KATOOM

Well bummer..... It did it again today. Ambient was about 55* and the overhead said 59* because its parked in the garage. What I "thought" happened this time was the grids cycled while the wait to start light was illuminated. Then I started the engine and after about 5 seconds the check engine lights up.....code thrown. What I'm not sure about is why the data says the IAT was reading 71.6*. What cha think?

Well finally.....

I was thinking that too and will certainly check if I get the code again. I actually have a spare IAT sitting around I picked up for some reason I cant remember..... But that said, I can pull up the IAT readings on my scanner at the time of the code and the IAT temps were normal with the ambient temps so I'm only guessing at this point that the IAT was reading correctly and the grids weren't generating any heat from a possibly loose connection. I'll have to wait and see.....

WHAT????? I'd certainly like to hear more about this since I'm currently in the beginning stages of equipping my home with solar. I've been researching for a few months and was going to do the typical ground mount panel system tied into the grid but the more I get into this rabbit hole the more I'm wondering if going completely off the grid would be better. Not sure..... But I can tell ya that 400 watt doesnt seem to be near enough since my current usage is going to require a 10k - 12k system just to zero my utility bill.

It looks like people are more using Eternabond as a permanent fix instead of the temporary fix until you can get it done right..... I've used the stuff and it works amazing. But 1) you cant expect it to do miracles, and 2) it does require proper prepping procedures with primers, and not placing it on existing silicone if you want it to work. But as with most things in life.....people tend not to follow the rules and then get upset with things dont work. Hey I'm certainly guilty of simply wiping the area with a dry rag and sticking it down when I was in a hurry..... Thats not me making the assumption that anyone in this thread has done this but I'm also a member of a few RV forums and applying Eternabond correctly is a well discussed topic.

I'm glad to read this because I've been toying with the idea of getting a portable 200 watt solar panel. Idea being that I could still park in the shaded areas but still have my panels facing in the sun and potentially help offset my night time battery usage. I'm still wavering on what, how, or how many watts I'd need or want though.....or even if its worth it.

The Wizard plays two parts..... This particular converter automatically maintains storage voltage at 13.2, but every 21 hours for a period of 15 minutes it will bump the voltage up to 14.4 to prevent battery stratification & sulfation. The remote pendant attachment allows you to manually select what mode the converter is in for times like running the generator where you want to force boost mode. Pretty cool little device.

As pointed out already, two 6 volt batteries will offer better amp hours over time when compared to two equivalent amp hour 12 volt batteries simply because 6 volt batteries have more lead in them. But one item which will make your camping experiences better when running off battery power is having a smart converter when the RV/trailer is connected to shore power. Smart converters like Progressive Dynamics 9200 series will run in four modes to keep the batteries in their best and highest charge for maximum time when unplugged. Other cheap converters wont do that and can even destroy batteries by overcharging them. I have the PD unit with the Wizard attachment and it works great. I also recently bought a pair of US batteries

My trailer is long and the gutter material for RV's seemingly only comes in lengths of about 20 feet or so. That means that the gutters are pieced together in a couple spots over the entire length of the trailer. Well one of the gutter seams happens to be located right above a window, and a small stream of water escaping that gap between the two gutter sections was running down the trailer side right onto the window frame. And it just so happened that the window seal was barely loose enough that it allowed enough water to find its way into a small open spot and wick its way right into the trailer. The odds..... But thankfully I enter the trailer often in bad weather just to make sure all is well and I found the leak before it did any damage. My trailer has fiberglass sides so I took a piece of duct tape and ran it across the top of the window frame until the rains stopped. Then when the weather let up I pulled the window out, let it all fully dry in there, and used an abundance of sealant when I re-installed it. I also ran some sealant material on the inside of the gutters at the seam to help stop water from running down the sides again. What you use for sealant is also important as most RV people will tell you not to use the everyday silicone but some other RV compatible material. So in point, you'd be amazed where the slightest leak can find its way in. Unless its down pouring outside, you can generally find the route the culprit water is taking and possibly block its path. Another items which is a much have at all times in an RV/trailer is Eternabond tape. Stuff is amazing and will make a quick fix out of most situations. Especially like accidentally running against a tree and damaging the roof. The only thing it doesn't stick well to is silicone. Check out some RV forums and you'll find most people carry a roll with them all the time.

Over the past couple weeks when I start up during a cold morning I'd happen to get the occasional P1291 code for the lack of intake heat. I'd clear the code and then it wouldn't happen again for a few days or so, depending on how many times I drove the truck. Strange part is when it would throw the code, I'd immediately shut down, check with a reader, clear the code, and start up again. All would be fine. I thought maybe I have a bad or sticky relay that just happened free up, so I checked around to see who has them. Thankfully they're readily available but they're not cheap either. Before I went and spent the money I thought I'd do a full diagnostic just to be sure..... I checked the small orange and yellow wires for continuity. I checked all the large cables at the solenoid and to the grids and the battery. The only connections that gave me reason for doubt was the small orange and yellow wires which were a tad loose. Their push on springy fitting had the slightest amount of movement in them on the stud as if the springy connector wasn't as tight as it could be. I wiggled them around and tried to smash the spring tighter with my fingers. Not a lot of room down there..... Then I started the engine and checked everything as the grids cycled. For those who dont already know, both of the grids initially heat up when the WTS light is on and then they alternate as they cycle when the engines idling. Meaning as the engine idles they both dont heat up at the same time but only one grid heats up while the other is off, and they trade during the next cycle. Nonetheless, everything seemingly works and the code wasnt thrown when performing the diagnostics. So my question is, has anyone found that their grid heater relays were sticky or worked randomly? I dont live in an area where road salts are used and there is ZERO corrosion on this truck and everything is clean and tight.

