Omega Owners Forum

Omega Help Area => Omega General Help => Topic started by: JamesV6CDX on 14 March 2011, 09:49:12

Title: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 14 March 2011, 09:49:12
My 3.2 is still not quite right.

It was fine when I picked her up – really, really pokey, you had to be careful with the throttle because the slightest touch would throw you back into your seat!

However, since taking off and refitting the plenum, inlets etc to do the thermostat, she’s lost all her get-up-and-go.

The best way I can describe it, is that she’s like a 2.5 – almost asthmatic. It’s not seriously underpowered, and totally drivable and smooth, but I know very well it’s not right.

Other observations are:

1.Only fault codes are the pre-cat issue, so not going to be related.

2.Economy is OK I think. (2 of us to Wales and back, A roads, boot full of kit - 30.2mpg)

3. All Vac pipes intact and connected correctly. Triple checked.

4. Main servo hose to plenum intact and tight.

5.Idle is 0.3 to 0.4 gal/h

6. There seems to be much more power in the higher rev range – it’s low-down the rev range it seems to be much less pokey. (I’ve had someone rev the car, and can see both ‘rams operating visually).

7.When you hoof it in sport mode, it seems to change up at around 6000rpm – I’d have thought it should rev higher than this! Feels too early for a gear change, in sport mode.

8. Gearbox has been behaving a little oddly – holding it in gear for too long, and then changing into the next gear with a very small ‘thump’ – this is intermittent, not sure if related, as this is the first A-Road run I’ve done with her.

I did think that the seals on the inlet bridge, plenum O rings etc looked a bit past their best, but, there is no noticeable air leaks.

Are there any other values in the live data, I could be checking?

Any suggestions would be VERY gratefully received… I love this car, and will do anything to keep her mint :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 14 March 2011, 10:00:18
post up the live data snapshot, may throw some light.

autobox - you know em well enough, could just be fluid, could be new box time, not far from the symtoms my old box had - nothing really wrong with it, just worn out (but it was an AR25 on a chipped etc 3.0)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: tunnie on 14 March 2011, 10:15:07
re-checked the cam-belt timing? could it have slipped a tooth?  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 14 March 2011, 10:17:57
Quote
re-checked the cam-belt timing? could it have slipped a tooth?  :-/

Not a chance - I changed the belt kit myself, triple checked everything incl torques etc...

(Plus, the cambelt hadn't been touched, at the time the car lost it's 'go')

:y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: tunnie on 14 March 2011, 10:19:42
Quote
Quote
re-checked the cam-belt timing? could it have slipped a tooth?  :-/

Not a chance - I changed the belt kit myself, triple checked everything incl torques etc...

(Plus, the cambelt hadn't been touched, at the time the car lost it's 'go')

:y

Ok, so what other things have been changed? (sorry not kept up to date on your project)

Done anything with the fuel filter?

Is it just plenum removal thats been done to cause less ooomph?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 14 March 2011, 10:22:37
Quote
Quote
Quote
re-checked the cam-belt timing? could it have slipped a tooth?  :-/

Not a chance - I changed the belt kit myself, triple checked everything incl torques etc...

(Plus, the cambelt hadn't been touched, at the time the car lost it's 'go')

:y

Ok, so what other things have been changed? (sorry not kept up to date on your project)

Done anything with the fuel filter?

Is it just plenum removal thats been done to cause less ooomph?

Only jobs that have been done, are

1) Thermostat (so plenum off)

2) Cambelt kit, water pump, aux belt, aux belt pulley (plenum off again)


Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: ffcgary1 on 14 March 2011, 12:01:31
As to the gearbox issues, it sounds like a problem with one or more of the solonoids that change the gearing, They are easy enough to change but as you know requires main gearbox sump down to do.
Poor performance is more difficult to tie down, dont dismiss the zorst senor issue it could affect the engine ecu in some small way and if you are sure that you dont have a timing issue then you have to look at poss air leak on or around the plenium or maybe multi ram not working.
Have you checked the vac tanks, or the seals on the intake manifold, it is going to be something small and silly that is letting you down.
Good luck james, if its there you will find it. :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 14 March 2011, 12:07:46
Im thinking MAF, they are not uber reliable on the 3.2's, so sould be interested to see live data at idle and load.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: YZ250 on 14 March 2011, 13:07:14
I'm following this thread with interest as what you describe is very similar to what happened to my 3.2 after I had removed the plenum to change my cam cover seals.

Like you, I have triple checked everything that I touched, including removing the plenum again. I'm hoping that your solution will be mine.

My symptoms at the time were explained here:

http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1277984602

Sorry I can't solve it but it does seem spooky that the only thing disturbed was the plenum.  :-/ :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Andy B on 14 March 2011, 13:08:45
Quote
...Any suggestions would be VERY gratefully received… ....

you've checked for any 'spare' hydraulic lifters in the boot ........  ::)  ::)  ::)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: SP_3.2 on 14 March 2011, 13:24:45
May have been something that you have checked James, but thinking there could be a blockage in the exhaust My old one before replaced had the internal wading coming away could just see it if you looked into the back box with a light ...But could not tell just looking at it day to day. Just a thought. Took the power down on mine until replaced
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 14 March 2011, 13:29:59
Quote
May have been something that you have checked James, but thinking there could be a blockage in the exhaust My old one before replaced had the internal wading coming away could just see it if you looked into the back box with a light ...But could not tell just looking at it day to day. Just a thought. Took the power down on mine until replaced

Seems like too much of a co-incidence, though Steve - considering it was fine one min - but not the next, as soon as plenum re-fitted?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: SP_3.2 on 14 March 2011, 13:40:07
That is a good point...hope it,s sorted soon for you as it,s a great looking car :y :y.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: harpersimon on 14 March 2011, 14:03:24
did you take the inlet bungs/rags back out :-)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 14 March 2011, 14:43:00
Quote
did you take the inlet bungs/rags back out :-)

Yep! :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 14 March 2011, 18:41:21
Smacks of a multiram issue - sure they are working. Any vac leaks?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: VXL V6 on 14 March 2011, 18:44:54
Quote
8. Gearbox has been behaving a little oddly – holding it in gear for too long, and then changing into the next gear with a very small ‘thump’ – this is intermittent, not sure if related, as this is the first A-Road run I’ve done with her.

I did think that the seals on the inlet bridge, plenum O rings etc looked a bit past their best, but, there is no noticeable air leaks.

Fix the known problems first.....
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 14 March 2011, 21:11:40
Quote
Smacks of a multiram issue - sure they are working. Any vac leaks?

Exactly my thoughts TB....

But, I've had the car revved - and they both work.

Can't find any vac leaks - and - you get a good 'hiss' if you pull off the rear multiram connection after it's been running - indicating the front tank is holding a good vac?

VXL - although the intake seals looked past their best, I don't think there is an air leak, else it'd idle quick, etc etc?

And ref the gearbox, I really don't think it's related, just a bit tired...
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: VXL V6 on 14 March 2011, 21:14:24
Quote
Quote
Smacks of a multiram issue - sure they are working. Any vac leaks?

Exactly my thoughts TB....

But, I've had the car revved - and they both work.

Can't find any vac leaks - and - you get a good 'hiss' if you pull off the rear multiram connection after it's been running - indicating the front tank is holding a good vac?

VXL - although the intake seals looked past their best, I don't think there is an air leak, else it'd idle quick, etc etc?

And ref the gearbox, I really don't think it's related, just a bit tired...

Has the Brake vacuum pipe to plenum rubbed on the Aircon pipe at all? My first one did that.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 14 March 2011, 21:17:50
Quote
Quote
Quote
Smacks of a multiram issue - sure they are working. Any vac leaks?

Exactly my thoughts TB....

But, I've had the car revved - and they both work.

Can't find any vac leaks - and - you get a good 'hiss' if you pull off the rear multiram connection after it's been running - indicating the front tank is holding a good vac?

VXL - although the intake seals looked past their best, I don't think there is an air leak, else it'd idle quick, etc etc?

And ref the gearbox, I really don't think it's related, just a bit tired...

Has the Brake vacuum pipe to plenum rubbed on the Aircon pipe at all? My first one did that.

You mean the thick one that comes from the servo, to the passenger side of the plenum - 19mm hex connection?

I'll double check it.

You know this has got me thinking. Although there is a 'hiss' when you pull off a vacc pipe when it's been running - it's not a POWERFUL hiss, like some Omega's I've seen...  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: VXL V6 on 14 March 2011, 21:24:45
Yep, where the vac pipe passes the top corner of the plenum it runs parallel to the aircon pipe. Can rub through the vac pipe.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Entwood on 14 March 2011, 22:03:38
Have you checked that funny shaped "o-ring" .. the one with the bar across it .. that sits in the centre of the plenum ??? I seem to recall it being broken on my 2.5, so blocking the 2 tiny breather holes and causing a serious power loss ... I know it breaks very easily when old.....did you replace it when you did the breathers ??
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 14 March 2011, 22:57:36
Quote
Have you checked that funny shaped "o-ring" .. the one with the bar across it .. that sits in the centre of the plenum ??? I seem to recall it being broken on my 2.5, so blocking the 2 tiny breather holes and causing a serious power loss ... I know it breaks very easily when old.....did you replace it when you did the breathers ??

Hi Nige - I haven't touched that one - not got around to doing the breathers yet  :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 15 March 2011, 09:28:08
Quote
You mean the thick one that comes from the servo, to the passenger side of the plenum - 19mm hex connection?

I'll double check it.

You know this has got me thinking. Although there is a 'hiss' when you pull off a vacc pipe when it's been running - it's not a POWERFUL hiss, like some Omega's I've seen...  :-/

Other thing to check is that the non-return valve in the reservoir is working - otherwise your vacuum will disappear on full throttle.

