > today's cars - they are so compacted and integrated (for weight, > mileage, performance, and a host of electronics - some useful, some not > so useful - but it's what we the consumer and the gov't demanded of the > automakers) that ain't nothin' simple. A difficult to replace oil pressure switch is not the result of design complexity. It's simply lack of attention to ease of maintenance, probably driven by lowering manufacturing costs regardless of later maintenance costs. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
who wrote:
> In article >, > Bill Putney > wrote: > > >>As far as the difficulty - yeah, that is just the way things are with >>today's cars - they are so compacted and integrated (for weight, >>mileage, performance, and a host of electronics - some useful, some not >>so useful - but it's what we the consumer and the gov't demanded of the >>automakers) that ain't nothin' simple. > > > A difficult to replace oil pressure switch is not the result of design > complexity. It's simply lack of attention to ease of maintenance, > probably driven by lowering manufacturing costs regardless of later > maintenance costs. I disagree. His diffucilty was due to things being very crowded - the proverbial 10 pounds of stuff (sensors, modules, wiring, pipig, hoses, etc., etc., etc.) being forced into a 5 pound bag (shape and size envelope). The pressure switch had to go where it was because of the existing engine design. If you routed the switch to another location (piping), then you would simply have compounded the problem (weight, volume, complexity, cost). If things weren't so tight space-wise, perhaps the shield would not have needed to be removed, or perhaps could have been deleted entirely. Stick that switch any place else, and chances are there would already be another thing (or two) in that place that would have to be relocated. It snowballs. Bottom line: In any design, everything is a compromise. With things so tight, you can't fix one problem without making three others a lot worse. With things being jammed so tight, maintenance considerations have to take a back seat. Size, weight, power, fuel economy, initial cost, ease and cost of maintenance *cannot* all be 9's or 10's. Priorities are set - on any given vehicle, some aspects are a 3 so that others can be maybe 6 or 7. Start pushing any one aspect to an 8 or higher, and something has to give (in the opposite direction). Add even more stuff at the factory (full blown workstation computers, refrigerant loops in the seat cushion, and other crap that are being added to cars now), and all the numbers across the board will drop incrementally, and we'll keep wondering why a "simple" repair costs $500 or takes 3 trips to the dealer to be properly diagnosed. But we've done it to ourselves. Did I mention that this is one of my hot buttons? Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x') |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
Bill Putney wrote:
> Add even more stuff at the factory (full blown workstation computers, > refrigerant loops in the seat cushion, and other crap that are being > added to cars now), and all the numbers across the board will drop > incrementally, and we'll keep wondering why a "simple" repair costs $500 > or takes 3 trips to the dealer to be properly diagnosed. > > But we've done it to ourselves. > > Did I mention that this is one of my hot buttons? You and me both. I get into arguments here all the time with people who like to claim that modern cars are "so much more reliable" than older cars.... but my 13 year old car is already getting almost un-maintainable because of parts going out of production, semiconductor obsolesence, etc. whereas parts for my FORTY ONE year old car are still readily available. And cheap, too! So what if a modern engine can last half a million miles? The automated butt-scratching accessories and the cheap plastics all over the car will fall to bits around it in 10 years even if it only has 50,000 miles on it by then. I doubt any car made after 1990 will be maintainable when its over 40 years old. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
my 72 cuda is full of plastic that is just fine
Steve wrote: > Bill Putney wrote: > > > Add even more stuff at the factory (full blown workstation computers, > > refrigerant loops in the seat cushion, and other crap that are being > > added to cars now), and all the numbers across the board will drop > > incrementally, and we'll keep wondering why a "simple" repair costs $500 > > or takes 3 trips to the dealer to be properly diagnosed. > > > > But we've done it to ourselves. > > > > Did I mention that this is one of my hot buttons? > > You and me both. I get into arguments here all the time with people who > like to claim that modern cars are "so much more reliable" than older > cars.... but my 13 year old car is already getting almost > un-maintainable because of parts going out of production, semiconductor > obsolesence, etc. whereas parts for my FORTY ONE year old car are still > readily available. And cheap, too! So what if a modern engine can last > half a million miles? The automated butt-scratching accessories and the > cheap plastics all over the car will fall to bits around it in 10 years > even if it only has 50,000 miles on it by then. I doubt any car made > after 1990 will be maintainable when its over 40 years old. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Sebring 2.7 2001
philthy wrote:
> my 72 cuda is full of plastic that is just fine > So is my '73, actually. The '66 has NO plastic, the 69 R/T has some, and the 73 Satellite is all plastic as is the 93 Eagle. But its kinda funny- they can now make the dashboard vinyl last a lot longer than the old dashes did, but all the hard plastics in modern cars get brittle as potato chips after 10 years or so. My 73 has one big dashboard crack, but all the hard plastic is perfect. The 93 on the other hand has a perfect dash, but every AC vent is falling apart, the cupholder is cracked, and all the hard panels and trim around the door handles are breaking apart. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Reposts - 2001 Chrysler Sebring LXi Convertible Silver fvl (2001 NAIAS) F.jpg 251049 bytes | HEMI-Powered @ [email protected] | Car Show Photos | 0 | April 18th 07 11:16 AM |
Reposts - 2001 Chrysler Sebring LX Convertible Red fvl (2001 NAIAS) F.jpg 230686 bytes | HEMI-Powered @ [email protected] | Car Show Photos | 0 | April 18th 07 11:16 AM |
Reposts - 2001 Chrysler Sebring Convertible Interior (2001 NAIAS) F.jpg 199807 bytes | HEMI-Powered @ [email protected] | Car Show Photos | 0 | April 18th 07 11:16 AM |
2.7 In 2001 Sebring Sedan | [email protected] | Chrysler | 6 | March 15th 07 01:01 PM |
Sebring 2001 | edjar | Chrysler | 1 | August 11th 06 11:24 AM |