Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

In article <5bGdncC_8to7qyXYnZ2dnUVZ_uDinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > And a bogus Si sticker from the previous ricer owner.
> >
> check the vehicle reg docs? i doubt it's just a sticker job - the
> conversion from 2pfi to 4pfi is non-trivial.

The serial number will tell all. Carfax, anyone?

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

In article <5bGdncC_8to7qyXYnZ2dnUVZ_uDinZ2d@speakeasy.net> ,
jim beam <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote:

> > And a bogus Si sticker from the previous ricer owner.
> >
> check the vehicle reg docs? i doubt it's just a sticker job - the
> conversion from 2pfi to 4pfi is non-trivial.

The serial number will tell all. Carfax, anyone?

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

"Dave Garrett" <dave@compassnet.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2021dcb2372f941698a156@207.14.116.130...
>I think I posted about this when my timing belt was changed a couple of
> years ago; the short version was that my usual mechanic told me after
> he'd finished the work that he thought my 90 CRX Si had a 1.5L engine
> instead of the usual 1.6, because the timing belt for a 1.6 didn't fit,
> but the belt from a 1.5 did. He claimed to have called a friend at a
> Honda dealer who told him that 1.5L engines had been installed in some
> Si models. I asked around, but was never able to find anyone else to
> confirm this, and since the car was running well, I eventually just
> chalked it up as a curiosity.
>
> Fast forward to several weeks ago, when I had (among other things) what
> I thought was a leaking rear main seal looked at, but which turned out
> to be a leaking oil pan gasket. In the process of trying to confirm
> where the leak was actually originating, the dealer where I had the work
> done cleaned off a fair amount of the gunk that had accumulated on the
> various surfaces of the engine.
>
> Yesterday I was poking around under the hood while attempting to change
> a burned-out low beam, when I happened to shine a light on the front of
> the block, and there it was, plain as day: D15B2, otherwise known as the
> motor used in DX models. Sis of this vintage are supposed to have a
> D16A6. The difference is a longer stroke, slightly higher compression
> ratio, and, depending on who's counting, between 15-20 horsepower.
>
> I bought the car from an Acura dealer in 1992 with roughly 20K miles on
> it. I have no idea whether they knowingly sold me the car with a DX
> motor, or whether it came to them that way and nobody noticed it before
> it went out on the lot; it's not exactly a difference that's easily
> spotted visually unless you examine the stamp on the block. But either
> way, I'm not too pleased. I've been thinking more and more about an
> engine swap lately, but the reality of taking that path is that it'll
> cost a lot more for me to do that than it would to be patient and keep
> my eyes open for a reasonably clean, non-riced CRX that's already had a
> B16 swapped in by someone who knew what they were doing.
>
> Dave
>

Oddly, it may be that way from the factory. There is nothing unusual about
smaller components being substituted - why not engines? Okay, sometimes
specific engines are offered as extra cost options, and in that case it
would be fraudulent to supply a motor that wasn't what the buyer paid for.
Otherwise, if the purchase contract didn't specify the engine there isn't a
strict legal issue, is there? (I am not a lawyer.)

I recall a while back a commotion about Oldsmobile engines being used in
Cadillacs. I don't know if anything came of that.

Mike

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

"Dave Garrett" <dave@compassnet.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2021dcb2372f941698a156@207.14.116.130...
>I think I posted about this when my timing belt was changed a couple of
> years ago; the short version was that my usual mechanic told me after
> he'd finished the work that he thought my 90 CRX Si had a 1.5L engine
> instead of the usual 1.6, because the timing belt for a 1.6 didn't fit,
> but the belt from a 1.5 did. He claimed to have called a friend at a
> Honda dealer who told him that 1.5L engines had been installed in some
> Si models. I asked around, but was never able to find anyone else to
> confirm this, and since the car was running well, I eventually just
> chalked it up as a curiosity.
>
> Fast forward to several weeks ago, when I had (among other things) what
> I thought was a leaking rear main seal looked at, but which turned out
> to be a leaking oil pan gasket. In the process of trying to confirm
> where the leak was actually originating, the dealer where I had the work
> done cleaned off a fair amount of the gunk that had accumulated on the
> various surfaces of the engine.
>
> Yesterday I was poking around under the hood while attempting to change
> a burned-out low beam, when I happened to shine a light on the front of
> the block, and there it was, plain as day: D15B2, otherwise known as the
> motor used in DX models. Sis of this vintage are supposed to have a
> D16A6. The difference is a longer stroke, slightly higher compression
> ratio, and, depending on who's counting, between 15-20 horsepower.
>
> I bought the car from an Acura dealer in 1992 with roughly 20K miles on
> it. I have no idea whether they knowingly sold me the car with a DX
> motor, or whether it came to them that way and nobody noticed it before
> it went out on the lot; it's not exactly a difference that's easily
> spotted visually unless you examine the stamp on the block. But either
> way, I'm not too pleased. I've been thinking more and more about an
> engine swap lately, but the reality of taking that path is that it'll
> cost a lot more for me to do that than it would to be patient and keep
> my eyes open for a reasonably clean, non-riced CRX that's already had a
> B16 swapped in by someone who knew what they were doing.
>
> Dave
>

