AnotherOldJeepGuy

I have bench.

I am the original owner of my particular 90 and I can vouch that these have never been touched since the day I drove it off the lot. Judging from this conversation, it would appear there are at least 2 different OEM nuts for this use .

Got the PCB cleaned up and put it back in for a test, all wiper operations are good! The vinegar was very foggy so it did pull off some crud. The large cap that @The86manche noted before actually looks fine (no deformity) once viewed with better focus looking at that cap. I think the most likely future failure may be the solenoid spring. I may take a look at the HW store to see if they have any springs that look the same, but swapping it would be risky cause the same "looking" spring may not have the same tension and I am not sure I could get the old one off and back on still in tack if needed. I'll soak it with a drop or 2 of oil before final reassembly and hope for the best! The old formed foam was dried up and crumbling so I threw it out and did not attempt to replace it. Not sure it was useful anyway.

Gotcha, thanks! I will let the vinegar clean probably for 24 hours, don't really know it needs that long but that's how long I soaked my blower control, then let it dry real good and then see what happens.

Opened up the module to take a look. You get in by drilling out four rivets that holed it together. The coil switch contacts are very ugly, and there's ugly elsewhere, but I don't see any opens or stressed components with visual inspection. (Some of what looks ugly is really because the component side had a formed block of foam covering everything and small bits of that foam remained stuck to components when I remove it.) I couldn't really get zoomed in clear focus to get a good view of the contacts to post, but they did look like they needed cleaned pretty badly. I got my ac blower speed control contacts working on my car before by soaking the assembly in vinegar so I'm going to try cleaning up this assembly the same way and see what happens. I may re-flow the solder joints as well, some are less shiny that others, although I can't see any are visually not connected.

Great! I plan on taking a look just to see if I can find a visible fault I can just solder or jumper, probably over the weekend. If that doesn't work I would be glad to send mine your way for core or repair. Stay tuned!

@The86manche, do you still have any working to sell, or are you willing to repair mine? I just pulled mine and restored non-intermittent functions, so it would appear mine is bad. I might attempt to look for a visible cracked solder or trace I can reconnect, but I don't have replacement parts....

I read on another post that you can bypass the intermittent control module by just plugging the two connectors together, so I did. I now have LOW and HIGH speeds at their respective control positions and WIPER PARK works. I assume this means the intermittent control module is bad. Seems like that post I read about bypassing it also talked about repairing it, or not, don't remember for sure. Otherwise I'll check here in the for sale area for one.

Here's a bit more detail in case it tells something: Switch Position Action OFF No Wiper Movement - Doesn't PARK, it just stops when you switch OFF DELAY Either continuous Wiper Movement in LOW speed - OR - No Wiper Movement (If Wiper Movement when switched to DELAY then Wiper Movement continuous at same rate regardless of Time Position) LOW No Wiper Movement HIGH Wiper runs faster than what it runs on DELAY if it runs on DELAY

I accidentally intertwined this thread with the one I started to document what it took to fix mine, I am going to try to get things back in that thread now so if you have a follow up, please put it there..

So now I have a brand new motor installed and new bushings, and sadly for me, I am 100% sure I got it hooked up correctly because it FAILS in the exact same way. I only get wiper motion when the switch is on high ( So what @Pete M said back on the 16th should have been where I went). I think I can say it's not the motor (odds that a new one fails in the exact same way is pretty small). So now what? I did look at wires at the motor, they look completely fine.

Well I kinds got off on the wrong thread, but I'll try to pull in back into this one. I asked in thread Upgrade your windshield wipers for GOOD! 2001 XJ wiper motor swap asking for wiring connections for installing the WPM447. @Gojira94 replied with that info! I'll copy it here since it was my intent to document this from start to finish in this thread, so that info was: Looking at the back of the new connector on the new motor, where the wires from the motor go into the connector, if these are the colors: ___________ | X 2 3 | |_4__5__6__| Then: New motor/function/old connector color: X (no pin/ no wire) 2 White - Park - goes to Gray wire of old connector 3 Red - Switched 12V - goes to Blue wire of old connector 4 Yellow - High - goes to Red Wire of old connector 5 Green - Low - goes to White wire of old connector 6 Black - Ground - goes to Black wire of old connector I had also captured some pics so I'll link them here again to get things back where they were supposed to be,,,, Now I'll continue here

I believe it matches! I just pictured and marked up the old one below from the MJ Electrical Manual and was about to start guessing, awesome that I don't need to guess! Thanks.

@Salvagedcircuit, Any chance you snapped a picture of the new motor with the old plug installed? Or if not saved the wire mapping from old to new wire colors?

