Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

That would be the better outcome. The one where the car is burning to the ground while also being broken down in the dark of a wet rainy night is also possible.

Hopefully not, since he knows the fuses work ha ha ha

3 minutes ago, MBS206 said:

Hopefully not, since he knows the fuses work ha ha ha

Yeah, but knowledge of one wire's insulation worn through to short on earth implies the possibility of other wires doing the same.

I had my power steering die, because the wire that runs to the solenoid valve on the rack runs in the same loom as the power wire for the O2 sensor. And when the O2 sensor/wire did something stupid and burnt part of that loom to death, the only indication was the shit(ter) fuel economy and the heavy steering. It took deep excavation of the looms in the bay to find the problem. Not wear through in that case, but similar shit.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

He's right ~ there is no 'magic' with stuff like this ... it is more likely that in the process of looking for the short, the loom/wire 'incidentally' got moved in the process, thus removing the short ~ now, that maybe a wire (in a loom) rubbing against the edge of some grounded metal, that's worn through the insulation, causing the (now intermittent) short to ground. If one wire in a loom has been damaged in this fashion, it's reasonable to presume that other wires beside it may have also be damaged, and now exposed...you can bet the green crusty copper corrosion will start...

...that'd be a pisser, Murphy's Law steps right in as GTS observes...but worse, something like that is easier to find when shorted...ie; unplug bulb and fuse, and put multimeter in continuity mode so you get constant beep, and carefully poke about hoping to find if some movemet of the harness stop the beeping....

...it's still all a bit Arnie tho' ..It'll be back... 😃

  • Like 1
7 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

That doesn't sound like bad news. That sounds like the never ending packet of TimTams.

yes wtf, its never ending i swear. im literally losing hair

From memory when the tank is full is when the resistance from the fuel sender reads its absolute lowest. It sounds like the short has made its way to the fuel sender wires...
Which also means the short could possibly be in / around the cluster.

Correct ~ fuel gauge receives power (usually about 10volts) from a linear regulator on the cluster board (gives a stable reference voltage), and as you say, via a variable resistor to ground (float level) ; high resistance when tank empty, a low resistance when tank full. As you surmise, if the fuel sender wire was shorted to ground, there'll be full defection of the fuel gauge needle. I haven't got an R34 wiring diagram, but going by the R33 spaghetti schematic, about the only thing common here between headlight & fuel gauge circuits is the SMJ connector...

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, kevboost7 said:

What is the SMJ connector?

Ahh...should have been clearer ~ there's 2 ... SMJ = super multi junction (connector)...

spacer.png

 

...this is connector 6 & 25 in above image -- body harness to engine loom (6) & body harness to main loom (25)

Headlights go to front via connector 6 ; fuel gauge goes to tank sender via connector 25  ...like I say this is R33 diagrams, but at a pinch R34 won't be too far different. *IF* the two ground faults are related, this can be the only place where both wires converge (as one runs to the back, the other to the front)...

....thing is, you probably need to establish if the faults are related (unless you examine that area and find obvious chaffing on the looms there to body ground)....*IF* the fuel gauge is still broken (full needle deflection), I'd be headed for the boot, remove fuel sender wire, key on and measure the voltage there ~ it should be roughly 10volts. If that's ok, check sender to ground resistance...if this is a dead short to ground (and there's fuel in it), then sender has failed or something funky has happened to wiring in the tank.

edit: ahh...rereading the thread, this is R32....above fuel sender test still valid tho'

Edited by dbm7

Those two circuits would end up in the same looms from near cluster/stalk all the way to the SMJ from memory, so fault could be anywhere between cluster/stalk area down to the SMJ, and even in the SMJ.

 

Other possible f**kery is some cars for compliance in Australia had extra resistors added to dash / headlight wiring to alter dash bright ness, so could be some dodgy free electrons floating out of that area if it's done in this car.

  • 3 weeks later...
On 06/05/2025 at 7:49 PM, GTSBoy said:

And the full R32 GTR wiring diagrams are also freely available.

Hmm.... there's supposed to be an auto replace that would have linked the thread. Here it is, manually

 

Wow, i wish i found this sooner.

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...