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Cliffo B on 15 March 2011, 10:47:25
has anyone thought of useing a vac gauge to check vac quality? I bought one several months ago and never got round to useing it because couldn't find any positive "vac should be" info
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 15 March 2011, 11:06:26
Quote
has anyone thought of useing a vac gauge to check vac quality? I bought one several months ago and never got round to useing it because couldn't find any positive "vac should be" info

Yes, I often do. If the vac is a little low it's a good indication of a leak in the system and watching the post-reservoir vacuum decay after stopping the engine (it shouldn't) can also give clues to what's going on with the non return valve and / or leaks.

Kevin

EDIT: to answer the "what it should be", at idle with a warm engine I would say about 18-20"Hg / 30kPa absolute (70kPa / 0.7Bar  of vacuum below atmospheric).
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 15:10:10
Just an update.

I tried plugging the line from the front vacc tank outlet, directly into a spare multiram, with the engine running.

I turned off the engine, and the ram stayed open, and didn't slowly return to it's original state, so it would appear it's holding a good vac?

I've also tried

- pulling off the feed line into the vacc tank after idle - no hiss. then pull off the outlet line - a good hiss - this indicates the return valve is OK, I guess?

I've also done a thorough inspection of vac pipes, removing them one by one - no damage or leaks evident  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 18:45:56
took her out for a run on a quiet road tonight

at 20mph - floor it - there is a good kick of power around 4000rpm, but - even in sport mode, it changes gear just under 5800 rpm - this can't be right???  :'(
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 15 March 2011, 19:26:34
Quote
took her out for a run on a quiet road tonight

at 20mph - floor it - there is a good kick of power around 4000rpm, but - even in sport mode, it changes gear just under 5800 rpm - this can't be right???  :'(
Grow longer legs, or move seat forward :P ;D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: hotel21 on 15 March 2011, 19:30:49
Don't want to sound condescending but you are using the full length of travel of the accelerator pedal, as TB suggests, including into the kickdown switch??   ;)   :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 15 March 2011, 19:33:42
Quote
Don't want to sound condescending but you are using the full length of travel of the accelerator pedal, as TB suggests, including into the kickdown switch??   ;)   :y

Does the 3.2 actually have a kickdown 'switch' in the pedal assembly, or does the ECU just look for max deflection on the throttle pedal pot?

Could be a dicky pedal pot maybe - live data would, I presume, read out the current value for that so it could be checked..
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 19:40:15
Quote
Don't want to sound condescending but you are using the full length of travel of the accelerator pedal, as TB suggests, including into the kickdown switch??   ;)   :y

Yep, any harder and the foot would be through the floor  ;D :y :y

Live data snapshots / driving recordings taken for engine and gearbox. Will be posted ASAP!
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 19:47:51
Engine snapshot.

At IDLE, and up to temperature:

Measuring blocks information:      
      
Battery Voltage      12.4 V
Main Relay      Active
Fuel Pump Relay      Active
APP Sensor 1 (Accelerator Pedal Position)      1.00 V
APP Sensor 2 (Accelerator Pedal Position)      0.51 V
Calculated Pedal Position      0%
APP at Idle Position (Accelerator Pedal Position)      Active
TP Sensor 1 (Throttle Position)      0.74 V
TP Sensor 2 (Throttle Position)      4.25 V
Calculated Throttle Position      1%
Throttle Position      Idle
Engine Speed      652 RPM
Mass Air Flow Sensor      1.35 V
Mass Air Flow Sensor      13 kg/h
Coolant Temperature      0.84 V
Coolant Temperature      97 °C
Intake Air Temperature      3.24 V
Intake Air Temperature      27 °C
Torque Control      Inactive
Tank Sensor      2.82 V
Tank Sensor      27 L
Park/Neutral Switch      P - N  0V
A/C Information Switch      Inactive
Brake Switch 1      Inactive
Brake Switch 2      Inactive
Clutch Switch      Active
Vehicle Speed      0 km/h
Cruise Control Tip Switch      O (off)
Cruise Control      Inactive
Vehicle Speed in Cruise Control Range      Inactive
Fuel Tank Ventilation Valve      6%
Knock Control      Inactive
B1S1 O2 Sensor Heater (Bank 1 Sensor 1)      Active
B1S1 O2 Sensor (Bank 1 Sensor 1)      684 mV
B1S1 Air/Fuel Ratio (Bank 1 Sensor 1)      Rich
B1S2 O2 Sensor Heater (Bank 1 Sensor 2)      Active
B1S2 O2 Sensor (Bank 1 Sensor 2)      644 mV
B1S2 Air/Fuel Ratio (Bank 1 Sensor 2)      Lean
B2S1 O2 Sensor Heater (Bank 2 Sensor 1)      Active
B2S1 O2 Sensor (Bank 2 Sensor 1)      644 mV
B2S1 Air/Fuel Ratio (Bank 2 Sensor 1)      Rich
B2S2 O2 Sensor Heater (Bank 2 Sensor 2)      Active
B2S2 O2 Sensor (Bank 2 Sensor 2)      117 mV
B2S2 Air/Fuel Ratio (Bank 2 Sensor 2)      Lean
O2 Sensor Loop      Closed
B1 Long Term Fuel Trim (Bank 1)      2%
B2 Long Term Fuel Trim (Bank 2)      0%
B1 Short Term Fuel Trim (Bank 1)      -1%
B2 Short Term Fuel Trim (Bank 2)      -1%
Requested Torque (Automatic Transmission)      199 Nm
Requested Torque (Traction Control)      199 Nm
A/C Relay (Air Conditioning)      Inactive
Malfunction Indicator (MI)      Off
Service Vehicle Soon (SVS) Indicator      Off
Intake Manifold Valve 1      Inactive
Intake Manifold Valve 2      Inactive
Engine Speed      652 RPM
Desired Idle Speed      650 RPM
Idle Speed Offset      0 RPM
Idle Speed Offset      Inactive
Vehicle Acceleration      0.0 m/s2
Ignition Dwell Angle      2.1 ms
Injector Time      4.0 ms
Ignition Spark Angle      8.7 °CA
B1 Knock Sensor Signal (Bank 1)      0.0 V
B2 Knock Sensor Signal (Bank 2)      0.0 V
Relative Engine Load      4%
Ignition Status      On  12V
Normal Engine Operating Temperature      Active
ETC Limp Home Mode (Electronic Throttle Control)      Inactive
Ambient Temperature      9 °C
Vehicle Speed Pulse      Not Received
Dec. Fuel Cutoff (Deceleration)      Inactive
Actual Accelerating Enrichment      0
Fuel Tank Ventilation Valve      Active
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 19:48:29
Note - I have done the output tests on both multirams - both of which operate absolutely fine...
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 19:50:18
Here is the GEARBOX live data snapshot - again at idle, with the car in PARK:

Emergency Mode      Inactive
Selected Mode      Economy Program
System Voltage      13.8 V
Internal Power Control Final Stage      Inactive
Brake Light Switch      Active 12V
Terminal A Selector Position Switch      Active 12V
Terminal B Selector Position Switch      Inactive 0V
Terminal C Selector Position Switch      Inactive 0V
Terminal G Selector Position Switch      Active 12V
Selector Position      -P-
Coolant Temperature Signal      94 °C
Kickdown Switch      Inactive 12V
Engine Speed      672 RPM
AT Output Speed (Automatic Transmission)      0 RPM
AT Oil Temperature (Automatic Transmission)      78 °C
AT Oil Temperature (Automatic Transmission)      1.19 V
Sport Program Switch      Inactive 12V
Sport Program Indicator      Economy 12V
Winter Program Switch      Inactive 12V
TPS Load Signal (Throttle Position Sensor)      0%
Winter Program Indicator      Econ./Sport 12V
Torque Control Signal      Inactive
Pressure Regulator Solenoid Valve      723 mA
Calculated Pressure      5.0 bar
1-2/3-4 Shift Solenoid Valve      Inactive 12V
2-3 Shift Solenoid Valve      Active 0V
Band Apply Solenoid Valve      0%
TCC Solenoid (Torque Converter Clutch)      Inactive 12V
Actual Gear      -1-
A/C Information Switch (Air Conditioning)      Inactive 0V
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Andy H on 15 March 2011, 19:51:16
Smooth & refined but gutless until the front multiram kicks in at 4000rpm is a symptom of the rear multiram not functioning IIRC  :-/

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 19:54:25
Quote
Smooth & refined but gutless until the front multiram kicks in at 4000rpm is a symptom of the rear multiram not functioning IIRC  :-/


Well tonight, booted it on a dual carriageway from 30 upwards - and it seemed to be hesitating a lot in the UPPER part of the rev range.

I have also taken a live data 'recording' while the car's been driven (hard and normal) for the engine and gearbox - they are half a megabyte each though, not sure how I could get them uploaded, as don't have any web space....
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Andy H on 15 March 2011, 19:55:38
Quote
Note - I have done the output tests on both multirams - both of which operate absolutely fine...
What does the output test measure? Would it tell you if the rear multi ram was seized or leaking? Or if the pipe was split?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 15 March 2011, 19:59:43
Can you not create a proper snapshot with that?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: omegod on 15 March 2011, 20:09:00
Forgive me for being dim but how do you" see" the multirams working? the front vac tank on mine has been bypassed for some reason and Im not sure both are working, I do get a shove at 4000rpm though.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 15 March 2011, 20:10:51
Quote
Forgive me for being dim but how do you" see" the multirams working? the front vac tank on mine has been bypassed for some reason and Im not sure both are working, I do get a shove at 4000rpm though.
Sure sign they are not working ;)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Mysteryman on 15 March 2011, 20:14:23
Quote
Forgive me for being dim but how do you" see" the multirams working? the front vac tank on mine has been bypassed for some reason and Im not sure both are working, I do get a shove at 4000rpm though.


http://www.omegaowners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1153840176/0
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 20:20:01
Quote
Can you not create a proper snapshot with that?