Oddly, it may be that way from the factory. There is nothing unusual about
smaller components being substituted - why not engines? Okay, sometimes
specific engines are offered as extra cost options, and in that case it
would be fraudulent to supply a motor that wasn't what the buyer paid for.
Otherwise, if the purchase contract didn't specify the engine there isn't a
strict legal issue, is there? (I am not a lawyer.)

I recall a while back a commotion about Oldsmobile engines being used in
Cadillacs. I don't know if anything came of that.

Mike

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

"Dave Garrett" <dave@compassnet.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2021dcb2372f941698a156@207.14.116.130...
>I think I posted about this when my timing belt was changed a couple of
> years ago; the short version was that my usual mechanic told me after
> he'd finished the work that he thought my 90 CRX Si had a 1.5L engine
> instead of the usual 1.6, because the timing belt for a 1.6 didn't fit,
> but the belt from a 1.5 did. He claimed to have called a friend at a
> Honda dealer who told him that 1.5L engines had been installed in some
> Si models. I asked around, but was never able to find anyone else to
> confirm this, and since the car was running well, I eventually just
> chalked it up as a curiosity.
>
> Fast forward to several weeks ago, when I had (among other things) what
> I thought was a leaking rear main seal looked at, but which turned out
> to be a leaking oil pan gasket. In the process of trying to confirm
> where the leak was actually originating, the dealer where I had the work
> done cleaned off a fair amount of the gunk that had accumulated on the
> various surfaces of the engine.
>
> Yesterday I was poking around under the hood while attempting to change
> a burned-out low beam, when I happened to shine a light on the front of
> the block, and there it was, plain as day: D15B2, otherwise known as the
> motor used in DX models. Sis of this vintage are supposed to have a
> D16A6. The difference is a longer stroke, slightly higher compression
> ratio, and, depending on who's counting, between 15-20 horsepower.
>
> I bought the car from an Acura dealer in 1992 with roughly 20K miles on
> it. I have no idea whether they knowingly sold me the car with a DX
> motor, or whether it came to them that way and nobody noticed it before
> it went out on the lot; it's not exactly a difference that's easily
> spotted visually unless you examine the stamp on the block. But either
> way, I'm not too pleased. I've been thinking more and more about an
> engine swap lately, but the reality of taking that path is that it'll
> cost a lot more for me to do that than it would to be patient and keep
> my eyes open for a reasonably clean, non-riced CRX that's already had a
> B16 swapped in by someone who knew what they were doing.
>
> Dave
>

Oddly, it may be that way from the factory. There is nothing unusual about
smaller components being substituted - why not engines? Okay, sometimes
specific engines are offered as extra cost options, and in that case it
would be fraudulent to supply a motor that wasn't what the buyer paid for.
Otherwise, if the purchase contract didn't specify the engine there isn't a
strict legal issue, is there? (I am not a lawyer.)

I recall a while back a commotion about Oldsmobile engines being used in
Cadillacs. I don't know if anything came of that.

