RPM's at 80 MPH
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 28
From: Vegas
yes, mine is a early 2003
CC works up to the difference between gear rations...ie 3.53 is 5% shorter so 89*.95 = 85 MPH as the new limit instead of 89 MPH.
The one problem is that if you drive over 85 MPH at all it can disable the CC.
CC works up to the difference between gear rations...ie 3.53 is 5% shorter so 89*.95 = 85 MPH as the new limit instead of 89 MPH.
The one problem is that if you drive over 85 MPH at all it can disable the CC.
^^^ I wonder why the fact that mine works in all scenarios up to 90mph?
In any event, I'm not sure why there are reports of cc not working at all... but it's clear that not all will lose cc...
In any event, I'm not sure why there are reports of cc not working at all... but it's clear that not all will lose cc...
^My theory is they changed it in 04.5 when they changed everything else (like the shift logic)
With yours it sets the code, but doesn't disable the cruise (just won't set over what is thinks is 90)
But with Johns if he trys to set it, it sets the code AND disables the cc until however many startup cycles it takes to clear the code.
Of course that's still just a theory based on the information in this thread.
With yours it sets the code, but doesn't disable the cruise (just won't set over what is thinks is 90)
But with Johns if he trys to set it, it sets the code AND disables the cc until however many startup cycles it takes to clear the code.
Of course that's still just a theory based on the information in this thread.
My 03 is one month newer than Toll's, so I'm assuming my CC should work the same his does unless Venus and Jupiter align differently in Utah vs Kansas and cause the CC to flake out at speeds below 86mph. As long as the CC works below 76mph, I'll be really happy. It's finally starting to warm up in KC so maybe I'll install this thing next weekend. I might get under the car this weekend and hit some of the bolts/nuts with PB Blaster. My biggest concern is that rear diff cover bolt. Hopefully I can get my impact on that one to reduce the chances of it cross-threading.
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 28
From: Vegas
^My theory is they changed it in 04.5 when they changed everything else (like the shift logic)
With yours it sets the code, but doesn't disable the cruise (just won't set over what is thinks is 90)
But with Johns if he trys to set it, it sets the code AND disables the cc until however many startup cycles it takes to clear the code.
Of course that's still just a theory based on the information in this thread.
With yours it sets the code, but doesn't disable the cruise (just won't set over what is thinks is 90)
But with Johns if he trys to set it, it sets the code AND disables the cc until however many startup cycles it takes to clear the code.
Of course that's still just a theory based on the information in this thread.
My 03 is one month newer than Toll's, so I'm assuming my CC should work the same his does unless Venus and Jupiter align differently in Utah vs Kansas and cause the CC to flake out at speeds below 86mph. As long as the CC works below 76mph, I'll be really happy. It's finally starting to warm up in KC so maybe I'll install this thing next weekend. I might get under the car this weekend and hit some of the bolts/nuts with PB Blaster. My biggest concern is that rear diff cover bolt. Hopefully I can get my impact on that one to reduce the chances of it cross-threading.
In that info I found in the FSM, it sounds like the TCU (early 2003 through 2004.5) has the wheel speed sensor go through it. I think when they revised the TCU they sent the signal straight to the ECU and because of that the transmission signal sent to the ECU isn't comparing driveline speed vs wheel speed so the problem is eliminated.
That seems reasonable, though I believe Mike's still set the same code, it just didn't disable the cruise... I'm I on track here Mike?
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 28
From: Vegas
well, that would be possible too. Maybe the engineers just figured that there was no need to compare rear wheel speed to driveline speed anymore....considered the first setup a little oversight? Or maybe they just widened the threshold a little more?
According to www.Infinitihelp.com the 2005 and 2006 RWD 5AT Sedan was made with 3.3 FD and the 5AT AWD and the 6MT both had 3.5 FD
I see no info on the AWD and 6MT models of 2003-2004, but the RWD 5AT models have 3.3 FD
I see no info on the AWD and 6MT models of 2003-2004, but the RWD 5AT models have 3.3 FD
Wait, I just thought about something... I'm too lazy to read this entire thread again... but did we ever figure out if the 03/04 MT models had 3.3 or 3.5 FD? Because if the AT and MT had the same FD that would be a reason for the computer to be more sensitive to a change, whereas later when the AT had a 3.3 and the MT had a 3.5 it would be easier to just widen the margin so both FDs would work.
wait, i just thought about something... I'm too lazy to read this entire thread again... But did we ever figure out if the 03/04 mt models had 3.3 or 3.5 fd? Because if the at and mt had the same fd that would be a reason for the computer to be more sensitive to a change, whereas later when the at had a 3.3 and the mt had a 3.5 it would be easier to just widen the margin so both fds would work.
99% sure its 3.5 (ppl have been swapping AT3.3 for MT3.5 for years - I'm sure if the 03-04 weren't 3.5 we would have heard about it years ago...)
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,684
Likes: 28
From: Vegas
all 6MTs have the 3.53 FD. It was paired up with the 6 speed that way. the 3.35 FD was put in the 5AT because there were lower number of gears and they wanted to keep HWY driving as economical as possible.