I'll go with a Fel-Pro! Got it! Rock Auto sells a Steel T-housing by Motorad (CH4802) and an Aluminum from FourSeasons (84802). Any benefit to one over the other? Is the original steel or aluminum? I didn't really take notice with I had it off last time. EDIT: Duh, all you need is a magnet to answer that last one, it appears what is there now is aluminum because my magnet doesn't stick! So I'll order the aluminum replacement.

So since I am going to put in a new tstat housing anyway, and as I look at Rock Auto for parts, I am wondering what the experts say about a few things. Thermostat: 1. 180 or 195 Degree Thermostat? The Rock Auto comments suggest 180 might be better for older/classic vehicles. 2. "High Flow" Thermostat? The Rock Auto comments suggests "a reduction in engine warm up times, allows trapped air in the cooling system to escape, and stabilizes the pressure of the cooling system overall". 3. "Fail-Safe" Thermostat? These have a lock-open feature in an overheat situation. I see less useful here, if I get an overheat I'm not planning to keep driving so other than an emergency that would demand it, I don't know that I am interested in this. I also note that I don't see both "Fail-Safe" and "High Flow", so if High Flow is a good thing, that's another reason I would not use the Fail-Safe one. Gasket: 4. On gasket, when I replaced my valve cover gasket it was Fel-Pro. The instructions specifically noted to not use sealant so I didn't and it is sealing fine. I tried to find the instructions that would come with the Fel-Pro thermostat housing gasket to see if they said the same thing but did not find that. I did ask my ai buddy and it said to install it dry unless there were lots of pits or imperfections. So, does the community agree with this, that is, if I get the Fel-Pro thermostat housing gasket, does it work without sealant?

I see one end at least in that posting. Not clear [to me at least] if that is the one Pentti was looking for, or the other end.

If you have the need to make it visible again, might go ahead and post that allusive pic for future reference.

I've watched while the temp came up from cold to around 190 and haven't been able to see it. But since the dye is showing, and that's the best clue I have, I'll work on what I can find and see what happens. When I have the thermostat housing off a few months back that housing wasn't in very good shape, and a new one isn't expensive so I guess I'll replace it and see what happens.

I used the REM to look at RPM with and without AC. There was about a 80 RPM increase or so with the AC on. So not a big change but in my case, some.

Data Collection #1 complete. I used 12oz. of fluid in 379 miles. I described my data collection and seep-only leak (no visible dripping or residue) to my favorite ai companion (duck.ai), and asked if the amount of coolant loss I measured could reasonable be expected for a seeping leak at the thermostat housing over the miles seen. The duck's math suggested it was. I don't really know if that's accurate or not, but, I still plan to try and eliminate the known leak, retest, and go from there....

I see why you are asking. I read your post and went out and looked, and to take the requested picture. No evidence of any ground at that described location I can find on my 4.0L 1990

Yeah I got the stepper motor (well 2 at the moment since I just put in a new one), but not the stepper motor exerciser . Just for fun I put in the number on the box from OHM's pic into an ebay search, the tester has turned into a fuel injuctor pump!!

Interesting stuff! No idea what that is either, but whatever it is, I don't have one! . It does answer the question of if the IAC is used in time other than IDLE, or at least I think it does and the answer seems to be yes as best I can tell. Doesn't say anything really of how it is used differently in different modes, but does say that it is used. It also mentions it does look at if the AC is on or not in IDLE Mode, although it doesn't really say anything about if the target IDLE RPM is intentionally being set differently with respect to the AC on/off or what that might be. So I decided I would ask my go-to ai (duck.ai) and the duck tells me a properly running 1990 4.0L Renix would see a 50-200 RPM increase if AC was turned on depending on various environmental conditions. That is probably a good enough answer to squelch my curiosity .

I went ahead and replaced the IAC just because the remaining thing here is idle is good with AC off but with AC on it's still a little less smooth. So the IAC is something fairly low cost and an easy minor hail mary, so I did it. The one I took out is from 1990 so I have got my money's worth out of it either way. It does seem a bit smoother, but that could be just me, or it could be real. Initial REM numbers are a bit lower, 118-122 where they were 129-130 on July 5. I don't know if that is "better" or not. Should the ECU maintain, or attempt to maintain the same idle RPM with AC on and AC off? The REM documentation says to expect RPM between 600-900 at idle, but also says it "should be around 750", but doesn't really say anything about if this is or is not with AC on. Does the IAC have any function other than at idle? I assume no, but I'll ask any since I don't really know and I'm sure the experts here do know!