I will always stop to help someone "if" I believe they truly need the help. But I have to say that this post left me feeling cold and sad.

Pucker factor scale 1 -10. Receives 11. Not sure I would have been standing there after those tree's started uprooting on their own.....

Its hard to force air to go down so if its possible to set it facing up.....

Again, you and I agree for the most part and there's no opposition from me. I'm just simply trying to make it clear why I chose what I chose. Because in regards to group size and CCA, what was available to me was 34's (1000ca / 800cca / 110 rc) or 65's (1000ca / 850cca / 150 rc). There was a couple 27's out there (940ca / 750cca / 100 rc) but not very many. Its almost as if 27's are falling out of style since very few applications use them so very few of them are even carried at the actual store locations. Also what I learned when looking for batteries is the best option is not so much the actual cranking amps above the OEM specs (as you point out too) but rather the reserve capacity. Finding the highest RC is best because it defines the batteries ability to do the job best suited for those CA's listed. But CA and RC seemingly can go hand in hand so its hard to find a low CA "starting" battery with high reserve. Deep cell is obviously different. So if I could have found 34's or 27's with a higher RC then that would have been my choice. and if mere CA's were all I was after then I can guarantee 31's would have been what would have shopped for. I was certainly interesting to see what is available but in the end I simply reverted back to what the 2002 year called for instead of 2001. Thats all I'm saying..... As for why my batteries failed..... Well I'm not sure I'd say they "failed" or didn't last as long as they should because they were going on 7 years and the truck did crank fine. Clearly not cranking as fast as I remembered it could, but batteries do deteriorate over time. Had I not been concerned with causing electrical issues or stressing the diodes I absolutely would have kept them for probably another year or so until they left me stranded. So I cant really say they didn't last as long as they should because in reality they did. I kept them clean and full of water and dont do a lot of hot weather driving in this truck so they probably lived a comfortable life aside from having to power up some serious energy hogging grid elements during the winter. I actually thought about just replacing them with the same thing since I obviously got my money out of them and hopefully the same product would have repeated the valiant effort. But again, RC was my new determining factor and we shall see if it pays off.....

Dont read more into the reason why I updated this thread Mike. Yes I got 65's over the 27's or 34' but.....65's are still OEM size for your year truck. But all that said, the biggest difference I wanted to point out was not how much better the engine cranked but rather "why" it cranked faster, and "what else" the weak battery(s) just so happen to cause..... So I dont really care what battery size someone wants as long as it meets minimum OEM specs, but to assume they're in better condition than they are has obviously made the a$$ of me.

I just thought I'd update the thread as to what I did..... I decided to go with the amazing deal Costco has on Interstate batteries at around $90 each. My truck sizing is group 27 or 34. In 2002 Dodge included group 65 but my battery tray had one little plastic edge that stops the passenger side from fitting correctly. So because I wanted the 850 CCA and 150 reserve of the group 65's, I trimmed the 1/4" plastic nub off the battery tray and it fit perfect. The drivers side fit fine without any modifying. The top hold downs needed to be messed with though because they're not wide enough for 65's so I just moved their corners to accommodate. Easy peasy and looks nice. After hooking everything up I tested them out. WOW.....I seemingly forgot how fast these engines can crank. Truck lights up almost faster than I can get off the key. I'm impressed. But all that said, this brings up a very important point I think needs to be addressed..... My batteries were 6 years old. I seemingly haven't had any trouble cranking the engine so why even consider replacing them right? Starts fine every time and the alternator tested OK too. But the trouble with a dual battery system is ya never know their true condition unless you test them independently of each other. And.....after switching these batteries out I think that one of them was probably much weaker and was lagging the system. Unfortunately I didnt know this either because my initial knee-jerk impression was it was starting fine and they were clean. Heck, if you check around its more a trophy for people to let them sit there until they're completely done. The other reason which raised some concern after the battery change was, my truck inherited an odd cold engine lope after installing the RV275's. I researched around but no one ever shared the similar change so I thought I was on my own. Obviously I attributed the new characteristic to the injectors since it was right after I installed them.....but strangely there has been zero lope after changing out the batteries. Idles smoother than ever. So, in point, I've always felt that these trucks are unbelievably sensitive to electronic anomalies but I've only confirmed my own logic by my truck inevitably thanking me for giving it some new batteries.