I don't know  :'( :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Sixstring on 15 March 2011, 20:32:36
James.............
are the plenums and multirams different or interchangeable from 3.0 to 3.2????


If so, have a spare plenum and multirams sitting in my garage you can piddle about with...........?? :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 20:34:28
Quote
James.............
are the plenums and multirams different or interchangeable from 3.0 to 3.2????


If so, have a spare plenum and multirams sitting in my garage you can piddle about with...........?? :y

Thanks Mike!

I'm afraid the plenums are different (No EGR, ICV on the 3.2) - and they have electronically controlled throttles etc.

Thanks for the offer, though  :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Boatboy on 15 March 2011, 20:43:20
Wild card maybe, but have you done anything different re fuel?

ie changed brand or RON.

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 15 March 2011, 22:16:42
I saw a 3.2 recently performing like a 1.0 Micra. ;D Intake ducting that feeds the bottom of the air box was sucking in on itself and starving it of air.

Can't see much wrong with the live data. Have the plugs been changed ?

What about fuel filter? :-/

Kevin

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 15 March 2011, 23:46:23
Quote
I saw a 3.2 recently performing like a 1.0 Micra. ;D Intake ducting that feeds the bottom of the air box was sucking in on itself and starving it of air.

Can't see much wrong with the live data. Have the plugs been changed ?

What about fuel filter? :-/

Kevin


Nothing changed at all. Just the thermostat and cambelt kit.

Was a rocket before - is now a snail by comparison  :'(
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: ffcgary1 on 16 March 2011, 00:30:20
Fuel filter, try changing it just to eliminate it from the probables, fuel injectors, could they be contaminated and partly blocked, you may have dragged some crud up from the tank.
Are you certain that you dont have an o ring dodgy. top end?
 :-?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: albitz on 16 March 2011, 00:35:42
If it was OK before the work was carried out, that would suggest a very careful recheck of cam timing might be needed. :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 16 March 2011, 12:12:27
Quote
If it was OK before the work was carried out, that would suggest a very careful recheck of cam timing might be needed. :-/

This initially happened after JUST a stat change, so cam timing wasn't in the equation.

Cam timing is absolutely spot on, set up with the correct kit and all torqued to spec.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: tunnie on 16 March 2011, 12:17:37
Quote
Quote
If it was OK before the work was carried out, that would suggest a very careful recheck of cam timing might be needed. :-/

This initially happened after JUST a stat change, so cam timing wasn't in the equation.

Cam timing is absolutely spot on, set up with the correct kit and all torqued to spec.

How cold was it running? If it was running too cool, would it not be over-fuelling, giving a slightly improved ooomph?  :-/

Can't see how else a stat change would affect performance  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 16 March 2011, 12:29:01
Wasn't running that cool, stat was tired, but not knackered... only noticed it overcooling a tad on a run...
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: ffcgary1 on 16 March 2011, 12:37:31
It seems to me the MAF is now the only thing left to check/swop out, 3.2's are known for being hard on MAF'S. This would affect performance.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: YZ250 on 16 March 2011, 13:15:04
Quote
Quote
I saw a 3.2 recently performing like a 1.0 Micra. ;D Intake ducting that feeds the bottom of the air box was sucking in on itself and starving it of air.

Can't see much wrong with the live data. Have the plugs been changed ?

What about fuel filter? :-/

Kevin


Nothing changed at all. Just the thermostat and cambelt kit.

Was a rocket before - is now a snail by comparison  :'(

Fully sympathise with you on this as what you describe is exactly what I posted way back in July 2010 regarding my 3.2.
I only removed the plenum to change the cam cover seals and ventilator box and when I put it back together the engine power was flat. Like yours, I can visually see both multi-rams pulling under vacuum when someone revs the engine. I removed the plenum again, checked everything and it is still the same.
Interesting comment about the gearbox. When mine was running like a missile it would kick down if you floored the pedal at about 80mph in sport mode but since the plenum removal it sometimes just builds up speed rather than the awesome pull on kickdown that it used to have before I touched it. We both know that this is not a deterioration of something over time.
As you say, it went like a rocket before the plenum came off and is now flat which is exactly what happened to mine.

If you find the cause further down the line would you be kind enough to PM me of your findings. My hands are blistered and burnt from pulling vac pipes off the hot engine after your post triggered off my curiousity again.

Regards
Alan

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 16 March 2011, 13:24:57
So .. do neither of your cars kick down at all, and both change up early?

That would definitely point me toward the throttle position sensor or perhaps the throttle actuator (which presumably has a check-sensor built in).. dickey connection there, perhaps, after removing the plenum?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: YZ250 on 16 March 2011, 13:39:23
Quote
So .. do neither of your cars kick down at all, and both change up early?

That would definitely point me toward the throttle position sensor or perhaps the throttle actuator (which presumably has a check-sensor built in).. dickey connection there, perhaps, after removing the plenum?

Mine does kickdown but not at the higher speeds that it used to. This problem seems too similar to not be related. :-/
As plenum and vac pipes were the only things touched it's got to be linked to that surely but I just can't see anything wrong. No codes present on mine. As James said, they run fine when driven normal.  :-/
I do not have the knowledge as far as live data goes but the end result is that we both had cars that flew, we removed the plenum and now we both have cars that are not as they should be. As said, it's not a deterioration of something. They were fine until the plenum came off. Mines been hooked up to my mates snap-on modus and shows nothing wrong so I am now depending on James. :y
No pressure mate. ;D ;D

Regards
Alan
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Lazydocker on 16 March 2011, 20:31:18
So... The plenum has been off. I'd be checking and rechecking the o-rings... All of them. And the breathers :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: YZ250 on 16 March 2011, 21:29:19
Quote

That would definitely point me toward the throttle position sensor or perhaps the throttle actuator (which presumably has a check-sensor built in).. dickey connection there, perhaps, after removing the plenum?


Good point. Do these need re-setting/ re-calibrating after throttle body plug disconnection or is it not affected?  :-/  I assumed as nothing had changed it would be OK. Just thinking out loud as they are both 3.2 DBW.


 
Quote
So... The plenum has been off. I'd be checking and rechecking the o-rings... All of them. And the breathers :y


I agree it's plenum or vac related.  :y

JamesV6CDX,
Apologies for butting in on your post.
I don't want to tread on your toes by answering on your thread so I'll take a back seat now. It does seem that our problems are connected. I'll continue to watch with interest.  :y

Regards
Alan
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: unlucky mark mv6 on 16 March 2011, 21:43:43
If its any help james,the fuel filter was changed some time last year,along with the plugs,and new dispack on drivers side. :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Andy H on 16 March 2011, 21:43:56
Quote
So... The plenum has been off. I'd be checking and rechecking the o-rings... All of them. And the breathers :y
I would double and triple check the vacuum connections.

If you have proved that the rear multiram is working then I wonder if the non return valve has failed on the vacuum tank :-/ When the throttle is wide open at low RPM there is no vacuum in the inlet manifold so the system depends on stored vacuum from the vacuum reservoirs to operate the multirams.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 16 March 2011, 23:18:39
Quote
If its any help james,the fuel filter was changed some time last year,along with the plugs,and new dispack on drivers side. :y

Cheers mate, that's very helpful :y :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 17 March 2011, 13:22:40
Right,

Just to play devils advokate:

 - Plenum off, and inlet ducting removed.

 - Cambelt cover removed, timing checked. 100% spot on.

- Plenum re-fitted, all O rings in place, vacc pipes connected and routed correctly.

Fired up first time, sounds lovely as always, but still nowhere near as powerful as before  :'(

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: jonnycool on 17 March 2011, 13:30:07
It's been known on mine for the MAF to appear to be connected when it isn't, just double check that the connection is fully home just to eliminate it
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 17 March 2011, 13:34:44
Quote
It's been known on mine for the MAF to appear to be connected when it isn't, just double check that the connection is fully home just to eliminate it

MAF readings fine on live data, indicating the ECU is talking to it OK :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kaycee on 17 March 2011, 13:58:38
I too had this problem last year and by coincidence i too had the thermostat changed the car was flat. I took it back to the garage who did test drive and said "nothing wrong sir" I said its not the same, are all the vac pipes right he said yes and i was there when we had a good look round at the pipes. Now im not saying its the same fault as yours but..... on closer examination there is a small vac pipe under the throttle housing that is difficult to see this was not coupled up, on connection voilla car was  back on song. the mechanic uttered a few expletives and said he could not believe that a small pipe,  could make that much difference but was ok after that if you havent checked yours its worth a look
Robert
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 17 March 2011, 14:06:17
Quote
I too had this problem last year and by coincidence i too had the thermostat changed the car was flat. I took it back to the garage who did test drive and said "nothing wrong sir" I said its not the same, are all the vac pipes right he said yes and i was there when we had a good look round at the pipes. Now im not saying its the same fault as yours but..... on closer examination there is a small vac pipe under the throttle housing that is difficult to see this was not coupled up, on connection voilla car was  back on song. the mechanic uttered a few expletives and said he could not believe that a small pipe,  could make that much difference but was ok after that if you havent checked yours its worth a look
Robert

Many thanks Robert

Very good info, but I've checked this one  :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 17 March 2011, 14:38:46
Quote
I too had this problem last year and by coincidence i too had the thermostat changed the car was flat. I took it back to the garage who did test drive and said "nothing wrong sir" I said its not the same, are all the vac pipes right he said yes and i was there when we had a good look round at the pipes. Now im not saying its the same fault as yours but..... on closer examination there is a small vac pipe under the throttle housing that is difficult to see this was not coupled up, on connection voilla car was  back on song. the mechanic uttered a few expletives and said he could not believe that a small pipe,  could make that much difference but was ok after that if you havent checked yours its worth a look
Robert

That'll be the pipe that dropped off twice when I was wiggling my plenum back into place ;D Annoying little thing, it is.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 24 March 2011, 18:08:14
Just tested the vaccum tank as best as I can.

