Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

My mechanic told me that 2 common things that cause bad fuel economy on skylines are the 02sensor, and the ecu temp sensor.

changed my 02 sensor a while ago, no improvement.

so is the temp sensor worth trying?

i think they're only about $50.

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

It sure can, if it is telling the ecu the engine is cold, it will always be using enrichment that isn't needed.

But all these sensors are easily tested for correct operation.

You don't just go changing things unless you like wasting money.

Two ways you can check it.

Firstly by disconnecting the plug and using a multimeter measure the resistance across the two terminals at the different water temps.

Spec is

20deg 2.5k ohm

80deg 0.3k ohm

Second way is to measure the voltage between ecu pin 28 and earth at the different water temps.

Spec is

20deg 3V

80deg 1V

As long as the test results are somewhere close to the spec it isn't faulty.

Hope that helps.

ive never seen a water temp sensor cause bad economy

if u want to test it, unplug it and drive around for a week

the car will be fairly upset. mind wouldnt even start with a shagged water temp sensor. so id be suprised if yours would work, but get crap economy.

How maney k's are you doing with 10l or a full tank and what 98 fuel are you useing, try shell optimax I put bp in car and the economy was bad

so try shell :nuke:

Edited by RB SANDY

I know mines a prehistoric R32 but mine would start and run ok with the water temp sensor disconnected.

I ran in to fuel economy problems a while back. All of a sudden dropped from mid to high 400's to 350km's per tank almost overnight.

Replaced o2 sensor with new item, had already replaced water temp sensors and they were reading fine on the pfc h/c. I replaced injectors and bang.. fuel economy was back. :)

Driving style also has a little to do with economy. With mine at least it makes a considerable difference. If I change up a shade over 2000rpm I get pretty damn close to 500km's per tank. If I stretch out the gears a little to 3000rpm with light throttle fuel economy hangs around the low 400's.

The odd boot here or there doesn't appear to make a noticable difference but if always up on boost and booting it it does and I only just scrap in at 400km's per tank (~50-52litres).

The RB20DET however, didn't seem to matter how I drove it, always returned 450-470km's per tank.

I feel like a broken record. I've said that so so many times. :nuke:

Two ways you can check it.

Firstly by disconnecting the plug and using a multimeter measure the resistance across the two terminals at the different water temps.

Spec is

20deg 2.5k ohm

80deg 0.3k ohm

Second way is to measure the voltage between ecu pin 28 and earth at the different water temps.

Spec is

20deg 3V

80deg 1V

As long as the test results are somewhere close to the spec it isn't faulty.

Hope that helps.

that helps alot. thanks man. will check that out.

How maney k's are you doing with 10l or a full tank and what 98 fuel are you useing, try shell optimax I put bp in car and the economy was bad

so try shell :D

10.9L/100kms using Boost98. Works good, hella cheap too. Stockish R32 gtst.

How maney k's are you doing with 10l or a full tank and what 98 fuel are you useing, try shell optimax I put bp in car and the economy was bad

so try shell :D

i'm getting about 15L/100kms. BP Ultimate 98.

Ive tried mobil, caltex, but not shell. keep hearing so many bad things about optimax.

At the end of the day, highway vs city/short trips, makes a huge difference.

that's why u get some R33 owners claiming 500kms to a tank, and others getting 250kms.

Will be hunting down a cheap used safc2 (anyone selling???) to fit and tune soon, but i want to make sure the temp sensor is doing its job first.

The Temp sensor is one of the vital reading's the ecu requires for fuel consuption!

Do the check as described above with a multimeter!

If it's out of spec replace it.

Cheers

Josh

do i keep the car running when measuring the resistance across the temp sensor terminals?

or motor off, ignition on?

or other ??

also, just to verify, this is the sensor i'm checking, right ?

post-29392-1159587824.jpg

I do all local driving. ZERO highway.

Driven correctly the 3ltr returns the same fuel consumption as the rb20det.

R33's for what ever reason tend to have considerably worse fuel economy compared to the little old r32's. Maybe its the greater weight, maybe its the vct or something who knows.

do i keep the car running when measuring the resistance across the temp sensor terminals?

or motor off, ignition on?

or other ??

also, just to verify, this is the sensor i'm checking, right ?

disconnect the plug and measure the resistance on the engine when its cold (first thing in morning), water temp will be around 20degC then.

then again after driving the car and its up to normal operating temp disconnect it and measure the resistance. operating temp is around 80-90degC.

all test with engine off.

If you prefer to measure voltage you will need igntion on and the connector plugged on.

I tested the resistance at the temp sensor terminals.

2.85k ohms when cold/sitting overnight.

