Compare temperature input to reality
Check ECT plausibility from cold start through warm-up. An implausible input can mislead the control strategy and the technician.
When a car runs hot, first determine whether the PCM is requesting fan operation and whether the fan circuit responds. That separates a control/input problem from a relay/fan/power problem.
Check ECT plausibility from cold start through warm-up. An implausible input can mislead the control strategy and the technician.
A capable scan tool can help separate the fan hardware/circuit from the temperature-based control decision. Follow the exact 2002 procedure already linked in FPV.
Move into relay, feed, ground, connector and fan-motor testing rather than replacing the ECT sensor or PCM.
1993–1997 LT1 and 1998–2002 LS1 control strategies are kept separate. Use the exact-year LS1 material for this car.
Do not replace a fan motor, relay, PCM or temperature sensor because the fan does not run in one condition. Follow the exact-year command-versus-response path and prove where the command or current path stops.
Replace the fan/relay/sensor only when its exact branch fails. If scan-command, wiring, power, ground or temperature-input evidence points elsewhere, repair that cause instead.
Heat-cycle or command the system through the original failure condition, verify the expected fan response returns and confirm the engine no longer overheats because of the same fan-control fault.
SYMPTOM → TEST → ISOLATE → PROVE → PARTS VERDICT → REPAIR → VERIFY. A code, symptom or commonly failed part is not proof by itself.
Use the proven failed branch—not the original symptom—to choose the replacement. Go from diagnosis to the Parts Verdict →