Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

been working on a the engine trying to get it wired up correctly. I have got it started now and it seems like it doesn't want to run right.

Problems:

very low idle, almost dies

gauge is showing little/no vacuum (this might have to do with my homemade vacuum block)

running super rich

doesnt want to rev up

When I unplug the maf it runs much better, idle raises up and it revs much more smoothly but stops at 2500 rpm like it should. As soon as i plug the maf back in it drops down again to 300 rpm or so and wants to die again.

I was thinking maybe the maf wiring or maf itself are bad?

what would cause it to want to die and not idle?

Haha I am actually located in Texas, in the US.

I went out and tested the voltages that the TPS is sending back to the computer and its something like 3v at close and almost 8 at full throttle. this is with the car on and engine running. I tried adjusting the tps down but I only got it to send at a minimum of 2.6v at close throttle.

Isnt the tps supposed to see 12v on the + wire?

throttle shut the tps should read .44V but i'm not sure which wires that is across

a good idea would be to grab either a consult cable or an ecutalk display and hook it up to a pc and see whats going on

www.ecutalk.com does the cables and the display (display is soooooo handy)

take a pic of the vac system and post it up, it will give us a good idea of whats going on

we told you in your other thread that the TPS see's 5v and you haven't taken any notice. no wonder your getting ridiculously high TPS readings. you'll be lucky if you haven't done any damage to the rest of the sensors that are designed to receive a 5v supply.

FYI, anything above 2.5v on the TPS at low load i.e idle, makes the ECU think you have your foot planted so it starts dumping in shit loads of fuel, this is all in preparation for hard acceleration and wont cause an issue if you do just that. because your not accelerating its just running mega rich at idle. to give you an idea of the fuel enrichment, your basically going from a normal idle injectors pulsewidth of about 3m/s to one of about 20m/s.

oh and just incase you still don't believe it

post-34711-0-16742300-1292915871_thumb.jpg

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...