Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys, I have done a search but nothing turned up in relation to NATS.

A little bit of background info first. My car is a 2002 350GT-8, it has the factory immobiliser deactivated (the LED that has a 'Security' sticker under it is off) but a factory fitted alarm that is still working (I set it off to test it). It also has an Autowatch 3 point immobiliser fitted that has a little LED indicator light next to the VDC button.

I was told that in order to start the car, I have to turn the key to the 'ON' position, at which point the Autowatch LED will light up continously, then when it turns off, I will be able to start the car. But the problem I've been having is the car basically has a mind of its own, sometimes it starts, sometimes it takes 2 or 3 attempts.

So I took it to a Nissan workshop and got them to hook up the Consult-II tool and search the whole system for error codes. The only thing that came up was 'NATS error', which I know refers to the security system but I'm not sure what exactly.

Are there any experts out there that can shed some light on this annoying problem? Thanks in advance :(

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/
Share on other sites

I would say he needs to check the car for you...

Thanks for that Captain Obvious.

And I bet he wants to charge me money just to do a simple 5 minute fix instead of just telling me what it is so i can fix it myself.

When I discovered how to get the oxidisation off of the windows, I shared that info with everyone, not a problem.

Isn't this forum about being part of a group that supports each other and shares the same interests, not a place for opportunists trying to make money anyway they can?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288031
Share on other sites

Hey mate calm down, I don't think he was trying to be a smart as$ :P

Chris is good with these types of things and has a lot of experience and I'm sure will be more than happy to help you out anytime, just send him a PM and have a chat with him :)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288047
Share on other sites

What the hell was that for? There is no need to be rude and call me names...

Perhaps some things are easier to check if you know how and obviously you don't, so please pull your head in and don't call me names.

Also, maybe he wasn't planning to charge you, I know if it was me and it only took a bit of his time, he would bend over backwards to help.

As for the oxidisation discovery, isn't that pretty easy to explain on here and perhaps fault finding a 2002 Factory immobiliser is a bit harder to do whilst online.

Also, I know what this forum is for and it isn't for openly having a go. If you are upset then please keep it to yourself, or complain to a moderator. As for opportunitists making money, it is your car, your money and your choice.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288074
Share on other sites

Hey mate calm down, I don't think he was trying to be a smart as$ :P

Chris is good with these types of things and has a lot of experience and I'm sure will be more than happy to help you out anytime, just send him a PM and have a chat with him :)

Hi Pulp, thanks for trying to smooth the situation over, but Stephen knows he is being a smart as$, thats the second time he has chimed in with a useless comment to try and make me look stupid.

Chris is no doubt good, but at the end of the day he is a business man and will try and make a buck, so I should expect that.

But you can be sure that any new information I find out about these cars will be posted loud and proud for all to see :) Have a good one

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288082
Share on other sites

Just for the record, there was absolutely NO intention to be a SMART ARSE and I take exception to that.

As for trying to make you look stupid, again that wasn't my intention, so my apologies.

However, if that is what you think please yourself.

As for Chris, I think if you think he is out just to make money, then I think you have that wrong.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288096
Share on other sites

What the hell was that for? There is no need to be rude and call me names...

Perhaps some things are easier to check if you know how and obviously you don't, so please pull your head in and don't call me names.

Also, maybe he wasn't planning to charge you, I know if it was me and it only took a bit of his time, he would bend over backwards to help.

As for the oxidisation discovery, isn't that pretty easy to explain on here and perhaps fault finding a 2002 Factory immobiliser is a bit harder to do whilst online.

Also, I know what this forum is for and it isn't for openly having a go. If you are upset then please keep it to yourself, or complain to a moderator. As for opportunitists making money, it is your car, your money and your choice.

So you think he wouldn't charge me? Then why come on here and say 'I know what the problem is..' etc. but not tell me?

And as for me being rude, I think you earned it. Two times you replied in my posts and both times it was with a useless comment. My tip to you is don't post unless you have something worthwhile to add or a question.