Mike

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

"Dave Garrett" <dave@compassnet.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.2021dcb2372f941698a156@207.14.116.130...
>I think I posted about this when my timing belt was changed a couple of
> years ago; the short version was that my usual mechanic told me after
> he'd finished the work that he thought my 90 CRX Si had a 1.5L engine
> instead of the usual 1.6, because the timing belt for a 1.6 didn't fit,
> but the belt from a 1.5 did. He claimed to have called a friend at a
> Honda dealer who told him that 1.5L engines had been installed in some
> Si models. I asked around, but was never able to find anyone else to
> confirm this, and since the car was running well, I eventually just
> chalked it up as a curiosity.
>
> Fast forward to several weeks ago, when I had (among other things) what
> I thought was a leaking rear main seal looked at, but which turned out
> to be a leaking oil pan gasket. In the process of trying to confirm
> where the leak was actually originating, the dealer where I had the work
> done cleaned off a fair amount of the gunk that had accumulated on the
> various surfaces of the engine.
>
> Yesterday I was poking around under the hood while attempting to change
> a burned-out low beam, when I happened to shine a light on the front of
> the block, and there it was, plain as day: D15B2, otherwise known as the
> motor used in DX models. Sis of this vintage are supposed to have a
> D16A6. The difference is a longer stroke, slightly higher compression
> ratio, and, depending on who's counting, between 15-20 horsepower.
>
> I bought the car from an Acura dealer in 1992 with roughly 20K miles on
> it. I have no idea whether they knowingly sold me the car with a DX
> motor, or whether it came to them that way and nobody noticed it before
> it went out on the lot; it's not exactly a difference that's easily
> spotted visually unless you examine the stamp on the block. But either
> way, I'm not too pleased. I've been thinking more and more about an
> engine swap lately, but the reality of taking that path is that it'll
> cost a lot more for me to do that than it would to be patient and keep
> my eyes open for a reasonably clean, non-riced CRX that's already had a
> B16 swapped in by someone who knew what they were doing.
>
> Dave
>

Oddly, it may be that way from the factory. There is nothing unusual about
smaller components being substituted - why not engines? Okay, sometimes
specific engines are offered as extra cost options, and in that case it
would be fraudulent to supply a motor that wasn't what the buyer paid for.
Otherwise, if the purchase contract didn't specify the engine there isn't a
strict legal issue, is there? (I am not a lawyer.)

I recall a while back a commotion about Oldsmobile engines being used in
Cadillacs. I don't know if anything came of that.

Mike

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 04:44:24 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:

> "Dave Garrett" <dave@compassnet.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.2021dcb2372f941698a156@207.14.116.130...
>>I think I posted about this when my timing belt was changed a couple of
>> years ago; the short version was that my usual mechanic told me after
>> he'd finished the work that he thought my 90 CRX Si had a 1.5L engine
>> instead of the usual 1.6, because the timing belt for a 1.6 didn't fit,
>> but the belt from a 1.5 did. He claimed to have called a friend at a
>> Honda dealer who told him that 1.5L engines had been installed in some
>> Si models. I asked around, but was never able to find anyone else to
>> confirm this, and since the car was running well, I eventually just
>> chalked it up as a curiosity.
>>
>> Fast forward to several weeks ago, when I had (among other things) what
>> I thought was a leaking rear main seal looked at, but which turned out
>> to be a leaking oil pan gasket. In the process of trying to confirm
>> where the leak was actually originating, the dealer where I had the work
>> done cleaned off a fair amount of the gunk that had accumulated on the
>> various surfaces of the engine.
>>
>> Yesterday I was poking around under the hood while attempting to change
>> a burned-out low beam, when I happened to shine a light on the front of
>> the block, and there it was, plain as day: D15B2, otherwise known as the
>> motor used in DX models. Sis of this vintage are supposed to have a
>> D16A6. The difference is a longer stroke, slightly higher compression
>> ratio, and, depending on who's counting, between 15-20 horsepower.
>>
>> I bought the car from an Acura dealer in 1992 with roughly 20K miles on
>> it. I have no idea whether they knowingly sold me the car with a DX
>> motor, or whether it came to them that way and nobody noticed it before
>> it went out on the lot; it's not exactly a difference that's easily
>> spotted visually unless you examine the stamp on the block. But either
>> way, I'm not too pleased. I've been thinking more and more about an
>> engine swap lately, but the reality of taking that path is that it'll
>> cost a lot more for me to do that than it would to be patient and keep
>> my eyes open for a reasonably clean, non-riced CRX that's already had a
>> B16 swapped in by someone who knew what they were doing.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>
> Oddly, it may be that way from the factory. There is nothing unusual about
> smaller components being substituted - why not engines? Okay, sometimes
> specific engines are offered as extra cost options, and in that case it
> would be fraudulent to supply a motor that wasn't what the buyer paid for.
> Otherwise, if the purchase contract didn't specify the engine there isn't a
> strict legal issue, is there? (I am not a lawyer.)
>
> I recall a while back a commotion about Oldsmobile engines being used in
> Cadillacs. I don't know if anything came of that.

