Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys

I'm new on this forum, hope starting this topic in right place :)

I recently cleaned throttle body and intake collector. doing this I accidentaly made puncture on EGR temp sensor's coolant hose. I found it out later, drove for one day :( I fixed the puncture, but check engine came out . I scanned my car at local dealer's shop, p1401 faulty code "EGR Temp sen/circ" came out. I tried to reset ECU, but did not solved my problem, after 3-4 km driving check engine is coming again.

Is there any chance to fix it?

You damaged the temp sensor. No big deal, you ca either replace the sensor or trick the ecu into thinking it is still in the circuit with a similar resistance soldered over it's wires.

Before you go further, can you make sure the temp sensor is plugged in properly? It's behind the plenum and throttle, thin white wire.

  • Like 1

You damaged the temp sensor. No big deal, you ca either replace the sensor or trick the ecu into thinking it is still in the circuit with a similar resistance soldered over it's wires.

Before you go further, can you make sure the temp sensor is plugged in properly? It's behind the plenum and throttle, thin white wire.

maybe is's overheated because of coolant leakage :( I know it is not big deal, I hate this sensor, it makes intake collector dirty :)

I checked it and connection is ok. How can I trick the ECU? which exact tips to solder?

Did you block the egr? If so you will need to put a resistor over the temp probe to get rid of the MIL.

Otherwise something is wrong with the temp sensor or the wires that connect it to the ecu. Did you forget to plug the temp sensor back in?

If I may, i have one more question:

My friend's 2005 250gt has problems with RPM, they are unstable. We resetted ecu several times and made idle air flow learning. Sometimes when he drives and turns gear to N rpms goes up to 1200-1500 and after switching to D gearbox is kicking hard :(

we checked on scanner and there are no ongoing faulty codes.

What can be the cause of this jumping rpms?

Edited by geoskyline

Did someone clean the throttle? Check all the vac lines are connected and not leaking.

You will probably need to do a throttle re-learn.

Did someone clean the throttle? Check all the vac lines are connected and not leaking.

You will probably need to do a throttle re-learn.

nope, nobody has done throttle body clean. I know what you mean, but this RPM jumping occurs occasionally, not always.

Something is letting excess air into the plenum occasionally, perhaps the egr valve is sticking open due to crud?

obviously the problem is mechanical not electrical. If problem would be electrical it should cam up on scanner :(

when my friend bought the car he fixed the loosen chain. is it possible mechanic did not fixed it properly, as i know chain has a mark points to sync it to engine.

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 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...