2002 Dale Earnhardt Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS - Fuel Pump Failure

Aside from the handful of times I've run out of gas, in all my years of driving, I have never had a car simply conk out on me. That was until this past Friday afternoon on a routine if not mundane trip to Walmart for cat food, when my 2002 Dale Earnhardt Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS decided to give up the ghost. 

No check engine light on, no noise from under the hood or a loss of power prior. Nope. Just a simultaneous brief kick-up of the tach-o-meter, a momentary herky-jerky surge and then.... oblivion. Good thing I was doing forty-miles-per-hour or so to give me enough momentum to coast into the parking lot of the Longhorn Steak House up the street from the Walmart. If it wasn't so cold out, I would have stopped in for some Firecracker Chicken Wings with Avocado Lime Sauce before calling AAA for a tow. 

I knew the engine hadn't seized because the starter was able to crank it freely and there was no tell-tale "knocking rod" noise or any ominous sounds or smoke ahead of it stalling out. There was plenty of heat too, always a good thing. The only thing that's been giving me trouble had been the fuel pump; when warm and then shut off, it needed up to four tries to stay running.  I had mentioned the problem to my mechanic recently and he said it sounded like the fuel pump was having trouble maintaining pressure when it was warm. The multiple start thing manageable as long as the engine finally lit for good. And it always did. Of course, I didn't expect it to just go kaput like it did. On a google search of symptoms of a bad fuel pump, "sudden death" wasn't on the list. All that said, all things pointed to the fuel pump. 

It could have been so much worse. This past week I had to make two, two-hundred-plus mile traipses to the office, and I shudder to think what it would have been like had this happened on the Ohio Turnpike. In the not too recent past as well, my wife and I used "The Dale" on trips to New York City, Long Island and Washington D.C. from our home here outside Cleveland, Ohio. There was second guessing our decision, my wife's mostly, to take a car with more than a quarter-million-miles on it on such long trips, but there was nary a problem, not that there was any hint of an issue in the moments on Friday before my car stalled out. 

That this breakdown happened four miles from my home was again, truly a blessing. Had it happened halfway between my home and my office, I might have been forced to have it towed to a mechanic who would have salivated at an easy thousand-dollar repair I would have had no choice but to pay. Worse yet, what if the pump had gone out when we were in New York or D.C.? Same thing, of course, plus I'd have to be concerned about extending the trip as we waited for my car to have work done, work I could easily do. And save hundreds and hundreds of dollars doing it myself.  

Swapping the pump was straight forward. I put the pump in that failed several years and more than 150,000 miles ago when the gas gauge started going wonky. Luckily, there's an access panel behind the fold-down rear seat that gave me access to it; all cars with fuel pumps in gas tanks should have such access. I've replaced fuel pumps where I had to drop the tank to get at it and that's no fun, especially on  pumps where the fuel lines on the pump are metal. Take off those eight, ten-millimeters, disconnect the fuel lines and electrical connectors, pop the retaining ring, rinse and repeat. The only issue I had was some gunk got into the gas tank when I was pulling the old pump out. Quick suck on my wet-dry vac and I was good to go to.  

Now, granted, there was every possibility that what made my car stop running might not have been the fuel pump - and that was in the back of my mind the whole time. With no check engine light on, "no-starts" like this can be hard to decipher. You go with what you think it might be and hope for the best. After I installed the new pump, I silently prayed to St. Christopher for engine to turn over and...it did. Whew. The Dale lives on. 

I'm planning a big road trip for my birthday at the end of March to Nashville, Chattanooga, Washington D.C. and Brooklyn, New York. If I do it all, I'm looking at more than two-thousand miles. Prior to this past Friday, I wouldn't think twice about taking The Dale on such a long trip, but sudden break downs do tend to make you think twice about things you used to take for granted. Who knows what I'll do. More than likely, I'll roll the dice and take my good old boy. He's only let me down this one time and I think he deserves another chance to be taken for granted. 

New Struts for the 2002 Dale Earnhardt Chevrolet Monte Carlo - The Struggle Is Real

Every time I finish a job like swapping out the front struts on my 2002 Dale Earnhardt Chevrolet Monte Carlo SS, I begrudgingly thank my late mother for her steadfast determination to block my aspirations to pursue a career in automotive repair. I also feel sorry for people who wake up every day and go to work where their employ consists of grueling and fairly dangerous tasks. I at least have the benefit of knowing this project is probably a one-off; for folks who do this kind of work for a living, or any job that is physically taxing, it's onto the next job. More power to all of you. Seriously. 

It all started easy enough. I found 1AAuto's video on strut replacement on 2000-2007 Monte Carlo's and it seemed like a very straight forward, dare I say simple job. Five bolts, some lifting, hammering and yanking. How hard could this be? Well, the very well-produced video here glosses over one very important fact - getting the new strut in is a major pain in the ass. Speaking of which, with all my grunting and squatting I think I may have a hemorrhoid. The struggle is real. 

In hindsight, it's not that anything "went wrong", per se with this project. It's that these suckers get heavy, they're unyielding and lining up the bolts connecting the lower part of the strut to the steering knuckle is way, way more challenging than the guy in the video makes it out to be. Then again, nothing ever goes wrong in DIY Youtube videos, you know? 

I did the passenger side strut earlier this week and that was bad enough. The driver's side, for reasons I will probably never determine, was ten times harder. I mean, if I didn't know better, I'd swear my "new" strut was not the correct size. The damn steering knuckle would not move down low enough and the strut itself could not go any higher. What was worse, the knuckle kept jumping up like it was on a spring. Well, it was and that was the anti-sway bar which is huge on my car with its F41 suspension and all. The car worked on in the video is a 2000-era Monte Carlo "LS" not an "SS" like mine. Less thick sway bar thus less spring action and easier to move the knuckle down and keep it there. 