If you're not getting the larger engine, you're not getting an Si. The Si
is the performance package.

If I would have found a 1.6L under the hood of my Si, instead of the 2.0L
it is advertised as, you can damn well believe the car would have been
back at the dealer right away.

This person doesn't have such recourse, likely, due to the age of the car,
and the time since it was purchased, but I'd still be mad as hell.

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 04:44:24 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:

> "Dave Garrett" <dave@compassnet.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.2021dcb2372f941698a156@207.14.116.130...
>>I think I posted about this when my timing belt was changed a couple of
>> years ago; the short version was that my usual mechanic told me after
>> he'd finished the work that he thought my 90 CRX Si had a 1.5L engine
>> instead of the usual 1.6, because the timing belt for a 1.6 didn't fit,
>> but the belt from a 1.5 did. He claimed to have called a friend at a
>> Honda dealer who told him that 1.5L engines had been installed in some
>> Si models. I asked around, but was never able to find anyone else to
>> confirm this, and since the car was running well, I eventually just
>> chalked it up as a curiosity.
>>
>> Fast forward to several weeks ago, when I had (among other things) what
>> I thought was a leaking rear main seal looked at, but which turned out
>> to be a leaking oil pan gasket. In the process of trying to confirm
>> where the leak was actually originating, the dealer where I had the work
>> done cleaned off a fair amount of the gunk that had accumulated on the
>> various surfaces of the engine.
>>
>> Yesterday I was poking around under the hood while attempting to change
>> a burned-out low beam, when I happened to shine a light on the front of
>> the block, and there it was, plain as day: D15B2, otherwise known as the
>> motor used in DX models. Sis of this vintage are supposed to have a
>> D16A6. The difference is a longer stroke, slightly higher compression
>> ratio, and, depending on who's counting, between 15-20 horsepower.
>>
>> I bought the car from an Acura dealer in 1992 with roughly 20K miles on
>> it. I have no idea whether they knowingly sold me the car with a DX
>> motor, or whether it came to them that way and nobody noticed it before
>> it went out on the lot; it's not exactly a difference that's easily
>> spotted visually unless you examine the stamp on the block. But either
>> way, I'm not too pleased. I've been thinking more and more about an
>> engine swap lately, but the reality of taking that path is that it'll
>> cost a lot more for me to do that than it would to be patient and keep
>> my eyes open for a reasonably clean, non-riced CRX that's already had a
>> B16 swapped in by someone who knew what they were doing.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>
> Oddly, it may be that way from the factory. There is nothing unusual about
> smaller components being substituted - why not engines? Okay, sometimes
> specific engines are offered as extra cost options, and in that case it
> would be fraudulent to supply a motor that wasn't what the buyer paid for.
> Otherwise, if the purchase contract didn't specify the engine there isn't a
> strict legal issue, is there? (I am not a lawyer.)
>
> I recall a while back a commotion about Oldsmobile engines being used in
> Cadillacs. I don't know if anything came of that.

If you're not getting the larger engine, you're not getting an Si. The Si
is the performance package.

If I would have found a 1.6L under the hood of my Si, instead of the 2.0L
it is advertised as, you can damn well believe the car would have been
back at the dealer right away.

This person doesn't have such recourse, likely, due to the age of the car,
and the time since it was purchased, but I'd still be mad as hell.