0.31k ohms when warmed up/after 15min drive.

so it looks good to me.

cheers man. thanks for your help.

if anyone is selling a used safc2, cheap, PM me. :angry:

if you do alot of short drives as opose to afew long drives fuel economy will suffer big time, just recently i moved closer to work so im only a 10min drive away so if all i do is drive to work my car is always running the richer(cold engine) maps as it doesnt get much time to warm up and my fuel economy has dropped from 450 odd km to 350 odd km's

Which is why its especially important to run a genuine thermostat as they get the car up to operating temp and out of the water temp correct table within 1-2km's.

Otto, if you run a pfc you can lean the water temp correct table out to all buggery until the drivability begins to suffer. I was able to take out a considerable amount of correction. I've seen a few maps from different tuners now and find it interesting they almost never touch the water temp correction table.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Well, after the full circus this week (new gearbag, 14 psi actuator on, injectors and AFM upgraded, and.....turbo repair) the diagnosis on the wastegate is in. It was broken. It was broken in a really strange way. The weld that holds the lever arm onto the wastegate flapper shaft broke. Broke completely, but broke in such a way that it could go back together in the "correct" position, or it could rearrange itself somewhere else along the fracture plane and sit with the flapper not parallel to the lever. So, who knows how and when exactly what happened? No-one will ever know. Was it broken like this the first time it spat the circlip and wedged itself deep into the dump? Or was it only broken when I tried to pry it back into place? (I didn't try that hard, but who knows?). Or did it break first? Or did it break between the first and second event of wierdness? Meh. It doesn't matter now. It is welded back together. And it is now held closed by a 14 psi actuator, so...the car has been tuned with the supporting mods (and the order of operations there is that the supporting mods and dyno needed to be able to be done first before adding boost, because it was pinging on <<14 psi with the new turbo with only a 6 psi actuator). And then tuned up a bit, and with the boost controller turned off throughout that process. So it was only running WG pressure and so only hit about 15-16 psi. The turbo is still ever so slightly lazier than might be preferred - like it is still a bit on the big side for the engine. I haven't tested it on the road properly in any way - just driven it around in traffic for a half hour or so. But it is like chalk and cheese compared to what it was. Between dyno numbers and driving feedback: It makes 100 kW at 3k rpm, which is OK, could be better. That's stock 2JZ territory, or RB20 with G series 550. It actually starts building boost from 2k, which is certainly better than it did recently (with all the WG flapper bullshit). Although it's hard to remember what it was like prior to all that - it certainly seems much, much better. And that makes sense, given the WG was probably starting to blow open at anything above about 3 psi anyway (with the 6 psi actuator). It doesn't really get to "full boost" (say 16 psi) until >>4k rpm. I am hopeful that this is a feature of the lack of boost controller keeping boost pressure off the actuator, because it was turned off for the dyno and off for the drives afterward. There's more to be found here, I'm sure. It made 230 rwkW at not a lot more than 6k and held it to over 7k, so there seems to be plenty of potential to get it up to 250-260rwkW with 18 psi or so, which would be a decent effort, considering the stock sized turbo inlet pipework and AFM, and the return flow cooler. According to Tao, those things should definitely put a bit of a limit on it by that sort of number. I must stress that I have not opened the throttle 100% on the road yet - well, at least not 100% and allowed it to wind all the way up. It'll have to wait until some reasonable opportunity. I'm quite looking forward to that - it feels massively better than it has in a loooong time. It's back to its old self, plus about 20% extra powers over the best it ever did before. I'm going to get the boost controller set up to maximise spool and settle at no more than ~17 psi (for now) and then go back on the dyno to see what we can squeeze out of it. There is other interesting news too. I put together a replacement tube to fit the R35 AFM in the stock location. This is the first time the tuner has worked with one, because anyone else he has tuned for has gone from Z32 territory to aftermarket ECU. No-one has ever wanted to stay Nistuned and do what I've done. Anyway, his feedback is that the R35 AFM is super super super responsive. Tiny little changes in throttle position or load turn up immediately as a cell change on the maps. Way, way more responsive than any of the old skool AFMs. Makes it quite diffifult to tune as you have to stay right on top of that so you don't wander off the cell you wanted to tune. But it certainly seems to help with real world throttle response. That's hard to separate from all the other things that changed, but the "pedal feel" is certainly crisp.
    • I'm a bit confused by this post, so I'll address the bit I understand lol.  Use an air compressor and blow away the guide coat sanding residue. All the better if you have a moisture trap for your compressor. You'd want to do this a few times as you sand the area, you wouldn't for example sand the entire area till you think its perfect and then 'confirm' that is it by blowing away the guide coat residue.  Sand the area, blow away the guide coat residue, inspect the panel, back to sanding... rinse and repeat. 
    • The detail level is about right for the money they charge for the full kit... AU$21.00 each issue, 110 issues for a total of $2,300 (I mentioned $2.2K in the first post when the exchange rate was better). $20/week is doable... 馃槓
    • If planning on joining us for the day(s) please indicate by filling in this form. https://forms.gle/Ma8Nn4DzYVA8uDHg7
  • Create New...