OK, so I have learned much in 24 hours. I found the terminology change in the back of my '93 Shop Manual indicating compliance with a SAE directive J1930 where IAC is Idle air control from 93 on and IMRC was previously IAC as inlet air control. So the 551 code refers to the IMRC.
I thought the secondaries were purely vaccum controled, I now know they are open engine off, closed by vaccum engine on below ~ 3600 rpm and open by the IMRC solenoid opening the line to atmosphere above 3600 hence the secondaries open.
Now the puzzle. I think my secondaries work fine. I visually see them move slightly on key on (from vaccum reserve canaster) then suck shut on start up. I am reluctant to bump throttle past 3600-4000 to seem them open visually in the driveway - I fear that risks engine damage. But there is no doubt in my mind they open on the road - engine tone change accompained by the expected power boost.
So all indications in my mind are that all is well. SHOooo suggests problems that to me would result in either stuck open or stuck closed secondaries - I have symptoms of neither. I do not quite understand your intstructions to test the resistance of the solenoid and there are no ohm values given, I don't have the supplemental engine power control trouble shooting manual.
I can test the resistance to ground or the voltage at the terminal but have no idea what they should be.
And does any of this relate back to my engine symptoms (first posting)? Stuck open could do it I suppose but I should get other performance problems.
Thanks, this site is great. I have owned my SHO for 6 years, just found this site last week. Have had this problem for 5 years, dealer has replaced a multitude of sensors and the PCM, transient and intemittent change but it always returns. The dealer ate the cost of the PCM because he had not been able to fix with multiple new sensors.
I have a theory to do with coolant air lock in the throtle body/IAC loop producing the effect of old fashioned carb icing, but I'll leave that for another time, I am intersted in your response to this rather lenghtly post.