I ran the engine for 5 mins, and turned it off - and then with the laptop, actuated the rear multiram. It operated 7 times, before using all the vaccum.

I'm guessing this indicates Vac is, in fact, OK?

Car is still not as responsive as it should be.

Also - what is the required idle speed for DBW engines? It's showing a consumpt. of 4gal/h on idle, in gear, when fully warmed up. Seems a little high to me - esp. as aircon compressor isn't running??

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Martin_1962 on 24 March 2011, 20:48:56
0.3 gallons per hour 2.6
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 24 March 2011, 21:16:34
Quote
0.3 gallons per hour 2.6

About what I'd expect.?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: iainb on 24 March 2011, 21:39:08
James,  consider putting your car on a rolling road to get an idea of the output figures at the wheels.
This may help you with your diagnostic !
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 27 March 2011, 18:57:03
Update

Kickdown tested by activating, and checking live data. Working fine.

I kicked it down at 60mph, earlier

And it took an age to get up to any higher speeds. Felt like a 4 pot!



Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: SMD on 27 March 2011, 20:29:19
My 3.2 is feeling sluggish too but I have no skills to do everything you did. From standstill acceleration is quite slow. No fault codes.

Please keep this thread updated.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 01 April 2011, 16:50:11
Can't decide if it's getting any worse, or not.

Hopefully tomorrow will shed some results, Mr Wood is going to glance his eye over it for another opinion  :y

On a brigher note, the AR35 seems better since it's 0.5 litre top up  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 03 April 2011, 17:57:18
This car is definitely not right at all.

If you kick down from 40mph, it feels asthmatic. Standing start performance is also rubbish, absolutely no comparison to other 3.2's I've driven.

A look at the live data, while being driven, show's 'knock control enabled' when giving it some beans.

A comparison of a 3.2 of the same year, does not show knock control enabled however hard it's driven.

The other week, when I did a live-data log whilst driving, the spreadsheet shows knock-control enabled an awful lot.

It also shows voltages being given largely from knock sensor two (246 bank)

Sensors and wiring appears to be ok, upon a look in daylight.

Could it be something else going on with the combustion process, that's causing the knock control to want to activate??

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: ffcgary1 on 03 April 2011, 18:03:56
James, have you got a tank full of crap petrol? as this could be a reason the knock sensor is shouting.
Did you fill up just after the work you did on the car.?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 03 April 2011, 18:06:03
Quote
James, have you got a tank full of crap petrol? as this could be a reason the knock sensor is shouting.
Did you fill up just after the work you did on the car.?

Only ever fill up at branded stations.. I don't think it's the fuel  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: mrgreen on 03 April 2011, 19:20:51
after reading this complete thread and after robert waded in i,m guessing it's a vacuum leak somewhere a hose that's been disturbed e.t.c and is collapsing under pressure i would start by replacing o-rings and hose one by one as they are cheap as chips and eventually you should find the problem, let's be real if nothings changed nothings changed surely it can't be anything else!!!! lol
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: RobG on 03 April 2011, 19:32:13
Any of the co-ax screened cable to 246 bank knock sensor damaged :question
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 03 April 2011, 20:30:39
If knock control is active...

Id be draining the tank (by driving, not wasting, then put in some good fuel system / injector cleaner, a tank of vpower etc, then run on normal Shell etc for a bit and see how it goes.

May not fix, but should give a better starting point.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: mrgreen on 03 April 2011, 21:00:00
Quote
If knock control is active...

Id be draining the tank (by driving, not wasting, then put in some good fuel system / injector cleaner, a tank of vpower etc, then run on normal Shell etc for a bit and see how it goes.

May not fix, but should give a better starting point.
yes i agree fuel helps but if it was goodn before and all that.......but i must say this points to a common problem something is up here this is the second person to post with  the same problem there is definately something physical going on here and i would say first off replace the hose which rob posted and start from there, by moving stuff you certainly reveal any perishing for a start and why shold moving the plenum make a difference apart from connections it must lie there anything else makes no sense unless you knock wiring whilst doing this job.... :-/ :-/ i don't know but where else can it lie??? when there is two cars with the same symptons??:-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 03 April 2011, 22:03:47
Quote
If knock control is active...

Id be draining the tank (by driving, not wasting, then put in some good fuel system / injector cleaner, a tank of vpower etc, then run on normal Shell etc for a bit and see how it goes.

May not fix, but should give a better starting point.

Jimbo - have ran pretty much only on shell for last 1000 miles now

 :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: PhilRich on 03 April 2011, 22:09:58
James, I take it you've checked that the knock sensor is securely held in its holder? :-?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 03 April 2011, 22:11:56
Quote
James, I take it you've checked that the knock sensor is securely held in its holder? :-?

Tell me how to get to the bloody thing on the passenger bank, and I'll have a look!! ;D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: RobG on 03 April 2011, 22:36:27
Quote
Quote
James, I take it you've checked that the knock sensor is securely held in its holder? :-?

Tell me how to get to the bloody thing on the passenger bank, and I'll have a look!! ;D
There should be a connector on a flying lead around the area where the main loom goes to the ECU box for the knock sensor.
Knock sensor actually plugs in on plastic cable tray running over passenger side bank of cylinders and drops down by dipstick tube. Find the connector then follow the screened cable to it
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 03 April 2011, 22:39:46
Quote
Quote
Quote
James, I take it you've checked that the knock sensor is securely held in its holder? :-?

Tell me how to get to the bloody thing on the passenger bank, and I'll have a look!! ;D
There should be a connector on a flying lead around the area where the main loom goes to the ECU box for the knock sensor.
Knock sensor actually plugs in on plastic cable tray running over passenger side bank of cylinders and drops down by dipstick tube. Find the connector then follow the screened cable to it

It disappears under the coolant transfer pipe, and then my hands are not that big!! ;D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 03 April 2011, 22:54:04
Quote
It disappears under the coolant transfer pipe, and then my hands are not that big!! ;D

.. which was disturbed during the thermostat change. :y

I know all looked well from above with the knock sensor cable, but this is significant enough to warrant retracing your steps a little and making sure it's not trapped under the transfer pipe, IMHO.

Failing that, try removing the sensor from the engine block and leaving it plugged in - or get another sensor from a scrapper and try it. They are normally reliable enough.

Knock retard will be your problem. It will kill performance by retarding the ignition yet not introduce a misfire or rough running.

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 03 April 2011, 23:08:05
More than happy to do that Kev, I'll have another look (with a cold engine!!) but to be honest, I can't see the 2-4-6 knock sensor underneith, or above, for love nor money!! :D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: bob.dent on 04 April 2011, 09:46:36
Quote
Quote
It disappears under the coolant transfer pipe, and then my hands are not that big!! ;D

.. which was disturbed during the thermostat change. :y

I know all looked well from above with the knock sensor cable, but this is significant enough to warrant retracing your steps a little and making sure it's not trapped under the transfer pipe, IMHO.

Failing that, try removing the sensor from the engine block and leaving it plugged in - or get another sensor from a scrapper and try it. They are normally reliable enough.

Knock retard will be your problem. It will kill performance by retarding the ignition yet not introduce a misfire or rough running.

Kevin

I seem to recall that at one of the meets Mike Dundee had some work done on his engine that involved the plenum coming off and when all put back together had a similar problem with loss of power. Turned out to be a trapped vac cable or wire IIRC.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 04 April 2011, 09:53:30
Quote
More than happy to do that Kev, I'll have another look (with a cold engine!!) but to be honest, I can't see the 2-4-6 knock sensor underneith, or above, for love nor money!! :D

It's in about the centre of the engine block on that side. Probably best located from underneath. A black cylinder with a bolt through the middle and a wire coming out of it.

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 04 April 2011, 10:03:19
From memory, reach it from underneath, behind engine mounts.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 04 April 2011, 10:04:38
And Project TB1 (2.5 v6) had a knackered sensor, was fine on initial pull-away, but lack of power above 2000rpm as the retardation kicks in.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 04 April 2011, 11:07:17
TB, did that log a fault code?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 04 April 2011, 11:22:13
Quote
TB, did that log a fault code?
In my case, yes, as the wire was in 2 pieces ;D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Elitenut on 05 April 2011, 08:26:49
James I don't know if this helps, first time I've tried to post a picture.

(http://i1115.photobucket.com/albums/k554/Elitenut/KnockSensor.jpg)

Brian
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 10 April 2011, 18:52:25
Further update - knock sensor changed.

What a job, by the way. Don't think I have any skin left on my right arm. It's right up behind the 246 engine mount, and it all had to be done by feel.

I also had to remove the oil filter housing (with the usual complications) to get access to undo the bolt  >:(

I also couldn't follow the exact route of the old wiring, without removing lots of things I wasn't prepared to!! So I found a route that works well, and secured the cable away from heat etc.

So, how is the car behaving with the new sensor....... ?


...... Absolutely no bloody different!   :'(

It does come to life a bit after about 3000 rpm, but before that, it really is asthmatic for a 3.2, I've driven MUCH better - including my own, up until I did the stat change.

So - if it's not the sensor...

Why is knock control activating , with values for bank 2?

Some other combustion problem on this bank?

Worth another live data check whle driving, to see what values are doing now?

I'm stuck with this one  :'( :'(
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 10 April 2011, 19:21:45
Just to add, MPG is ok.

I drove from our place in Gloucester, to Sassanach in Trowbridge, up to Kevin's place in Hampshire, and a fast motorway run back home (plus some local running around)

320 miles to £90. About right for a 3.2 V6 - 21mpg.