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 04:44:24 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:

> "Dave Garrett" <dave@compassnet.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.2021dcb2372f941698a156@207.14.116.130...
>>I think I posted about this when my timing belt was changed a couple of
>> years ago; the short version was that my usual mechanic told me after
>> he'd finished the work that he thought my 90 CRX Si had a 1.5L engine
>> instead of the usual 1.6, because the timing belt for a 1.6 didn't fit,
>> but the belt from a 1.5 did. He claimed to have called a friend at a
>> Honda dealer who told him that 1.5L engines had been installed in some
>> Si models. I asked around, but was never able to find anyone else to
>> confirm this, and since the car was running well, I eventually just
>> chalked it up as a curiosity.
>>
>> Fast forward to several weeks ago, when I had (among other things) what
>> I thought was a leaking rear main seal looked at, but which turned out
>> to be a leaking oil pan gasket. In the process of trying to confirm
>> where the leak was actually originating, the dealer where I had the work
>> done cleaned off a fair amount of the gunk that had accumulated on the
>> various surfaces of the engine.
>>
>> Yesterday I was poking around under the hood while attempting to change
>> a burned-out low beam, when I happened to shine a light on the front of
>> the block, and there it was, plain as day: D15B2, otherwise known as the
>> motor used in DX models. Sis of this vintage are supposed to have a
>> D16A6. The difference is a longer stroke, slightly higher compression
>> ratio, and, depending on who's counting, between 15-20 horsepower.
>>
>> I bought the car from an Acura dealer in 1992 with roughly 20K miles on
>> it. I have no idea whether they knowingly sold me the car with a DX
>> motor, or whether it came to them that way and nobody noticed it before
>> it went out on the lot; it's not exactly a difference that's easily
>> spotted visually unless you examine the stamp on the block. But either
>> way, I'm not too pleased. I've been thinking more and more about an
>> engine swap lately, but the reality of taking that path is that it'll
>> cost a lot more for me to do that than it would to be patient and keep
>> my eyes open for a reasonably clean, non-riced CRX that's already had a
>> B16 swapped in by someone who knew what they were doing.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>
> Oddly, it may be that way from the factory. There is nothing unusual about
> smaller components being substituted - why not engines? Okay, sometimes
> specific engines are offered as extra cost options, and in that case it
> would be fraudulent to supply a motor that wasn't what the buyer paid for.
> Otherwise, if the purchase contract didn't specify the engine there isn't a
> strict legal issue, is there? (I am not a lawyer.)
>
> I recall a while back a commotion about Oldsmobile engines being used in
> Cadillacs. I don't know if anything came of that.

If you're not getting the larger engine, you're not getting an Si. The Si
is the performance package.

If I would have found a 1.6L under the hood of my Si, instead of the 2.0L
it is advertised as, you can damn well believe the car would have been
back at the dealer right away.

This person doesn't have such recourse, likely, due to the age of the car,
and the time since it was purchased, but I'd still be mad as hell.

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 04:44:24 -0700, Michael Pardee wrote:

> "Dave Garrett" <dave@compassnet.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.2021dcb2372f941698a156@207.14.116.130...
>>I think I posted about this when my timing belt was changed a couple of
>> years ago; the short version was that my usual mechanic told me after
>> he'd finished the work that he thought my 90 CRX Si had a 1.5L engine
>> instead of the usual 1.6, because the timing belt for a 1.6 didn't fit,
>> but the belt from a 1.5 did. He claimed to have called a friend at a
>> Honda dealer who told him that 1.5L engines had been installed in some
>> Si models. I asked around, but was never able to find anyone else to
>> confirm this, and since the car was running well, I eventually just
>> chalked it up as a curiosity.
>>
>> Fast forward to several weeks ago, when I had (among other things) what
>> I thought was a leaking rear main seal looked at, but which turned out
>> to be a leaking oil pan gasket. In the process of trying to confirm
>> where the leak was actually originating, the dealer where I had the work
>> done cleaned off a fair amount of the gunk that had accumulated on the
>> various surfaces of the engine.
>>
>> Yesterday I was poking around under the hood while attempting to change
>> a burned-out low beam, when I happened to shine a light on the front of
>> the block, and there it was, plain as day: D15B2, otherwise known as the
>> motor used in DX models. Sis of this vintage are supposed to have a
>> D16A6. The difference is a longer stroke, slightly higher compression
>> ratio, and, depending on who's counting, between 15-20 horsepower.
>>
>> I bought the car from an Acura dealer in 1992 with roughly 20K miles on
>> it. I have no idea whether they knowingly sold me the car with a DX
>> motor, or whether it came to them that way and nobody noticed it before
>> it went out on the lot; it's not exactly a difference that's easily
>> spotted visually unless you examine the stamp on the block. But either
>> way, I'm not too pleased. I've been thinking more and more about an
>> engine swap lately, but the reality of taking that path is that it'll
>> cost a lot more for me to do that than it would to be patient and keep
>> my eyes open for a reasonably clean, non-riced CRX that's already had a
>> B16 swapped in by someone who knew what they were doing.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>
> Oddly, it may be that way from the factory. There is nothing unusual about
> smaller components being substituted - why not engines? Okay, sometimes
> specific engines are offered as extra cost options, and in that case it
> would be fraudulent to supply a motor that wasn't what the buyer paid for.
> Otherwise, if the purchase contract didn't specify the engine there isn't a
> strict legal issue, is there? (I am not a lawyer.)
>
> I recall a while back a commotion about Oldsmobile engines being used in
> Cadillacs. I don't know if anything came of that.

