Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

My car seems to be having some serious issues here

Was driving to the drags one evening and it suddenly just stopped working

(thank god it didnt happen on the drag strip)

It refused to start even when my friend helped me to jump start it

Towed it to the workshop and they told me they had spark but the injectors seems to be flooding the engine and the only thing they could think of is the ECU is ****ed. The workshop is going to be closed for the weekend so they said they'll test the ECU on monday

Recently before the incident Ive been having problems starting the car

sometimes I had to put some gas into it before it would crank over

and also a few days before I had a bosch 910 installed without a FPR

and exhaust cam gear set to 4Deg retard

So any ideas?

just incase it maters my car is a 1996 R33 Series II Auto

Here's the list of mods I currently have

S-AFCII

Profec B boost controller

Bosch 910 (no FPR)

HKS Exhaust Cam gear

Trust Cat-back

SS high flow cat

Front pipe

Trust V-SPL intercooler

Apexi Air Filter

cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/35704-engine-flooding-problem/
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I dont think you need a FPR...

Could be stuffed injector stuck open... be carely that you havent filled you cylinder/s with fuel and may have compression locked your motor .... pull the dip stick out and check to see if it smells like fuel??? It s not a common thing - but it does happen, trust me ;-<

Dan

Pump the throttle???

1. efi cars are ment to be started with the foot off of the throttle

2. would pumping the throttle actually do anything?? - its not like an old carby that opens up secondary squirters when pumped.

3. when you said you had a pump installed without a FPR, do you mean you removed the standatd/afrermarket FPR on the fuel reguator? if so why??

4. This may not explain why it flooded, but it indicates a few problems.

well it wont start with or without throttle

and the standard FPR is still there

When I installed the fuel pump my workshop said it might blow the standard FPR because of overpressure. How does that make sense? doesnt the FPR control the pressure?

IMACUL8:

checked out that possibility as well but its not compression lock

but havent checked the injectors though

If the engine is "flooded", you need to try and start with the "pedal to the metal" - this is to allow as much air as possible in to help ignite the fuel. DO NOT pump the throttle - that only adds "acceleration" fuel, and worsens the situation.

If the CAS was crook, you would not have spark.

I have been running the standard FPR in my 32 with a Bosch pump, and no problems encountered for nearly 2 years.

Can you hear the injectors working when trying to start the engine?

You are probably going to have to pull the injectors, so arrange to get them cleaned while they are out.

  • 2 weeks later...

BACK ON THE ROAD!

turns out the CAS was electronically alive but mechanically dead!

and the little stick at the end of the cam shaft had snapped

oh well got HKS 256 in there now

when the engine is warm the cams are kinna noisy

is this normal?

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...