(Considering, I was hoofing it on the backroads to Andover!)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 10 April 2011, 19:46:08
That's a bummer. >:(

Worth trying the old knock sensor connected but not bolted to the engine?

Not sure if it's clever enough to work out it's not picking up normal combustion from the sensor, but maybe worth a try?

Wiring back from sensor to ECU? Might be worth checking this?

Kevin

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 10 April 2011, 19:48:52
I didn't see it in the last few posts so; is the code you're getting a "faulty knock sensor" code or a "knock detected" code? (I don't even know if the Omega has both..)

If you're really getting knock on one bank, I'd be thinking fuel or ignition problems on a single cylinder - faulty injector/connection, coilpack/connection, cam position sensor perhaps (assuming the 3.2 uses one to determine ignition timing, along with the crank sensor)?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 10 April 2011, 21:45:56
No codes, but live data shows knock retard active at anything above light throttle. :-/

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 10 April 2011, 21:56:03
Here's a thought - this started after the thermostat change which will have involved coolant loss.. any chance of a suddenly blocked coolant passage in the head on that side causing a localised hotspot and pre-ignition?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 11 April 2011, 10:05:23
Quote
Worth trying the old knock sensor connected but not bolted to the engine?


The exact thing crossed my mind last night  :y

Only problem is, due to the wiring route, I had to snip the connector off the old one in order to remove it  :'( But I'm sure I can get hold of another.

I think I'll do another live-data run to see if knock control is still activating? Just to make there isn't more than one issue?

Failing that, how about fitting new plugs, (I have them) and then swapping the coil packs around to see if the issue moves to bank 1?

We'll get there  ;D :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: henryd on 11 April 2011, 10:59:52
Seems to point to air leak on 2-4-6 bank causing weak mixture and knock sensor kicking in,could the servo or the pipework be leaking air
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 11 April 2011, 11:22:18
Quote
Seems to point to air leak on 2-4-6 bank causing weak mixture and knock sensor kicking in,could the servo or the pipework be leaking air

Airleak has been strongly considered, however:

All vacc hoses checked

Idle steady - would be increased, if air leak?

Airleak wouldn't affect it at high RPM, when it needs as much air as poss?



Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: kcl on 11 April 2011, 11:51:02
Quote
Quote
Seems to point to air leak on 2-4-6 bank causing weak mixture and knock sensor kicking in,could the servo or the pipework be leaking air

Airleak has been strongly considered, however:

All vacc hoses checked

Idle steady - would be increased, if air leak?

Airleak wouldn't affect it at high RPM, when it needs as much air as poss?




Or, could it be, a missing/damaged inlet trumpet seal? It would still idle ok but when giving it full throttle the engine sort of sucks extra air through the o-ring  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 11 April 2011, 11:58:09
Quote
Quote
Quote
Seems to point to air leak on 2-4-6 bank causing weak mixture and knock sensor kicking in,could the servo or the pipework be leaking air

Airleak has been strongly considered, however:

All vacc hoses checked

Idle steady - would be increased, if air leak?

Airleak wouldn't affect it at high RPM, when it needs as much air as poss?




Or, could it be, a missing/damaged inlet trumpet seal? It would still idle ok but when giving it full throttle the engine sort of sucks extra air through the o-ring  :-/

Do you mean the plenum O ring? :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: kcl on 11 April 2011, 12:32:32
Thats one possibility that the plenum o-rings leak but it should not have that effect... But what I meant is you had the trumpets off when doing the stat? So the red rings between inlet divider and trumpets might leak?  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 11 April 2011, 13:22:06
I should also point out that both lambda sensors are reading "rich" solidly on hard acceleration. That doesn't mean it's impossible for one cylinder to be  going lean, but I think it's unlikely...

I don't believe it could be an air leak. Anything that affects full throttle running will completely kill the idling, and it idles perfectly.

Ignition coil packs are handed, so doubt they could be swapped between banks. :(

I suppose we're assuming it's bank 2... and James' live data does show a few murmurs from bank 2 sensor, and nothing from bank 1. Hardly conclusive, though.

What we do know is that the live data is showing knock retard active, and it doesn't on my car, no matter what I do to it.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 11 April 2011, 13:31:16
How were the MAF readings?

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 11 April 2011, 13:35:10
James, can you plug the "My Naff Code Reader" in, set it doing flight recorder data and go for a drive and email me the log.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 11 April 2011, 13:37:52
Quote
How were the MAF readings?


MAF was reading as expected at idle. Fuel trims were not getting excessive at any point.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 11 April 2011, 13:38:45
Quote
Quote
How were the MAF readings?


MAF was reading as expected at idle. Fuel trims were not getting excessive at any point.

Hmm. Could have swapped out the MAF with mine and eliminated it, though, I suppose. :-[ Just didn't seem to be pointing in that direction.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 11 April 2011, 13:53:07
my theory is the MAF has been replaced in the past, with a cheap chinese ebay one, which often contain just a resistor! so am after some correlation that it really seems to be working as it should.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 11 April 2011, 15:10:07
hi Jimbob :)

Yep I am going to create another log tonight, and will email it to yourself and Kev.

Kev had visibility of my original one, which is what much of this is based on.

Reg the MAF - it looks to be a GM one, not a cheapie.  :)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Big_Roger on 11 April 2011, 16:09:47
Hi,
I and I am sure many others can hardly wait for a good result from all this investigation, and hoping we never get this problem with our motors.

I don't know anything about knock detectors, only that they are "tuned" to pick up certain range of noise.

I just wondered if this knock sensor was picking up noise or vibration from a faulty bearing on the water pump or air con compressor or steering pump??

Just a thought.

Roger
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 11 April 2011, 19:30:48
Took the 3.2 out to play tonight, armed with laptop, monitored by SWMBO.

Have noticed that "knock control" becomes "active" at the slightest touch of the throttle.

Eg, if I rev the engine on the drive, stood still, about 3000 rpm it goes active.

When driving, ANY load on the engine turns "knock control" "active". Constantly.

The strange thing is, I tried unplugging both sensors in turn, and then together - and even with both unplugged, it still shows knock control as active, under those conditions.

The only time it's ever "inactive" is when not touching the gas, eg downhill, on the overrun.

Really confused.

The drive (with both sensors connected) was "sprited" to say the least ::) (you'll be pleased to know it was to Cheltenham, Kev, to get your LPG cable!)

And I have the excel log of both the drive with the sensors connected, and then a short drive without them connected.

I'm not sure how to post them on here, though - probably need some hosting which I can't access on this silly connection

Help, please?  :'( :'( :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 11 April 2011, 19:33:36
Did the other side show similar when unplugged?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 11 April 2011, 19:36:25
Quote
Did the other side show similar when unplugged?

Knock control seems to be a global thing, rather than for individual sensors?

Think examination of the logs is required  :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 11 April 2011, 20:04:04
mail me the logs, ill host em
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 11 April 2011, 20:05:10
Quote
mail me the logs, ill host em

Email sent, thank you kindly :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 11 April 2011, 20:10:20
http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/james.csv

http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/noknock.csv
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 11 April 2011, 20:10:42
my dinners ready, ill read em in a bit, but here they are
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 11 April 2011, 20:12:33
Quote
http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/james.csv

http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/noknock.csv

Just to clarify - james.csv is a spirited drive, with all sensors connected.

The other one, is a similar drive, with both knock sensors disconnected, just in case this helps troubleshoot in any way.

Genuine thanks to everyone helping me with this  :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Omegatoy on 11 April 2011, 21:03:13
Hmm, my initial thought was lazy lambda sensor , as often these will lose some of thier switching i,e top or lower end of the trim levels or voltage
 then i reread the whole thing and 0.3/0.4 on tickover sounds not good to me, would have thought it should be around 0.2/0.3? however i dont play with the v6 to often so i could be totally wrong here
think in the absense of anything else appearing to be wrong i would go back to basics, and do a complete service, i.e plugs filters oil etc then at least you know all is right there,
the fault appears to me also to be similar to tired plug leads, but i think the 3.2 is coilpack on the plugs?
not much help here im afraid just gving ideas that appeared to my mind to be something like the problem :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Entwood on 11 April 2011, 21:08:37
Quote
Quote
http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/james.csv

http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/noknock.csv

Just to clarify - james.csv is a spirited drive, with all sensors connected.

The other one, is a similar drive, with both knock sensors disconnected, just in case this helps troubleshoot in any way.

Genuine thanks to everyone helping me with this  :y


Stupid question... equally stupid thought ...  :(

knock sensors / ECU  ... in the "absence" of the knock sensor .. ie unplugged....  does the ECU "assume" knocking and retard the ignition as a safety feature ???

If it does ... then unplugging will make no difference, but would imply that the bank you are having problems with might well have a power supply problem ?? 

Sort of .. no power = assumed knocking ... if that makes sense ???

Probably a load of rubbish .. but worthy of a moments thought ???

Nah .. thought not .. :)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: CaptainZok on 11 April 2011, 21:21:19
Quote
Quote
Quote
http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/james.csv

http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/noknock.csv

Just to clarify - james.csv is a spirited drive, with all sensors connected.

The other one, is a similar drive, with both knock sensors disconnected, just in case this helps troubleshoot in any way.

Genuine thanks to everyone helping me with this  :y


Stupid question... equally stupid thought ...  :(

knock sensors / ECU  ... in the "absence" of the knock sensor .. ie unplugged....  does the ECU "assume" knocking and retard the ignition as a safety feature ???

If it does ... then unplugging will make no difference, but would imply that the bank you are having problems with might well have a power supply problem ?? 

Sort of .. no power = assumed knocking ... if that makes sense ???

Probably a load of rubbish .. but worthy of a moments thought ???

