Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Already posted in the stickied O2 sensor section however this is rather urgent, hoping on a main page it will get a bit more exposure.

curious

i stuck the cable in the com port of the stagea last night

unfortunately i have not been able to stick the cable in within 60 starts of the lst check engine light so i cant be too sure of the problem.

i'm thinking my o2 sensor is stuffed

the o2 sensor was reading 0.2 to 0.3 V (volts?) on a warm engine after start up

after continuous loops around 2 roundabouts boosting it hard for about 5 mins i returned home

the guage was stationalry, reading 0.02 V

is this a sign that my 02 sensor is shagged?

i'm not sure on what one should read and i dont want to go through the hard slog of country f**k wits to try and get one if its ok.

any ideas of theories?

img-resized.png Reduced: 93% of original size [ 1024 x 640 ] - Click to view full imageecutalk.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/277229-ecu-talk-o2-sensor-help/
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

not sure whats up with ur screenshot, all the sensors there show 0

anyway, 0.3v o2 sensor generally means its dead (assuming its warm). when u rev the engine a bit at idle u should see it move around when engine is warm, if it doesnt react then its dead

best way to tell is log a run and then graph the sensor afterwards (or just look at the readings), it should be moving quite a bit from 0.1v up to 0.9v and back and forth when cruising/light load, and generally moving about to 0.9v on power etc.

hiya. I'm pretty sure it should ideally sit at 0.5v which is lambda (14.7:1 ideal afr) and it should periodically flick from 0 to 1. I know its never this exact but 0.2 sounds like its running a spot rich overall (never a bad thing I think personally - much better than the other way around lol!). The fact it doesn't move suggests the o2 sensor may have seen better days and they're not that much to replace so usually worth doing I think if you haven't.

edit sorry its the other way around - 1v is rich, 0v lean - sorry about that!

Edited by anthonymcgrath

the o2 sensor is a narrowband sensor, which basically means its either reporting 'richer than 14.7:1' or 'leaner than 14.7:1', it doesnt really ever sit on 0.5v but is continually going back and forth as ecu continually fine tunes the fuel around the 14.7:1 point.

so when cruising along, the correct behaviour would not be constant at 0.5v, but rather back and forth from close to 0v and to 1v (even if its reading 0.1v, this may not a whole lot leaner than 14.7:1, and likewise even 0.9v isnt too much richer than 14.7:1)

no the screen shot was after i moved the laptop inside to connect to the net and disconnected from ecu.

i wasn't sure of the scale of the o2 sensor being V (volts i assimed) i wasn't aware it had volts or was supposed to read resistance (ohms), so stuck it up to hopefully trigger someone to look at it.

at the moment on cruise it is sitting at 0.01v to nothing

i'm assuming its dead - casual drivin gets 350km to a 60L tank and would like to see a slight improvement

i just wanted a bit more understanding before i purchase something i may not need

Edited by 910trx

yep if it sits on any single value (but often close to 0v or 0.3v) when car is cruising then its dead. most people dont change them often enough (theyre supposed to be changed like every 40-80'000km i think, but most people are lucky to change them once in the cars lifetime).

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...