Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have O2 feedback on (pfc) and it cycles between 14.1-15.7afr when cruising, and yes i can feel the change in the "beat" of the engine similar to what Hanaldo is describing, and it clearly goes in time to when the gauge cycles from lean to rich and back

Sometimes it is worse than others but it is noticeable....never paid attention to when it is worse so i dont know if its related to operating temp but i'll monitor it now to see

Either way I just thought that it was normal due to the engine getting varying amts of fuel from being in closed loop as my O2 sensors voltage looks good and cycles as normal .........it does not do it if I turn off O2 feedback

hmmm..not connected as in not wired?

Effectively, yes. The sensor itself is still in the dump pipe, but the harness has been unplugged. When connected it gives a lot of trouble, made it impossible to tune.

Well then there is no possible way of the ecu seeing a voltage input so I cant think of any reason why the afr would cycle... just saying even if O2 feedback was indeed on and seeing erratic readings from the dud sensor when in closed loop

Sounds like you have similar symptoms but a different issue

It is not unknown for the wire that powers the heater in the O2 sensor to melt through and short the signal wire. You shoud check that loom from end to end to see if it good or bad. I can imagine it possibly feeding voltage or short to ground to the ECU if there is something wrong and seriously messing with the feedback.

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...