wtf... computer?

ok so i have discovered something. i have two computers for this '88 new yorker. one was in the car already, the other i got from an identical '88
in the parts yard. SO..
with computer A) i get normal mileage, runs a little rough, accelerates fine, and everything else is ok.
with computer b) i get really shitty mileage, runs awesome, accelerates even better, and the rest is normal.
so what's the deal? which one is *more* normal?
i have a few ideas.. (taking into consideration that the O2 sensor being kaput is about the only thing i can think of that can decrease mileage by 12 MPG, and it is a new one in there already). either 1) computer A is busted and the O2 sensor is good, or 2) computer B is good and the O2 sensor is bad, 3) both A and B are busted and i have to get another computer as a control group, 4) the O2 sensor is bad AND the computers are both bad, 5) both A and B are fine, the O2 sensor is fine, and i have another problem.
thanks for the help guys ;)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

There are 2 basic different computers used on the 1988 3.0 New Yorker.(actually 4 different part numbers IIRC, 3 basixcally the same, and one different. One has to be addressed as a 1989 when connecting a code scanner. I suspect if the wrong computer was installed there may be some issues.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
how many computers were there for the 2.2T?

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Don't know - I had a 3.0
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Please post with what you find out on this. I have an '89 3.0 Caravan, 155k, that is very underpowered. Won't even turn the tires over on loose gravel, literally. I'd had a '90 right before this one and had twice as much power as my current one, same engine. Both got around 23 mpg. I've checked all the obvious stuff, someone said he'd heard that if the timing belt isn't positioned properly on one of the cams it will make it behave like this: run normal, decent fuel mileage, but lousy power. Anyone else heard that?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
heard the same. i had an '86.. or '85 daytona with a 2.5, i can't remember the year anymore.. but anyway- friend of mine drove it, blew the timing belt, replaced it, but put it on one cog too far in the wrong direction. absolutely no power at all over 2400 rpm... nothin, nada, zilch, zippo. but nothing else changed. i retired the car and got my current new yorker.
so; cam timing, ignition timing, get some plugs and wires, make sure she's firin' on all 6. all i can think of right now. :)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.