Anyway, we have both had our say, lets agree to disagree and get on with it.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288105
Share on other sites

Just for the record, there was absolutely NO intention to be a SMART ARSE and I take exception to that.

As for trying to make you look stupid, again that wasn't my intention, so my apologies.

However, if that is what you think please yourself.

As for Chris, I think if you think he is out just to make money, then I think you have that wrong.

Thanks for the apology Stephen, I believe you mean it and if what you say is true, then I must be reading your replies in the wrong light. Thats the trouble with reading and not hearing what someone says.

So I apologise for my remarks to you then, have a good one.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288115
Share on other sites

Remember no matter what you might think, being rude to someone doesn't help the situation.

If you think my comments are wrong and I have earned it, ask me about it in a PM, because I think you will have me wrong.

As for Chris, I presume he is a busy man, like all of us and perhaps he would prefer to work over the phone at the very least... I know of a very different side to him and he has never got money out of me... so far.

Have you tried to call him... his number is on all of his posts?

agree to disagree

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288117
Share on other sites

I would say he needs to check the car for you...

exactly.

if it was a car that I did during compliance I could tell you over the net via PM. I dare say its not.

I really need to see the car so I can verify : alarm model, installation, put a face to a name :)

and no if its a 5 min fix (which it sounds that way.) I'm NOT going to charge you.

stephen has met me. I'm not an opportunist- I do work on A LOT of these cars daily and have a decent understanding of them.

As for Chris, I presume he is a busy man, like all of us and perhaps he would prefer to work over the phone at the very least... I know of a very different side to him and he has never got money out of me... so far.

Have you tried to call him... his number is on all of his posts?

busy- me . never :P (say he that just finished a sedan and has 4 more cars waiting- none of which are on this forum.)

at the very least give me a call during the day- I *may* be able to sort it over the phone.

tell me who did the compliance on the car as well . sticker is inside the passenger door.

Edited by Chris Rogers
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288232
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Captain Obvious.

[And I bet he wants to charge me money just to do a simple 5 minute fix instead of just telling me what it is so i can fix it myself.

When I discovered how to get the oxidisation off of the windows, I shared that info with everyone, not a problem.

Isn't this forum about being part of a group that supports each other and shares the same interests, not a place for opportunists trying to make money anyway they can?

considering that the car has 4 major networks in it its not something that I would even attempt unless you had a background in autoelectrics and electronics.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4288242
Share on other sites

considering that the car has 4 major networks in it its not something that I would even attempt unless you had a background in autoelectrics and electronics.

I think you'll find that it only has 2 major networks, called CAN H and CAN L. One being high speed for the important things like ABS etc. and the other is low speed for power windows etc. And these two networks are linked for redundancy, allowing bcm's to be able to continue communicating if a section of the comms bus is broken.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4290875
Share on other sites

I think you'll find that it only has 2 major networks, called CAN H and CAN L. One being high speed for the important things like ABS etc. and the other is low speed for power windows etc. And these two networks are linked for redundancy, allowing bcm's to be able to continue communicating if a section of the comms bus is broken.

I thought it was a single CAN network with 2 communication lines (CAN H line and CAN L line)? Not 2 networks. Then there is the K line for all the OBDII diagnostics stuff, navi/TV/display bus and probably A/C bus.

I'm with smoothV35, unless we share information we will never learn.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4295212
Share on other sites

I thought it was a single CAN network with 2 communication lines (CAN H line and CAN L line)? Not 2 networks. Then there is the K line for all the OBDII diagnostics stuff, navi/TV/display bus and probably A/C bus.

I'm with smoothV35, unless we share information we will never learn.

I know what you mean mate, just depends how you look at it. For example, the Internet is one network, however it obviously has countless networks within it aswell.

Even though CAN H and CAN L are physically linked, logically they are separate, so they can be classed as their own type of network, thats what I was alluding to :)

Discussion is good though, we can learn off each other, and my plan is to totally crack open the mystery of how this cars internals work so we can do what we want to it.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/246664-nats-error/#findComment-4296095
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...