Nah .. thought not .. :)
It flicks between active and inactive with the sensors disconnected so it doesn't look like it Nige.

Download the file and it will open in excel then you can have a look yourself.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Entwood on 11 April 2011, 21:26:46
Quote

<snip> ....

It flicks between active and inactive with the sensors disconnected so it doesn't look like it Nige.

Download the file and it will open in excel then you can have a look yourself.

Yeah I looked .. didn't understand a word of it !!!  :)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 11 April 2011, 23:58:10
Those logs don't look to bad to me. :-/

Interestingly, when knock sensors are disconnected there is no output from knock sensors shown, but knock retard is going active just as it was with them present. I notice the MIL is on, so the ECU obviously noticed they were unplugged. :-/

A little output from the knock sensor on both banks, coincident with engine load, and mostly from bank 2 with them connected, but I've never seen this logged from a "healthy" vehicle (Tech 2 doesn't report it) :-[ Some output may be perfectly normal.

Maybe we're barking up the wrong tree here?

What else could be disturbed during a 'stat change?

Cam sensor? Might well put it into limp mode as it's essential fro proper knock control. Why no trouble code, though?

Crank sensor? It's original, judging by cable routing, so imminent failure to be expected. Might have been pulled about a bit during recent work perhaps? Why no trouble code, though?

Engine pulled smoothly enough so I would be surprised if there was a misfire.

MAF - output looks good from the live data. Can't find anything I'd regard as suspicious. Ditto the lambda sensors. Toggling away happily. Not excessive fuel trim.

Torque request from Autobox / TC looks OK, so guess that's not holding it back.

Has it been filled with weasel pee? ;D

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: feeutfo on 12 April 2011, 01:53:37
Are we getting into the realm of coincidental failures with this one...?

What would we check if the work had not been done? Blocked exhaust...? Pining usually decreases with rpm afaik(?) yet we seem to have the opposite, certainly worse performance by the sound of it..

Lob some octane booster in? Or injector cleaner, see if any effect...?  :-/

Although some juddering mentioned at higher rpm... Ignition? Water in 246? Windscreen seal loose on both my 3.2's btw. Misfires need to be quite bad before they throw a code ime.

Poor ks connection somewhere up to ecu. Or is it actually knocking, what causes knocking....etc etc.

More related stuff.
Is the vac pipe under the plenum connected at the regulator end?

Inlet wedge seals top and bottom giving air leak.
Re trace steps.... Again  :-/

Ok rambling now...  :-[  ;D

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: feeutfo on 12 April 2011, 02:09:25
More ramblings...

Injector plug seated correctly?    Mmmm nah
Damage to injector loom  :-/
Fuel regulator working? (how do they work anyway?)
Crank sensor disturbed on the same bracket....   Mmmm probably not.
Trapped cam sensor wire

Fit your plenum on another 3.2.     (not mine ;D )




Re checked for codes I take it?    :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 13:58:26
Jimbob, would you be kind enough to connect your laptop up, look at "measuring blocks" and take it for a quick spin - noting whether "knock control" goes active under any throttle load?

Just wondering if "My Naff Code Reader" reports it, but Tech2 doesn't?  :-/ Worth comparing another 3.2 at any rate.

Kevin - when I was doing the knock sensor under the car - the crank sensor follows the revised route suggested by OOF, it's not the original path up behind the cooler pipes - so I'd suggest it's not that old?

Just reluctant to start changing things when we've not proved them to be faulty, EG introduce more unknowns  :-/

Re the exhaust, I cable-tied a rubber glove onto each of the outlets and fired it up - it burst them in no time  :D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 12 April 2011, 13:58:56
There are a lot of 'invalid' for Throttle position, which Ive never seen before...

Wonder if its worth trying a different TPS  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 12 April 2011, 14:01:29
Yes, Ill take a spin in a bit and put the logs here for comparrison.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Marks DTM Calib on 12 April 2011, 14:07:55
You cna get odd results relating to the TPS when the buterflies and throttle body are not squeeky clean (clean the edge of the throttle discs to).

Are we certain that the coil packs are firing at max volts?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 14:09:51
Quote
Are we certain that the coil packs are firing at max volts?

Nope - how best to test this Mr DTM?

I actually dropped the 1-3-5 coil pack when doing the stat change  :-[ - knocked it off the wing.

(I popped them both out, looking for oil in the wells) - but no misfire apparent on putting all back together.


Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 12 April 2011, 14:14:37
Quote
There are a lot of 'invalid' for Throttle position, which Ive never seen before...

Wonder if its worth trying a different TPS  :-/

Well spotted. :y There seems to be some correlation between that and the occurrence of knock control too. Odd that it doesn't raise any fault codes for that but we could be onto something (or we have 2 faults that are related i.e. a wiring problem is affecting both sensors).

Shame the 2nd TPS sensor is not logged so we can compare the two. :-/

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 14:18:20
I'm not sure if this makes ANY difference, but my DBW plug, from the loom, that connects to the throttle assembly, does not 'click' home, and is easily pulled out.

Cable tie around this, worth trying? Long shot, but...  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 14:19:14
Being DBW, does it have a 'TPS' in the usual sense? Is is not just taken from pedal position?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 12 April 2011, 14:20:12
Quote
Being DBW, does it have a 'TPS' in the usual sense? Is is not just taken from pedal position?


one on pedal
one on throttle body iirc
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 12 April 2011, 14:21:32
Quote
I'm not sure if this makes ANY difference, but my DBW plug, from the loom, that connects to the throttle assembly, does not 'click' home, and is easily pulled out.

Cable tie around this, worth trying? Long shot, but...  :-/


Think you may be getting close.....give it a good clean and try and get a good connection.

Im getting the little fella from school in a hour, live data on my return  :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 14:26:31
You're a Star, JB. Will look forward very much to the comparison. 


And of course will try the suggestions tonight!

:)

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 12 April 2011, 14:32:34
Quote
Quote
Being DBW, does it have a 'TPS' in the usual sense? Is is not just taken from pedal position?


one on pedal
one on throttle body iirc

There are actually 2 channels of TPS on each, with different responses, so they each generate a different voltage to represent the same position. The two are compared by the ECU to determine if the reading is consistent and only if they are is the reading used.

Otherwise, the TPS should go into limp-home and limit you to 1500 RPM or something silly.

Still, be interesting to see if the connector helps. :y

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 14:34:25
Mine is useless, I'm tempted to get a known good connector from a breaker, with a good length of loom, and solder/heatshrink the connections  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: feeutfo on 12 April 2011, 14:38:53
That clip often breaks. Can the plug on the loom end not come apart? They usually clip together....?   :D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 12 April 2011, 14:40:20
Quote
Mine is useless, I'm tempted to get a known good connector from a breaker, with a good length of loom, and solder/heatshrink the connections  :-/

Albs is yer man. :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 14:51:13
Yes, Albs, is yours in good nick, on your breaker, if so, shall I send you another cheque?  ;D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: albitz on 12 April 2011, 15:26:37
Are we talking about the plug that goes into the throttle bodies ? :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 15:31:00
Quote
Are we talking about the plug that goes into the throttle bodies ? :-/

Yep :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: albitz on 12 April 2011, 15:33:23
Just checked it - clips intact. :y have uncovered it back to where it goes into the main loom. Approx 18 inches. Shall I just snip it off there ?
Did someone mention another tps at the throttle pedal ?
Worth having that as well ? :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 12 April 2011, 15:40:31
Heres my logs, hot of the press....

http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/jmcold.csv

http://images.omegaowners.com/images/Jimbob/hosted_for_others/jmhot.csv
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 12 April 2011, 15:41:24
hmmmm tps may be a red herring, similar results on my data....
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 15:43:36
Cheers JB.

I note your throttle position is "invalid" on some occasions too - and that your knock control is "active" quite a lot

Can anyone else see any significant difference between these logs and mine?  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: albitz on 12 April 2011, 15:44:21
Quote
Yes, Albs, is yours in good nick, on your breaker, if so, shall I send you another cheque?  ;D
[/highlight]

Its OK James, I will just add a couple of zeros on the end of the one you sent me this morning. :y ;D
If you just want the plug with some loom attached, its F.O.C. ;)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 12 April 2011, 15:45:45
in fact VERY similar results in some areas......
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 15:56:52
Quote
in fact VERY similar results in some areas......

My 3.2, used to feel so pokey that I had to watch I didn't blip the throttle a fraction over bumps, else I'd shoot off like a rocket!

It now feels like someone's stolen it, and replaced it with a 2.2  :'(
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 12 April 2011, 16:32:00
I've turned my eyes inside out trying to spot the differences. ;D

Looks to me like the TPS situation and the knock retard are the same on both cars.

Jimbobs is clearly kicking out more power, though. Pick a spot vehicle speed at 100% throttle and compare the two cars. Notice the "Vehicle acceleration" column.  :o Also, RPM is higher by a couple of hundred RPM in each case. Assuming gearing is the same, (we don't know that it is!) I think this means much more torque through the sludge pump.

At times James' car is using less injector duration and the MAF output is lower. Either the MAF sensor is telling it porkies or it really is drawing in less air (crushed intake duct? throttle not really fully open?).

Sometimes there's a difference in ignition timing but I'm not convinced that isn't because of the difference in apparent engine load. :-/

I've got a headache now, so I'd better stop poring over logs. ;D

Oh, and I hate Excel. >:(

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: albitz on 12 April 2011, 17:05:59
Crushed air intake or something along those lines sounds feasible imo, as does a blocked exhaust.
If the engine cant suck in enough air, or push the exhaust gasses out, it aint going to produce the power it should. :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Entwood on 12 April 2011, 19:40:59
Quote
I've turned my eyes inside out trying to spot the differences. ;D

Looks to me like the TPS situation and the knock retard are the same on both cars.

