[timrice]

No apologies needed as far as I'm concerned, pcmos. I'm glad to learn all the extra details. I know some people get frustrated if they have to read more than a couple lines, but without the details, what's the point of even sharing a forum, I figure.

Now I must say that rustbucket has me worried again with what was said in Post #23 about the PCM having nothing to do with spark control during cranking.

The ICM *was* replaced about a month ago by my local shop in their first effort to fix this problem. I guess there's nothing that says that I couldn't have gotten a bad replacement. But I'd have thought my mechanic would have immediately load-checked the one he installed after I brought it right back in complaining of the same symptoms he originally told me were cured by replacing the ICM on my prior visit. He seemed awfully sure the original ICM was bad. Yet after I took the car home from the shop with the problem unresolved, the symptoms continued through last Friday. If the original diagnosis of a bad ICM was *truly correct*, I wonder why the shop didn't say the replacement ICM was bad too and that I needed another one?

Here I'm thinking I have it narrowed down to the PCM or its ground, but based on what rustbucket says, how can the PCM be at fault when it dies and won't start back up right away? It seems reasonable to me that if the PCM didn't have a stable ground it could cause the engine to die, but if the engine doesn't even *need* the PCM to start, how does it add up that the PCM and its ground should be suspect at all? If I unhooked the PCM and put it in the back seat, could the car still be started?

By the way, no failures again today. That makes two straight work days, plus almost 6 hrs engine time on Sunday. This streak is unprecedented. The last thing I did was clean up the frame ground post and ground terminals. Yet I do not dare claim victory prematurely.