Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Google “stratus p-0740” got me the following possibles:
Poor fluid condition. Full flush & fill.
Solenoid fail. Buried in trans, requires trans pull.
Converter clutch fail. Requires new converter, trans pull.
Trans valve body issue. Requires valve body service, possible trans pull & rebuild.
Internal trans leak. Requires trans pull and rebuild.
Any of the above can cause the p-0740 fault. Sorry it’s not better news. Chrysler is kinda known for trans issues like this.
See your fuel system checks through to the end. I still think your main fault is that check valve.
I only mentioned the evap system because the one I had hands on started off with “little” weird problems like yours, and devolved into bigger weirder problems like taking 10 mins. to put gas in it and not running with the tank more than 3/4 full. Never threw a code. Something to be aware of if all else fails.
A friend’s wife had a 2006.5 Sonata, so I feel your pain on the parts issue. What we found was that decoding the vin was less than helpful. One thing a Haynes manual will have lots of that will be invaluable to you is PICTURES. Knowing what parts from what years look like is a god-send.
Something these cars are kinda known for is dodgy evap components. It sounds very much like it’s that check valve, but if not I would look there next.
Fuel pressure test kits can be had fairly cheaply and easily. If it’s not something you think you’ll use often enough to warrant a purchase, ask about “renting” one instead. Most major parts houses do that now for specialty tools.
SorSorry to double post. Just found this on Wikipedia about the 1.3 endura/kent engine.
“Another reason is the large tappet clearance on the exhaust valve. This could of course be reduced to lower the noise level but the engine would then suffer from a rough idle and usually stalled.”
Another valve adjustment may be all it needs, but don’t hope too greatly.
Jesus dude, those data plots look awful. There’s some info missing from the charts that would make some things clearer, but I think I get the idea. I will come out and admit I’m from America, so I have never seen or heard of your car before, BUT all cars work the same way so basic engine theory should still apply. I see two possibles:
1: damaged or incorrectly installed valve(s). This would cause the rough running you describe, but isn’t reflected in the data so well. Have a shop run a compression check. Low or uneven numbers on one or more cylinders will point to this as a possible cause.
2: improperly installed timing belt/chain. This will cause rough running too, and is an easy mistake to make. From what I can see in your data, this seems most likely. To put it simply, the cam and crankshaft will not be aligned correctly. The engine *can* run this way, but the computer has to work very hard to compensate. Your ignition timing seems to show the computer “searching” for the correct pattern to use, failing, and trying again. Up down up down up down… The other plots do this too. Up and down when the correct answer is in the middle, but it can’t use the middle because the cam isn’t where it should be. “Like a blind man in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn’t there.”
A third possible is that a sensor or vacuum hose failed or isn’t connected properly, but an obd2 check would show this pretty quickly.
I hope this helps, and I wish you luck my friend!
Sounds very much like CV joints/axles to me, assuming front wheel drive. With your tie rods already gone, other parts of your front drive line needing work isn’t out of the question. On front wheel drive cars, it’s rare for parts to wear out “in a vacuum” due to how interconnected steering/suspension/drive train are. Check as many bushings, linkages, boots, and bearings as you can for wear.
If we’re just talking about stock replacement parts, if it’s sold by a known retailer as being for your car, it should fit. Getting a Haynes/Chilton manual for your car and learning what you’re getting yourself into and what year-by-year changes to look out for is never a bad idea. If you’re talking about performance “upgrades,” that’s a whole ‘mother can of worms.
A bit about pads & shoes some may not know. When you buy new pads or shoes, there will be a two-letter code printed on the side of the friction material, usually EE, FF, or FE.
The farther down the alphabet you go, the greater the coefficient of friction (stickiness) of the friction material. So, D<E<F<G. D is garbage. G and up is mostly reserved for race pads. E is suitable for most drivers. F is a better choice for more spirited driving and climates with extreme heat.
Why two letters? The first letter is friction when cold. The second letter is friction when hot. EE & FF will have more consistent braking performance across a broader range of driving conditions. FE…won't. They will fade noticeably. There's not really a good reason to buy these. Consistent, predictable braking is king. EE as your economy and "normal duty" choice, FF for performance and heavy traffic applications, and FE for…paperweights?
In our family, it’s a tie between two fords:
’85 Ford Tempo. How has nobody mentioned this little gem yet? Ate map sensors like skittles. Junk transmissions (ours was a case failure). An unbelievable amount of chassis flex, you could feel the doors shifting around in their sills while driving. Creaked like it had a mast instead of an engine. Engine was the 2.3L HSC. Basically a 200-I6 with cyls 3&4 cut out the middle and a different head. Both engine and throttle-body injection were uniqe to the car, along with loads of other parts, so trips to the parts house were…interesting. “The 2.3L. No, the other 2.3L. No, the OTHER other 2.3L.” Also a victim of Ford’s early forays into “non-serviceable” and “lifetime” parts. Warped rotors? Good news, you get new bearings too! Why? They’re both permanently affixed to the new steering knuckles you get too…
’02 Taurus wagon. Ohio winters were not kind, and now that it’s in TX, nobody will touch it. Things that should take minutes or hours take days or weeks. Bad sensors. Siezed brakes. Compressor clutch failed, sheared the input shaft, and wedged the pully against the frame rail taking out the entire accessory drive and making driveway repair impossible. All that aside, the thing is impossible to drive well. The only way to drive with any level of competence is to approach it like a u-haul. Do everything slowly and deliberately, while accounting for massive blind spots. It’s car-shaped, but bad at doing car…things. Like turning. And stopping. The goofy body shape makes such a bad joke of the cargo area and loading it’s almost insulting. I drive a ’91 Camry wagon that’s fairly comparable. High-trim, v6, auto, power everything. I think it says a lot that a car that’s 10 yrs older with twice the mileage shows less wear, is more reliable, and is largely a better car in every way than this POS is.