I had thought about disconnecting the sway-bar links to help lower the knuckle, something the guy in the video didn't do but the bolts were rusted and to undo them would have taken at least another hour. So I fought and fought with the strut and the knuckle and eventually got the bolts in just far enough to whack them the rest of the way in with my trusty five-pounder. Phew. Remarkably, the threads on the bolts weren't damaged. 

Much like discussing a serious car accident you almost had but thankfully didn't, in the end my "new strut" story on "The Dale" is an anti-climactic one. Once my anxiety dialed down over possibly not being able to finish this project I found my car to ride like it hasn't in years. Shocks, struts and springs deteriorate slowly; you don't realize how bad things had gotten until new ones are in. Who's up for a roundtrip to D.C.? 

Now, onto the rears which looks to be somewhat easier to do than the fronts. Bring it on and long live "The Dale". 

1974 Chevrolet Corvette - Charting the (C3) Changes

I found this 1974 Corvette recently while searching for parts for my '77. The Craigslist ad didn't have any information about what's going on here save for the owner saying he or she was parting this out. All in asking price is $5,000 which is absurd considering five-grand could get you a roller if not a running car. On the other hand it's actually quite reasonable considering what an NOS frame and birdcage would run you. Shut-up and take my money! 

What in the name of Zora Arkus-Duntov is going on here? Reminds me of the "hillbillies" I grew across the street from back on Long Island who did auto repairs and custom fabrication in their driveway. Sorry - "hillbilly" was my mother's derogatory term for them and it was a point of extreme consternation between the two of us that she would find me "over-there" all the time. Their custom fabricating often had dubious results, not unlike like whomever started to "update" this '74 into a later-model fastback. Surprise-surprise, they gave up.  

Not all is lost, though. Me being as easily inspired as I am this hulk has spurred me to take a brief stroll down a third-generation Corvette memory lane of sorts and chart the myriad changes Chevrolet put the "plastic-fantastic" through over it's fifteen year run. Changes that apparently goaded some, actually many, to trade in their old-Corvette for one of the "new-ones". Some of course eschewing the expense of a new car and attempted to plow into updating their old car on their own. How else to explain what's going on here? I mean, seriously, if this isn't a decades old project that had gone south, why would someone do this now? 

1969 Chevrolet Corvette Stingray with chrome bumpers front and back

Along with numerous ancillary changes, not all of them welcome of course, there were two significant and not-subtle changes in the appearance of third-generation or "C3" Chevrolet Corvette's from 1968-1982. Above is a '69 with it's signature chrome bumpers, modest yet quite tasteful rear spoiler and the "gills" from the Mako-Shark concept the car was allegedly based on. There's a lot of Pontiac Banshee in the C3 as well. 

1973 Corvette - note bumper cover up front, chrome bumper out back

The first big change was due to a federal mandate that all automobiles and light trucks sold in this country had to be able to withstand a five-mile per hour impact without damage. That edict required vehicles sold in 1973 had to pass muster up-front meanwhile the back end required some sort of buttressing or reinforcement for model-year 1974. Rather than attach large and heavy chrome bumpers fore and aft like they did on other makes and models, GM cleverly hid the energy-absorbing bumpers on Corvette behind rubberized covers. 

1977 Corvette with bumper covers fore and aft

While it technically got the job done aesthetically the reviews were mixed. Some lauded the update  while others abjectly hated them. Choose your poison. If you're in the market for a "C3" note how much more valuable the 1968-1972 "chrome-bumper" models are these days compared to the later "rubber-bumper" models. Values of "73's are less than '68-'72's although generally they're worth a bit more than the later models. Love how pin-straight that right-rear tire is on this '77 I plucked from a brochure. As if. 

1978 Corvette "fastback"

The second change came for model-year 1978 with Chevrolet adding a large rear window that transformed the rear of the car into a fastback of sorts. As part of the twenty-fifth anniversary of Corvette, this update came with a significant reboot of the interior as well. 

1979 Corvette L-82

Much like the bumper-covers, the look of the car was significantly different from previous model years and you either loved it or hated it. Of the four iterations of the C3, through my eyes, the 1974-1977 front end on the new rear for 1978 and 1979 looked awkward and unbalanced. Side note - Chevrolet offered a bolt-on "Pace-Car" spoiler on '74-'79's C3's. If I can find a picture of one in the flesh I'll update this blog - safe to say they're absolutely hideous. 

1980 Corvette with front end ground effects and integrated spoiler on the rear bumper cover

Come 1980, some ground effects under the front end and an integrated spoiler on the rear bumper cover gave the car an adroit duck tail reminiscent of the one on '68-'73's making the design a cohesive whole in my opinion. For 1982, the last year of the run for "C3's", that rear glass actually opened. As it probably should have going back to 1978.  

I'm the last person to scoff at anyone attempting to do something as ambitious as altering the overall appearance of a car but to do it well and make it appear seamless is an art form. I'm blessed with what I believe is a fair amount of mechanical intuition and what my father referred to as "Yankee Ingenuity" so on some level I'm actually jealous of someone attempting to do whatever it is they started out to do here. There's a reason why body-work in general is so expensive because so few do it well. 

Pride goeth before destruction as they say and no doubt some well-intention-ed person had to bite down hard to give up here. If I find this listed again I promise I'll reach out to whomever is selling to try and get some more intel on this. Cheers.