Page 1 of 2
Another fuel problem
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:41 pm
by dave
Ok got the clivo insured , taxed and MOT'd.
Ran it for a few days now and it eats the fuel!!
10er will do maybe 40-50 miles. Is that right?
Im also not running a lambda sensor, if i put one on will the fuel economy be better?? As with no lambda it will running rich yes?
Happy and sad at the same time
.
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 6:33 pm
by catgroom
Hi Dave!
Not sure about Lambda but I think yes..
With the fuel consumption,I find that with MAF set to 650,I get 100 miles per tenner.
Hope yer good mate!
Steve
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:44 pm
by dave
Hmm maybe mines is set too high then??
What is it best to be set at?? 650?
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 7:50 pm
by dave
I might fit my lambda as well just to help (even a little)
.
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:19 pm
by catgroom
Hi Dave
I was told 550.
650 absolute max.
What you been runnign it at then??!00 and over can easily fuck it!
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:51 pm
by dave
How do you measeure it again??
What setting on the multi meter?
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 9:07 pm
by owen080808
you want your multimeter set to measure resistance (ohms) and measure between pins 1 and 6, altho i've never actually dont it, so if they're not actually numbered on the car then maybe someone else would be kind enough to label up a pic?
Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 9:13 pm
by dave
Ok sorted, i have reduced it from 650 to 500. So ill see what the fuel is like over the next few days.
19Mpg is just really bad!
Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 11:19 am
by dave
Seems a bit better now.
If i fit my lambda, would it better still? What is the reason its there? WIll it improve driveability?
Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 10:44 pm
by 98kellrs
As far as I know the Lamba measures your emmissions to check that you're not running too lean/rich, but I don't know (nor does anyone i've spoken to) what happens when it's removed..
..However like you, I'm about to find out as i've just de-catted mine, and removed the lambda sensor, fingers crossed! Only difference i've noticed is that the idle vibrations you feel through the car are much stronger than before, but that may just be because it's a free flow exhaust now
I just put £20 in today, so i'll measure how many miles I can clock up on it for you over the next few days
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:59 pm
by martinholmesuk
Dave, You have what's called a B18FT(M) which is a b18ft without the sensor, the ecu goes into closed loop.
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:43 pm
by dave
martinholmesuk wrote:Dave, You have what's called a B18FT(M) which is a b18ft without the sensor, the ecu goes into closed loop.
Is that good or bad??
Its not running right and gets a missfire/hesitation at higher rpms
Posted: Tue Apr 10, 2007 9:59 pm
by martinholmesuk
Short term fuel correction uses the oxygen senor to make small changes to the injector duty cycle. Effectivley it's the closed loop control of the mixture done during 'cruse' conditions. This is an offset made to the injector duty (that is calculated from the MAF signal), and acts to get the lambda value as near to 1 as possible. It is calculated 'on the fly' constantly by the ecu.
Long term correction is triggered when the short term correction reaches a particular offset, and the offset value is in one direction. The ECU stores a value that is calculated to bring the lambda value to near 1 in place of the short term correction. Thevalue offsets the entire range of fueling (it's supposed to correct for wear in the injectors, and / or drift in the output of the MAF).
Well Dave, I think it's not a problem with having no sensor... Have you changed the coul and rotor/dizzy/leads or have we been down this path because someone else did I'm sure of that.
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 5:47 pm
by dave
martinholmesuk wrote:Short term fuel correction uses the oxygen senor to make small changes to the injector duty cycle. Effectivley it's the closed loop control of the mixture done during 'cruse' conditions. This is an offset made to the injector duty (that is calculated from the MAF signal), and acts to get the lambda value as near to 1 as possible. It is calculated 'on the fly' constantly by the ecu.
Long term correction is triggered when the short term correction reaches a particular offset, and the offset value is in one direction. The ECU stores a value that is calculated to bring the lambda value to near 1 in place of the short term correction. Thevalue offsets the entire range of fueling (it's supposed to correct for wear in the injectors, and / or drift in the output of the MAF).
Well Dave, I think it's not a problem with having no sensor... Have you changed the coul and rotor/dizzy/leads or have we been down this path because someone else did I'm sure of that.
It has had new plugs but leads etc are older and the cap and arm are a bit older aswell.
Ill give them a change and see how it is. Its normally in higher gers 3rd and upwards at higher rpms that you feel/hear it.
Posted: Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:15 pm
by martinholmesuk
coil, u changed that?
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:35 pm
by dave
martinholmesuk wrote:coil, u changed that?
not yet but worth a try
Posted: Thu Apr 12, 2007 8:40 pm
by dave
martinholmesuk wrote:coil, u changed that?
Im going to give it a full service and change the coil.
Fit lambda sensor and wiring.
Pressure test for any leaks.
Hopefully that might solve the problem
Posted: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:39 pm
by martinholmesuk
fixed?
Posted: Sun Apr 15, 2007 12:50 pm
by dave
martinholmesuk wrote:fixed?
Still a WIP.
Will update as soon as i have finished!
Posted: Wed Apr 18, 2007 7:22 pm
by Rapid-R5
tut tut dave, all that time and money and you couldn't spring for a new dizzy cap and arm!!
steve