Hi Gary,
Quote:As many of you already know, the old school way of diagnosing is on it's way out due to computers, sensors and actuators controlling or monitoring every action of engine. There are some tricks that still work to get a general diagnosis, but will not pinpoint the exact failure, especially with emission failures.
You know there are two mistakes some make when it comes to troubleshooting... Using a scanner and using a scope. At the wrong time, for the wrong reason, in the wrong way, and without a good grasp of logic...
I am a GM dealer driveability tech of some 30 years now. My primary diagnostic tool is a Tech 2 scanner. After that, I use my fluke 192 scope, my fluke 863 GMM, a five gas analyser, firstlook sensor, and current probes.
The way I see it is like this. Many techs have gone overboard with scopes because they were never really taught how to not just view scanner data streams, but how to think. Deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, and my favorite, "the art of inference". Sometimes what is NOT to be found in the data stream is a source of information.
Post modernism with its "relativism" has clouded the usefulness (and truthfulness) of the law of noncontradiction for many. A cannot be non A at the same time and in the same sense. Therefore I can make (at times) use of deductive logic, inductive logic, and inference to find truth in a data stream.
Someone might say concerning a diagnostic routine, "see, the scanner did not help us". Well... maybe it did not because we were not thinking as we might have. It may not have told us what the problem was, but it might have told us what the problem is NOT. From there we can consider what other possibilities there are and if a direction can be inferred from the data.
Another mistake is to brush off the capabilities of a powerful scope such as the pico. While I have a lesser capable scope, even I know when its time to pull it out of my box...
I may be wrong, but I have a feeling it is easier to teach a tech how to make the best use of a scope than it is how to make the best use of a scanner. The more variables in a diagnostic equation the more fuzzy the logic gets.
One of the things I hope to get out of discussions here is how I might better use my scope. And also to challenge myself and find out if I'm being a bit too stubborn at times and not laying aside the scanner and reaching for my scope.
We need both the scanner and the scope. And heck... a gas analyzer is almost a necessity for me these days
If you want to get the most out of your scope, your in the right place.
Jim