Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey all,

I just wanted to quickly clarify whether this noise I am hearing is normal or not. When I pressurize the intake using an air compressor to test for leaks, I have noticed before that I get an odd whine coming from somewhere in the engine bay. I have narrowed it down to having something to do with the charcoal canister, as when that is disconnected and the lines blocked, the sound disappears. However the sound emanates from the back of the engine bay, over near the brake booster.

Now I am totally unsure why, but when I first made this discovery a few months ago I dismissed it as being normal. Upon hearing it again, I had the thought that perhaps this isn't normal and is an issue that I should rectify.

So, here is a video of pressurizing the intake with the charcoal canister disconnected. Note no noise:

Here is another video, now with the charcoal canister connected again. Note the noise that comes in at approx. 11 seconds.

I should also point out that I have never heard the sound while driving, I guess because the noise of the car covers it up or possibly the noise doesn't occur with the engine running.

Edited by Hanaldo

Can you unplug the hoses from the charcoal canistor one at a time to isolate which part of the system is making the noise. Just tryong to think where the lines run. One to the throttle body on the intercooler/turbo side of the TB, one to the manifold, one to the fuel tank breather and one more? Cant remember and dont have my car handy lol

I'm not sure what help this is but when we pressurise air systems in trucks and trailers at work on 100 psi to release the brakes for brake adjust or whatever, the air tanks can make this sound for a minuite then the sounds goes away when they are full, it may be normal.

The charcoal canister should only ever see vacuum as the diaphragm that opens it only gets exposed to vacuum at light throttle opening due the a valve on the cylinder 1 throttle.

I've heard that sound before, and it sounds more like throttle gasket or shaft seals.

Well considering the noise is only there when the charcoal cannister is connected, does that not mean it must be related to it? I can pump 20+psi into the system with the canister disconnected and it will be dead silent.

Also Nur, and what do you mean cylinder 1 throttle? The engine is a 25 Neo, so there is no Cyl 1 throttle. I did think the noise might be related to a diaphragm that doesn't normally see positive pressure, HOWEVER. When I installed the Plazmaman plenum, I ran new hose for the charcoal canister so that I could run it a natural way. It now goes straight into the plenum through standard 1/4" hose. No valve anywhere. Is that likely to be a problem?

Where is the valve supposed to be for the charcoal canister? If I have deleted that valve without knowing it, would the charcoal canister essentially be a big boost leak?

That is the sound of air leaking past a diaphram valve im guessing the one that only opens on vacuum being present. And sounds like a fairly small amount at that. Find the valve, and inspect. Not sure about the 34 ones but 33 is the round bit on top of canister

Does anyone know where this valve is? If it is between the canister and the plenum, then it no longer exists. I've run 1/4" hose directly from the canister to the plenum, there's no valve in that line. If it is in the line between the fuel tank and the canister, does anyone know where? I can't find a diagram anywhere.

i do the same test from time to time, and haven't had that noise....just sounds like a leak to me. What's the pressure gauge doing, going down? After I replaced the leaking PCV valve mine holds pressure pretty well, no rapid drop or sound of leak like that. Other option would be to try getting can of party smoke and filling air compressor with it, then pressurising and seeing if any colored smoke coming out anywhere..?

Well the sound doesn't come from anywhere near the canister. Its definitely over near the brake booster.

the inline chechvalve on booster line? remove/block booster line and test?

That valve is fine. The noise isn't coming from the brake booster, just some where near it. I block off the charcoal canister and it goes away, has to be something to do with that, surely?

That is the solenoid for the charcoal canister, so it only sucks air from the tank when there is vac in the manifold. Perhaps it's leaking? It looks like the same part my car uses for a stock boost controller.

  • Like 1

Hmmm... I imagine it won't be an easy part to find :/ I don't really want to block off the charcoal canister though. Would definitely much rather keep it.

I doubt this is the cause of my power issues anyway, it's barely leaking at all :(

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...