Jimbobs is clearly kicking out more power, though. Pick a spot vehicle speed at 100% throttle and compare the two cars. Notice the "Vehicle acceleration" column.  :o Also, RPM is higher by a couple of hundred RPM in each case. Assuming gearing is the same, (we don't know that it is!) I think this means much more torque through the sludge pump.

At times James' car is using less injector duration and the MAF output is lower. Either the MAF sensor is telling it porkies or it really is drawing in less air (crushed intake duct? throttle not really fully open?).

Sometimes there's a difference in ignition timing but I'm not convinced that isn't because of the difference in apparent engine load. :-/

I've got a headache now, so I'd better stop poring over logs. ;D

Oh, and I hate Excel. >:(

Kevin

Is the gearbox faulty ??? Problem with the TC (if auto) / Clutch (if manual) ??? Engine actually OK but the power is not getting to the wheels ???

James says it "feels" sluggish .. if it revs freely under no load, and the problem is under load .. again .. possibly a gearbox issue ??

:(
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: henryd on 12 April 2011, 21:11:39
You could be on to something there ,I am sure that James has mentioned that the gearbox is on it's way out :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 21:11:42
Update

I put a cable tie around the DBW multiplug (the one that doesn't 'click' home)

It did seem to 'pull in' a little.

Went for a drive tonight and I don't know what to make.

It's not quite the beast it was when I bought her, but I'm convinced it's now more responsive.

When booting from standing start / crawl, the 'TC' light sometimes flashes now, stopping it from letting the rear wheels spinning - I don't recall it doing that, after the stat change.

Also when clogging it from 30mph, over 4000 RPM, it really takes off.

On the way home from work, Sophie said to me words to the effect of "whatever you've done, it hasn't felt this quick apart from the day you bought it"

Have I made a difference? am I imagining it?

It's still definitely not like it was when I bought her, but am convinced it's at least a bit better  :-/

Another live data log perhaps to look at acceleration / speed against throttle position  :-/




Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 12 April 2011, 21:12:32
Oh, and I may also be totally imagining this, but I reckon the gearchanges felt better too, since the cable tie.

Again, it may just be in my head  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Jimbob on 13 April 2011, 07:59:25
well that sounds like progress, yes be interesting to see the 'after' log

would also be interested in another 3.2 auto produced "My Naff Code Reader" log, just in case we both have an issue, with different severitys.


Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 13 April 2011, 10:21:55
would blocked plenum breathers cause a noticible performance loss?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 13 April 2011, 19:24:49
Quote
well that sounds like progress, yes be interesting to see the 'after' log

would also be interested in another 3.2 auto produced "My Naff Code Reader" log, just in case we both have an issue, with different severitys.


You want me to burn perfectly good petrol (suspect LPG would not help the confusiion) :o

Can't do it until the weekend now though...
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 13 April 2011, 19:44:04
Quote
Quote
well that sounds like progress, yes be interesting to see the 'after' log

would also be interested in another 3.2 auto produced "My Naff Code Reader" log, just in case we both have an issue, with different severitys.


You want me to burn perfectly good petrol (suspect LPG would not help the confusiion) :o

Can't do it until the weekend now though...

Yes please!

On a serious note TB, it would be appreciated. Happy to cover your fuel on the, no doubt enthusiastic, test flight!!
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 13 April 2011, 20:00:17
Quote
Quote
Quote
well that sounds like progress, yes be interesting to see the 'after' log

would also be interested in another 3.2 auto produced "My Naff Code Reader" log, just in case we both have an issue, with different severitys.


You want me to burn perfectly good petrol (suspect LPG would not help the confusiion) :o

Can't do it until the weekend now though...

Yes please!

On a serious note TB, it would be appreciated. Happy to cover your fuel on the, no doubt enthusiastic, test flight!!
The Elite doesn't do enthusiastic. Tyres are simply unable to change direction.  It'll have to be a straight line dash ;D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 13 April 2011, 20:02:22
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
well that sounds like progress, yes be interesting to see the 'after' log

would also be interested in another 3.2 auto produced "My Naff Code Reader" log, just in case we both have an issue, with different severitys.


You want me to burn perfectly good petrol (suspect LPG would not help the confusiion) :o

Can't do it until the weekend now though...

Yes please!

On a serious note TB, it would be appreciated. Happy to cover your fuel on the, no doubt enthusiastic, test flight!!
The Elite doesn't do enthusiastic. Tyres are simply unable to change direction.  It'll have to be a straight line dash ;D

;D ;D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Lazydocker on 13 April 2011, 20:25:33
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
well that sounds like progress, yes be interesting to see the 'after' log

would also be interested in another 3.2 auto produced "My Naff Code Reader" log, just in case we both have an issue, with different severitys.


You want me to burn perfectly good petrol (suspect LPG would not help the confusiion) :o

Can't do it until the weekend now though...

Yes please!

On a serious note TB, it would be appreciated. Happy to cover your fuel on the, no doubt enthusiastic, test flight!!
The Elite doesn't do enthusiastic. Tyres are simply unable to change direction.  It'll have to be a straight line dash ;D

I know... I was sat nearest the lorry on the roundabout! :o :o :D :D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 13 April 2011, 20:44:19
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
well that sounds like progress, yes be interesting to see the 'after' log

would also be interested in another 3.2 auto produced "My Naff Code Reader" log, just in case we both have an issue, with different severitys.


You want me to burn perfectly good petrol (suspect LPG would not help the confusiion) :o

Can't do it until the weekend now though...

Yes please!

On a serious note TB, it would be appreciated. Happy to cover your fuel on the, no doubt enthusiastic, test flight!!
The Elite doesn't do enthusiastic. Tyres are simply unable to change direction.  It'll have to be a straight line dash ;D

I know... I was sat nearest the lorry on the roundabout! :o :o :D :D
Yeah, sorry, I'd forgotten how shite they were, as I'd been using the Silver Bullet all week  :-[
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Lazydocker on 13 April 2011, 20:48:35
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
well that sounds like progress, yes be interesting to see the 'after' log

would also be interested in another 3.2 auto produced "My Naff Code Reader" log, just in case we both have an issue, with different severitys.


You want me to burn perfectly good petrol (suspect LPG would not help the confusiion) :o

Can't do it until the weekend now though...

Yes please!

On a serious note TB, it would be appreciated. Happy to cover your fuel on the, no doubt enthusiastic, test flight!!
The Elite doesn't do enthusiastic. Tyres are simply unable to change direction.  It'll have to be a straight line dash ;D

I know... I was sat nearest the lorry on the roundabout! :o :o :D :D
Yeah, sorry, I'd forgotten how shite they were, as I'd been using the Silver Bullet all week  :-[

It's OK... Your seats are wipe clean :-[ ::) ;D

Mind you, I'm not convinced that the wallowy Elite suspension helps either ::) ::) Although mine isn't that bad, even with the awful job they did on the tracking when th T/Rod ends were replaced >:( >:(
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: TheBoy on 13 April 2011, 21:16:02
Quote
It's OK... Your seats are wipe clean :-[ ::) ;D

Mind you, I'm not convinced that the wallowy Elite suspension helps either ::) ::) Although mine isn't that bad, even with the awful job they did on the tracking when th T/Rod ends were replaced >:( >:(
Most Elites, when you turn/brake, the tyres respond, and the suspension responds some time later.  With shite tyres, your breaked.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 13 April 2011, 21:41:02
Must say, this is the first MV6 saloon I have owned, and it goes around corners MUCH better than any elite I've ever had!!
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: feeutfo on 14 April 2011, 00:32:04
No news there, on a certain dual carriageway tightening right hander on the way back from the Oxford meet, the left side wheels dropped into a seem in the road, it was impossible to tell if the back end was coming round, as I feared, or if the chassis was about to fall off the suspension onto the hard shoulder range rover style, or if there was a lift off over stear situation going on. Mv6 is far superior in the bends. Easily rectified with b4's and firmer springs. Certainly delighted with b4's and irmscher springs on mine.  :y

But then not everyone wants a firmer ride. Elites being designed to "waft" rather than "Wang" around. Sl suspension certainly not a cornering aid IMO. Much as I hate to remove the feature, sl just had to go.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 14 April 2011, 09:28:33
Wouldn't mind binning the SL on mine and going for lowered Bilsteins etc (especially as the SL on mine seems rather 'jacked up' vs. my friends 2.2DTi with SL) - but then I wouldn't get the car down my folks drive .. and this is the only car I own that'll make it down there! ;D
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 01 June 2011, 17:02:34
It's been a while I know,

- car still running v reliable, starts fine, very smooth.

- still feels too low on grunt for a 3.2

- Spark plugs changed - no difference

- Plenum removed again, everything double checked, no obvious faults.

- 2 x Oil changes performed. Not directly relevent I know but it was like black glue.


One thing that's crossed my mind.

Recently done a camping trip to Devon and back, around a 400 mile round trip.

Car performed faultlessly bar lack of grunt, however, returned me a combined MPG of 34!!

Can this be right? This is calculated the traditional way, not just on the MID (although, the MID agrees).

To get this much out of a 3.2 almost makes me think it's under fuelling or something?  :-/


Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Entwood on 01 June 2011, 21:45:55
You sure its a 3.2 and not a 2.2 ??? ......  :)

Mind you ... you'd probably have noticed the missing 2 cylinders and the odd shaped block !!!

Perhaps its a 2.6 then ????  :)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: feeutfo on 01 June 2011, 21:59:40
Gay!  Very Gay actually! Show it who's boss.

Large manly can of Italian tune up for you....
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Lazydocker on 01 June 2011, 22:04:24
Quote
Gay!  Very Gay actually! Show it who's boss.

Large manly can of Italian tune up for you....

