Forums

I just ordered some LEDs to replace the OEM bulbs ($8.89) for a box of 10. They're supposed to be a direct replacement for the bulbs and brighter to boot. We'll see. There were several color options. I briefly thought red might be fun, but I decided white would be the brightest. 

It does not appear that any bulbs are burned out because the lighting is uniform, albeit ridiculously dim, across the panel. I can imagine that dust might be a possible culprit. I've just got to figure out how to get in there to clean off the bulbs. I have also noticed the other evening is the panel lights were fairly bright when I first turned the lights on, but then quickly became progressively dimmer. I can still see the needles, just not what they're pointing to. It's also possible that could be an optical illusion caused by changing levels of ambient illumination (e.g., street lights, headlights from other vehicles, etc.). If I end up replacing the bulbs, I would want to investigate options for brighter ones. Meanwhile, I'll continue to endeavor to minimize nighttime driving as much as possible.

Well, a 95 is now 31 years old... a lot has changed since then. Possible that the bulbs are dusty/dim you could try replacing the illumination lamps in the cluster - perhaps one or more is burn out. Or perhaps we're just spoiled by new cars and thats just how it is...

So, I'm without my daily driver (2013 Buick LaCrosse) for a couple of weeks, and my '95 Cutlass Supreme convertible has been pressed into daily driver service. This is fine during the daytime, especially when we've been having afternoons in the mid-'70s, which is perfect drop-the-top weather, but after dark? Not so much. The instrument panel lights are so dim, I can't see the speedometer, especially when a jacked-up SUV or pickemup truck shines its way-too-bright headlights in my rearview mirror. I can't imagine they were this dim when the car was new. There's got to be a fix. Oh well, I just have to remember to be glad I have transportation. 

My car is currently at the mechanic after the technician repaired my main engine harness, I guess when I put my engine back together I smashed the harness behind the AC compressor bracket. Mechanic ended up bypassing To a known good 5 Volt reference after he got the same numbers that I got when I back probed my MAP, IAC and TPS. He then informed me that I had board damage on my ECM and that a 12 Volt being fed to my ECM couldn't have been good. I ended up purchasing a spare ECM. I'm preparing to head there and connect TunerPro RT V6 to my 1990 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme 3.1L LH0 V6, 4T60 automatic, using a GM 12-pin FTDI ALDL cable. The vehicle originally had a 16198260 ECM, and I purchased a replacement 1227727 ECM. The replacement arrived with an ARZW MEM-CAL. I'm still confirming whether my original MEM-CAL was transferred. My engine has the three-solenoid digital EGR valve. I currently have A109.adx loaded, converted from A109.ads, and corrected the Transmit Stream Reply body size from 66 to 67. I'd appreciate clarification on four questions: Is A109 the correct 8192-baud ALDL data-stream definition for the 1990 W-body LH0 with digital EGR, or should I be using the $88 acquisition definition? Has anyone successfully used A109 with the 1990 W-body 1227727 ECM and original $88-family calibration? Are there any additional ADS-to-ADX conversion settings I need to verify in TunerPro RT V6? What's the best way to confirm that the ECM is transmitting valid packets, rather than merely establishing serial communication and displaying incorrectly decoded parameters? The engine has exhibited incorrect sensor-reference voltage, rich running, injector-control problems and unreliable starting. The mechanic has repaired damaged wiring, and I'm preparing to collect a fresh KOEO/cranking XDL recording. I'm trying to verify the acquisition setup before interpreting the live readings or considering additional ECM replacement.