Omega Owners Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Search the maintenance guides for answers to 99.999% of Omega questions

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: P0170 & P0173 sharing experience (2.6)  (Read 926 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

allen25

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Worcestershire
  • Posts: 226
    • Omega 2.6 V6 2001
    • View Profile
P0170 & P0173 sharing experience (2.6)
« on: 19 September 2013, 19:42:57 »

Hi all,

There is a large amount of information on OOF regarding this topic and I have digested most of it in order to decide how to resolve these codes/issues on my 2.6. Great to have a source of information like this.

There are many possible causes discussed for good reason and therefore many possible solutions. In my case it was the MAF sensor at fault (I know there are many recommendations for MAF fault on here for these codes).

My process was to watch live data for MAF and fuel trims, engine load etc etc. Long term fuel trims at circa +25%, both banks, throwing the above fault codes. For information, all the data at circa 2400 rpm delivered an average MAF reading of 61kg/hr with the failing MAF.

Next, after checking air leaks so far as possible, I went on a run and mid journey (hot engine) I disconnected the MAF sensor. The LTFT's reduced to 0% immediately. I'm not sure if this was 'true' information from the ECU or if it reports 0% because the MAF is unplugged? The MAF was reporting 0kg/hr as might be expected.

I had enough info to give me confidence to go for a replacement MAF. I started the engine to go and collect the part. Immediately codes P0100 & P0110 MAF related codes were thrown (no surprise, MAF disconnected). Although not cheap, I sourced a Bosch replacement and duly fitted it out of sight on the supplier's car park. Then reset the codes and monitored on 'live data'. LTFT's seem to be normal again although Bank 1 is recording higher than Bank 2 for some reason? I'll monitor for a few days/journeys and see how it goes.

Having covered the same route again with the new MAF connected (same driving characteristics), the average MAF reading was 75.4kg/hr at the same average 2400rpm

Not sure if this info will help any OOF members in future and I'm not suggesting MAF is always the issue but it is evidence that another 2.6 MAF has failed? I'll report otherwise if anything changes.
Logged

TheBoy

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Brackley, Northants
  • Posts: 107023
  • I Like Lockdown
    • Whatever Starts
    • View Profile
Re: P0170 & P0173 sharing experience (2.6)
« Reply #1 on: 19 September 2013, 21:07:53 »

2.6/3.2 MAFs do seem to degrade, rather than outright fail. 2.5/3.0 MAFs seem to be more robust, but usually completely fail when they go.

You diagnostic approach was the right method IMHO, by looking at the lamdas for activity, then watching the long terms drift out, whilst simultaneously monitoring the MAF readings.

EML comes on at 25% deviation, code is stored from approx 20% I believe.
Logged
Grumpy old man
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.009 seconds with 16 queries.