16 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHFacebook find
Leading reported evidence
Replace cpu
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Leading evidence: 'Replace cpu' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace cpu' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
16 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T165820Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Talked to the seller a bit. Said he tracked the car a few times. Didn't have any records. Looks like it could be good if you do a full checkout. Probably needs cam chain pads already tho.
I smell BS! There is more to the "left the sunroof open" story. The CPU/ECU is on the back shelf, behind the rear seats, under the carpet/foam. Also, at 40K miles it shouldn't need any chain pads.
And I had cam deviation if close to 9 on a 43k mile engine. My understanding is the original pads go bad quick. JR mentioned it being the number one reason for failing prequal on 3.4L
It�s a cab. No sunroof. If the top was left down and a rain storm destroyed the interior I could see it being totaled. Can also see having a ton of electrical issues down the line. Assume water got behind the dash, carpets, basically everywhere.
If that's the case then the owner wanted to get rid of the car before the roof was left open. Unlike a flood, rain water is not that detrimental to electronics especially since almost everything has weather tight connectors nowdays. There is more to this story.
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
