^^^ further kills the myth...

I'm curious if yours works Dave...

John is yours a version1 car (early 03)?

 

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.

 

^^^ 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...

 

^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.

 

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.

The rear bolt should be the easiest to remove. Very hard for that one to get the rust that all the others had. I highly doubt you will have any issues in taking off the bolts. (You work out, remember?)

 

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?

 

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?

 

Looks like a great source of info. Can anyone chime in as to the accuracy of the information from Infintihelp? Looks good to me but there are those here that are more familiar with the FD ratios among years than I

 

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.

 

mt - 3.5

 

^What about pre 04.5 though?

 

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...)

 

^Oh ok. Just one of those random thoughts that crosses through my jumbled-up train wreck of a mind

 

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.