Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys,

Seeing as when I run into a starting problem I try to get some info first, I thought I would post how I solved my no start issue for my R33 S2.

The car is great, best I have had as it rarely runs into trouble and if it does it is usually responsive to the first thing I do I love her!

Anyway, yesterday I got some fuel and went for a little drive. I turned the car off to run into the shop and when I tried to start her it was a slow start and died pretty much as the engine started. I tried a couple more times and would only keep cranking & cranking. Battery was good, got no codes from ECU, heard fuel pump prime and relay click etc. I was worried maybe fuel pump as I didn't really smell much fuel considering the cranking but that didn't end up being the case.

Narrowed it down to CAS or AFM. I had a spare CAS so I unplugged mine and undid the three bolts and removed it taking note as best as I could of the bolt position. I put the spare CAS in and it seemed to fit easier and was easier to turn and adjust. Guessed the correct position, tightened bolts and plugged in and she started first go! I was having the occasional slow start which I have put down to being the CAS now as well. For the first minute it sounded like it had a slight miss but after a run that was gone and it sounds so much better than before and starts great. I also gave my AFM a clean just in case which helped also.

Anyway, I hope this helps someone!

Here is a pic of her with her new wheels.

Emily

photo4_zps7997ff36.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/450769-no-start-no-problem/
Share on other sites

Good point- on start up only when it has been sitting over night it will start and sort of feels like it is going to die, i don't put any throttle on and it picks up on it's own like jumps straight up to 1500rpm. Worth checking cold start valve? Want to take a look at that and clean my AAC valve :)

  • Like 1

Omg after all that it was actually the fuel pump!! It broke down again haha. I was suspicious of the lack of fuel smell after cranking so decided to listen out for it priming but only the relay would click.

It was obv a fluke starting last time but I did chuck some fuel in it and banged around in the boot. I used a rubber mallet the second time around and hit near fuel pump and tank and it started!

Maybe check out your fuel pump as could be the reason you are having rough starts also. Hope this helps!

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...