Errm... I seem to have caught something from you ::)

I used to drive sedately most of the time but just lately :-X :-X ::) ::)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: feeutfo on 01 June 2011, 22:06:39
Quote
Quote
Gay!  Very Gay actually! Show it who's boss.

Large manly can of Italian tune up for you....

Errm... I seem to have caught something from you ::)

I used to drive sedately most of the time but just lately :-X :-X ::) ::)
Keeps the pre cat code away ime. :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Lazydocker on 01 June 2011, 22:26:35
Quote
Quote
Quote
Gay!  Very Gay actually! Show it who's boss.

Large manly can of Italian tune up for you....

Errm... I seem to have caught something from you ::)

I used to drive sedately most of the time but just lately :-X :-X ::) ::)
Keeps the pre cat code away ime. :-/

But even the local LPG station has commented that I'm filling up frequently ::) ::)

Incidentally... That tank took 64L from empty and I got 250 miles :y :y
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 02 June 2011, 00:15:41
Quote
It's been a while I know...

Next time you're over this way perhaps we should swap MAF sensors and give it a try?

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 07 June 2011, 09:12:24
Yes please!

Just when I thought it was OK, I booted it to overtake a campervan on a 2 lane sliproad this weekend. Admittedly I had 4 people in the car, and a boot full of stuff, but still it really did feel like a 2.0!!!

I'm not sure if it's just me, but it seems to run WORSE on super unleaded / higher octane fuels  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 07 June 2011, 10:51:38
Quote
I'm not sure if it's just me, but it seems to run WORSE on super unleaded / higher octane fuels  :-/

Hmm.. knock sensor causing full retard permanently? I think that could conceivably show a drop in power with super (as it's harder to ignite and takes more ignition advance happily)..

Though ISTR from past discussions that we've already covered the knock sensor?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 07 June 2011, 12:19:12
Quote
Though ISTR from past discussions that we've already covered the knock sensor?

I'm not sure about that.

Admittedly, "My Naff Code Reader" results for knock were similar between myself and Jimbob,

But -

On the Tech2, No manner of driving could get the knock-control active to show on Kevin Wood's 3.2, whereas on mine - the lightest throttle will make it show...
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 07 June 2011, 13:23:34
Quote
Quote
Though ISTR from past discussions that we've already covered the knock sensor?

I'm not sure about that.

Admittedly, "My Naff Code Reader" results for knock were similar between myself and Jimbob,

But -

On the Tech2, No manner of driving could get the knock-control active to show on Kevin Wood's 3.2, whereas on mine - the lightest throttle will make it show...

Ah yes - now I remember.. I think - though I'll bow to superior knowledge on this - that ignition retard would show a 'greater' effect the higher the octane rating of the fuel?

It did seem hinkey that you could get knock control active on yours but not Kevin's. Wonder if the MaxiScan MS509 shows knock control? If it does I'll have a look at mine.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Marks DTM Calib on 07 June 2011, 14:45:29
The higher the octane rating, the more ignition ADVANCE that can be accomodated.

If the knock system detects a fault its simply retards the ignition to a set position and disables the active control.

If this happens, then its VERY down on power
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 07 June 2011, 15:37:56
Quote
The higher the octane rating, the more ignition ADVANCE that can be accomodated.

I think I said that somewhere up there.. but doesn't the flame front also propagate more slowly with a higher octane fuel?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 07 June 2011, 16:13:37
Quote
Quote
The higher the octane rating, the more ignition ADVANCE that can be accomodated.

I think I said that somewhere up there.. but doesn't the flame front also propagate more slowly with a higher octane fuel?

I don't believe so, or at least not significantly so. The main difference is that it is stable against detonation at higher combinations of temperature and pressure. Once it's burning I doubt there's much difference.

I really can't see a reason why it would be more sluggish on high octane fuel, except that, depending where you buy it and how much they turn over, it is often in worse condition than the 95 RON. Been there myself. ::)

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 07 June 2011, 16:19:41
Quote
I don't believe so, or at least not significantly so. The main difference is that it is stable against detonation at higher combinations of temperature and pressure. Once it's burning I doubt there's much difference.

Ah - then I'll go back to sleep now ;)

Quote
it is often in worse condition than the 95 RON. Been there myself. ::)

I've seen that effect too - monitoring knock vs. ignition advance on the MR2 I couldn't get any more advance into the system (without knock) on Optimax from a low-traffic petrol station than I could with super unleaded from a high-traffic petrol station.. (Mapped it on Super in the end)
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 07 June 2011, 16:37:18
I wonder if it's got one or more cylinders running lean? Either a knackered MAF (although there was nothing to suggest this in the live data that james posted IIRC) or a clogged injector?

As I recall knock retard was going active according to the Tech 2 at anything above "cruising" levels of throttle and, as said, I couldn't provoke that on my car at all. :-/

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 07 June 2011, 16:42:26
Can I just add that, disconnecting both knock sensors, doesn't make any difference at all to the performance. It doesn't get better, or worse...

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 07 June 2011, 16:43:20
Quote
I wonder if it's got one or more cylinders running lean?

I think I posted somewhere on this thread Kev - I don't think it's right that I get over 34mpg on a 70mph run..  :-/
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: aaronjb on 07 June 2011, 16:44:50
Quote
Quote
I wonder if it's got one or more cylinders running lean?

I think I posted somewhere on this thread Kev - I don't think it's right that I get over 34mpg on a 70mph run..  :-/

It's possible but unlikely - I got 28-29mpg on an 85mph run, you could save quite a bit of fuel at 70.. maybe.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 07 June 2011, 22:34:42
Quote
Quote
Quote
I wonder if it's got one or more cylinders running lean?

I think I posted somewhere on this thread Kev - I don't think it's right that I get over 34mpg on a 70mph run..  :-/
It's possible but unlikely - I got 28-29mpg on an 85mph run, you could save quite a bit of fuel at 70.. maybe.

That sounds Ok if it was 70MPH all the time. Running lean won't necessarily improve fuel consumption either.

Hmm. Thinking about it, I reckon at times when it goes into knock retard the load is light enough to still be closed loop, so fuel trims would have taken care of it. :-/

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: ffcgary1 on 08 June 2011, 17:32:16
Have you swopped maf meters yet, still think that is where you should be looking, all this faffing about with perameters is putting off the obvious swop.
The maf controls or affects so many systems directly or indirectly that it needs swopping to confirm or disregard.
I know that you also have to arrange to meet at a time that is sutable to both parties but the length of time that this has been ongoing, it must have been worth finding the time and effort to do this before now.
Anyway i am still finding this an intresting thread but hope that you can sort your car to how it should be James.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: so comfortably numb on 10 June 2011, 00:36:04
Sorry for butting in, but on your first batch of live data, one of the TPS voltages was significantly lower than the other. Now, speaking from experience (although not a vauxhall) I had a faulty TPS that didn't throw up any codes whatsoever, the shifting of the box was all over the place, I had erratic idle, smooth power mid-range and then lack of power higher up - like it was being restricted.

Forgive me if you have already been down this route but theres alot of reading and I'm tired.
The haynes manual that I had for that car, gave me the info for what the voltage reading should be close throttle and wide open, thus enabling me to pin point that component.
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: Kevin Wood on 10 June 2011, 11:35:53
Quote
Sorry for butting in, but on your first batch of live data, one of the TPS voltages was significantly lower than the other. Now, speaking from experience (although not a vauxhall) I had a faulty TPS that didn't throw up any codes whatsoever, the shifting of the box was all over the place, I had erratic idle, smooth power mid-range and then lack of power higher up - like it was being restricted.

Forgive me if you have already been down this route but theres alot of reading and I'm tired.
The haynes manual that I had for that car, gave me the info for what the voltage reading should be close throttle and wide open, thus enabling me to pin point that component.

The drive-by-wire cars have twin TPS's and they have deliberately different characteristics so the voltages are never the same. This is to allow any fault in the throttle control loop (including the wipers of the two TPSs shorted together) to be identified by the ECU and a fail-safe condition established.

So, I wouldn't regard the different voltages as being a cause for concern and, if they weren't consistent, I'm be sure the ECU would raise a fault code.

Drive-by-wire Omegas aren't covered by the Haynes manuals, unfortunately, so the voltage readings there will not be useful.

Kevin
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 10 June 2011, 16:40:50
I noticed last night, when I went out for a run - seems considerably more like what it should be when cold. It loses power when fully up to temp.

If you hit the kickdown, it WILL go... I don't think there is a problem with the engine being able to produce the performance.

But, if you're travelling at say 10mph, and press the throttle 3/4 of the way down, when I first bought the car that would have thrown you in your seat - now, it just slowly increases speed...

Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 10 June 2011, 16:42:35
I noticed again when booting it on a dual carriageway, off a roundabout, with the foot through the floor ::)

Revved up to 6,000 rpm, and changed to next gear - still with sport mode on and kickdown switch firmly down.

Should rev higher than this?  :-/

Am annoyed, because I initially loved the 3.2 experience, and I'm now frustrated because I want my performance back  :'(
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: ffcgary1 on 10 June 2011, 22:27:36
Quote
Have you swopped maf meters yet, still think that is where you should be looking, all this faffing about with perameters is putting off the obvious swop.
The maf controls or affects so many systems directly or indirectly that it needs swopping to confirm or disregard.
yes or no guys? , maf or not.?
Title: Re: 3.2 still a little unhappy
Post by: JamesV6CDX on 13 November 2011, 18:24:13
Just an update, to this one.

Since June, there have been tiimes I've thought all is fine, and others where I've thought "this should have much more guts for a 3.2"

Tonight, I was replacing the exhaust ready for MOT. When I looked into the old backbox, I could see what looks like quite a bit of wadding, which I reckon was making it at least partially blocked.

I will take her for a run tomorrow night, and see how she behaves from there :y