>> I have a 95 dodge neon That i have never had any problems with till
>> today.I was going down the highway and it started shaking and lost
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Also i forgot to add I did get some codes they are 51 and 55
55 is end of fault code display. 51 is fuel system lean. That could be
caused by an O2 sensor problem or low fuel pressure. Best to have someone with
a good scan tool look at sensor values and check the fuel pressure.
>> I have a 95 dodge neon That i have never had any problems with till
>> today.I was going down the highway and it started shaking and lost
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Also i forgot to add I did get some codes they are 51 and 55
55 means end of sequence, so the interesting code is 51. That's a code
indicating that the engine has been running too lean. Now, it might have
been running too lean a long time, or maybe just a short while while it
was shaking. But it's an indication your problem probably had something
to do with the fuel system rather than the ignition.
When did you last change the fuel filter?
The bad news is that intermittent fuel supply can be a bad pump or a bad
regulator, or something keeping power from getting to the pump, and of
course to track it down you have to make it misbehave. But even with it
running well, I'd check the pressure on the fuel rail and make sure it is
in range... then try and make it fail again.
And it's POSSIBLE that the error code is related to something else, too,
but I'm betting it's not.
--scott

Signature
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
Don Stauffer in Minnesota - 21 Nov 2007 14:48 GMT
> The bad news is that intermittent fuel supply can be a bad pump or a bad
> regulator, or something keeping power from getting to the pump, and of
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> but I'm betting it's not.
> --scott
I had to replace the pump on my 98 Neon recently. Symptoms were
primarily in starting. I had to let pump run for a long time after I
turned key on before pump would stop. If I tried to start before that
it would not start. Have you noticed it taking a longer time to pump
up before starting?
I had over 100K on it at that time- I guess that is not bad for a
fuel pump.
clifto - 21 Nov 2007 21:07 GMT
> I had over 100K on it at that time- I guess that is not bad for a
> fuel pump.
I thought it was absolutely terrible when I recently had to change the one
on my 140K mile '94 Acclaim. Never ever had one go on any of my five
Grand Marquises, one of which is now comfortably over 200K (the '89).

Signature
Angry American flags attack Hillary Clinton!
Don Stauffer in Minnesota - 22 Nov 2007 15:18 GMT
> > I had over 100K on it at that time- I guess that is not bad for a
> > fuel pump.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> --
> Angry American flags attack Hillary Clinton!
I hear people say, "they don't build 'em like they used to." I say
thank goodness. I and several of my friends used to have old flathead
Fords. Pumps were often replaced in as little as 30-40K miles. Of
course, rebuilding them was easy enough, and the rebuild kits were
cheap. I guess that diaphram was leather,and it would get brittle and
crack after awhile.
clifto - 23 Nov 2007 05:18 GMT
>> > I had over 100K on it at that time- I guess that is not bad for a
>> > fuel pump.
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> cheap. I guess that diaphram was leather,and it would get brittle and
> crack after awhile.
But they were bolted to the side of the front of the engine block, and
took about three minutes to remove, ten minutes to R&R, and three minutes
to reinstall. The only one I ever replaced (on my '60 Bonneville) was
just fine as it turned out, or at least the new pump didn't make a bit of
difference.

Signature
Angry American flags attack Hillary Clinton!