If you're not getting the larger engine, you're not getting an Si. The Si
is the performance package.

If I would have found a 1.6L under the hood of my Si, instead of the 2.0L
it is advertised as, you can damn well believe the car would have been
back at the dealer right away.

This person doesn't have such recourse, likely, due to the age of the car,
and the time since it was purchased, but I'd still be mad as hell.

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

On Jan 25, 5:51 am, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <e...@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <5bGdncC_8to7qyXYnZ2dnUVZ_uDin...@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> > > And a bogus Si sticker from the previous ricer owner.
>
> > check the vehicle reg docs? i doubt it's just a sticker job - the
> > conversion from 2pfi to 4pfi is non-trivial.The serial number will tell all. Carfax, anyone?

I have an open account. What's the VIN?

Dan D
'07 Ody EX
Central NJ USA

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

On Jan 25, 5:51 am, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <e...@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <5bGdncC_8to7qyXYnZ2dnUVZ_uDin...@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> > > And a bogus Si sticker from the previous ricer owner.
>
> > check the vehicle reg docs? i doubt it's just a sticker job - the
> > conversion from 2pfi to 4pfi is non-trivial.The serial number will tell all. Carfax, anyone?

I have an open account. What's the VIN?

Dan D
'07 Ody EX
Central NJ USA

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

On Jan 25, 5:51 am, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <e...@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <5bGdncC_8to7qyXYnZ2dnUVZ_uDin...@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> > > And a bogus Si sticker from the previous ricer owner.
>
> > check the vehicle reg docs? i doubt it's just a sticker job - the
> > conversion from 2pfi to 4pfi is non-trivial.The serial number will tell all. Carfax, anyone?

I have an open account. What's the VIN?

Dan D
'07 Ody EX
Central NJ USA

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

On Jan 25, 5:51 am, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <e...@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> In article <5bGdncC_8to7qyXYnZ2dnUVZ_uDin...@speakeasy.net> ,
> jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
>
> > > And a bogus Si sticker from the previous ricer owner.
>
> > check the vehicle reg docs? i doubt it's just a sticker job - the
> > conversion from 2pfi to 4pfi is non-trivial.The serial number will tell all. Carfax, anyone?

I have an open account. What's the VIN?

Dan D
'07 Ody EX
Central NJ USA

Re: My Si has a DX motor!
 

In article <1169734704.580895.81910@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups. com>,
dan.dibiase@gmail.com says...
>
>
> On Jan 25, 5:51 am, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <e...@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> > In article <5bGdncC_8to7qyXYnZ2dnUVZ_uDin...@speakeasy.net> ,
> > jim beam <spamvor...@bad.example.net> wrote:
> >
> > > > And a bogus Si sticker from the previous ricer owner.
> >
> > > check the vehicle reg docs? i doubt it's just a sticker job - the
> > > conversion from 2pfi to 4pfi is non-trivial.The serial number will tell all. Carfax, anyone?
>
> I have an open account. What's the VIN?

You've got mail - I didn't want to post the number on the net, but feel
free to post the results here.

I had a Carfax account briefly several years ago, and at that time I
remember running a report for my car, but I don't recall seeing anything
unusual then. It's been a while, however, and my memory could certainly
be faulty, so I'll be interested to see what it says.

Thanks,

Dave