I couldn't tell by those Rockauto pictures what bearing was what, nor if was they listed was the same bearing as I purchased. All I know is the SKF I discussed in that other thread was stout and nothing like the OEM version. I cant comment on any "grove" in the sleeve either. Maybe.....maybe not. I wouldn't think a small grove would do anything but cause a one time hang up when you pressed the clutch pedal. Not to say that little catch wouldnt be annoying If thats what you're feeling..... And yes, leaving the transfer case attached still means you have to undo the driveshafts and drop the cross member but leaving it up on the jack and only pulling it back far enough to get in there made the whole event much quicker. Still a pain though.....

Sounds like the least costly move..... And yes, I mean pull the tranny back just enough to see and reach in the bell housing. Thats only about 8 to 10 inches and you can leave the transfer case attached while they're both strapped to a tranny jack. I loathed having to do it again in such short time but I knew something was up and I wasn't going to chance ruining an expensive clutch system just for sake of convenience. But that said.....I confirmed my issue with the fork movement "before" pulling the tranny too. So I wasnt just willy nilly with how I approached it.

The rear drums on these trucks are notorious for being a tad grabby during the first few touches of the brake pedal on wet or humid days. Sometimes just making sure they're adjusted correctly will help with any grabby brake attitudes. Also make sure you engage the e-brake when sometimes rolling backwards. I do this every once in awhile and I can even hear the star wheel ratchet a click if it ever needs to move (they dont move often). Stuck, rusted, seized star adjusters are VERY common so the rears eventually stop pulling their weight over time and then all you have is the front discs getting hot and wearing out fast. And.....then resulting in threads about people complaining because their 2nd gen trucks dont have good brakes. But as for grabbing really hard or severe lock up issues all the time..... Thats usually a sign of leaking axle seals or leaking brake cylinders contaminating the shoes. A faulty proportioning valve can also cause either axle to pull more load than it should be, meaning the rear brakes power is reduced as the truck sits higher or have more power as it sits lower.

Well here's my logic as to what I thought caused mine to do what it did..... The grease contamination from clutch dust affected the lubrication as the throwout moved across the shaft. Maybe the difference in time is because your clutch is different company, different material, or had more initial break in dust, and/or maybe you slip the clutch more that I do. There doesn't have to be such a black and white reason..... When I pulled my tranny back to investigate, I took notice that the grease on the input shaft sleeve was clearly crudded up. Obviously not what someone would want on there. But.....this was the kicker part I cant confirm. I believe there also was a problem with the overall specs of the SB throwout bearing, meaning it was in spec but possibly fitting tighter than the new SFK throwout bearing I changed it out for. Remember, these throwout bearings are built to OEM specs by a third party supplier. Who that is?.....know one seems to know, but I'm guessing China. So because the specs were potentially a tad less tolerant and with a combination of the grease thickened up, it resulted in a sticky clutch pedal, which also was more problematic when things were warmer too. A part I didnt include in that other thread. Which is why I'm very insistent that you MUST pull the slave when everything is warmed up and the clutch pedal is feeling sticky and then assess the movement of the throwout. No matter if things are hot or cold, that throwout bearing should move with effortless ease along the sleeve. And the lack of grease on the fork face would offer a very minor change in how things feel. As you pointed out yourself, the area thats greased is tiny and is only there to allow the bearing to rock on the fork face as everything moves. Not much else going on so any lack of grease will result in just a little added wear over time. So.....again, you can replace the hydro's and see what happens or pull the tranny back. Maybe Valair also mentioned that a bad pressure plate will cause an odd feel in the clutch pedal too but usually such an issue creates a jerky clutch engagement feel too because the pressure plate isnt moving geometrically flat along its movement.

I dont know what else I can tell you..... I was serious before and I'm just as serious now. You have TWO options. Replace the hydro's (which whatever brand or choice you desire since they all work) and see if that was the problem.....or pull the tranny back just enough to peer in the bell housing and see if you can determine whether or not the throwout is moving without resistance. Did you not see this thread I created not very long ago? I may help you understand what I mean. http://www.cumminsforum.com/forum/98-5-02-powertrain/1919017-just-installed-skf-throwout-bearing-wow.html

This is why posting video's can be more helpful..... Because that video shows a perfectly normal gauge operation. You're good.....

A sticky or shuddering clutch pedal is not part of a new clutch break in.

OK, then look at it like this..... Is the money for hydraulics worth a "test" to determine whether or not you have to pull the transmission again? If so then it seems to me that you have a simple decision to make.

Cant think of anything besides everything I've already suggested. And not to beat the horse either but I cant stress enough how the fork should move. There is no "partial" resistance or I think it sticking but maybe not and I'm not sure if I pulled it far enough.....ect..... It simply moves forwards and backwards about 3/4 of an inch and will come to obvious contact stops. Move it forward and the throwout bearing face will contact the clutch forks. Move it backwards and the fork will contact the bell housing. Not much else going on in there. Which is why I said "check again. It literally will take you may 5 minutes if you take your time. Heck, take a video for future reference if it helps. I know you're not disagreeing with me either but merely trying to attack the possible cause from all angles. So you're good..... Other than that, I guess worst case scenario is you replace the hydraulics and the problem remains. Then you'll have to delve deeper.....