Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I was testing the volatge coming from my AFM on my r33 gtst s2 to see if its operating correctly by connecting a multi-meter to 2 of the 3 terminals, negative and positive. I incorrectly tried connecting it another way through the meter which caused the car to have a rough idle and then shutoff. Now it will not start at all. It cranks over and idles for a split second then shuts off. Ive checked all fuses that I know of and none are gone. Ive also reset the computer and this has achieved nothing. The care starts with the AFM disconnected but it has a rough idle. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. Cheers.

Edited by thirtythree-II

Ouch :)

Sounds like you killed it. If it starts fine with no AFM (prolly in limp mode though) and not at all with it connected, you most likely have killed the AFM :(

Multimeter on the signal and ground wires should give you a reading (don't quote me on that lol) that reading is whats confusing the ECU, causing it to not start. Maybe its outputting 5v, and the ECU doesn't like it.

Maybe checking for error codes and testing with known good AFM gets my tick too.

The small voltages that are going on there (+5 volts) wont damage the loom wire.

A small arc when you were testing "could have though, damaged the AFM.

- I guess you could run 4 new test wires from ECU to AFM (just out the side of the bonnet, through the window) to test the loom.

- Borrow an AFM to test the AFM

I done a diagnostic test and it reported but no.12 afm problem.

I found power coming from the afm connector.

I will test the continuity of the afm signal sensor wire (no.27) and also the earth wire (no.26)

Are r33 s1 and s2 ECU identical with terminal pin connector layout????

there's continuity from both terminals no.26 & 27 to the AFM connector.

so it must be the AFM.... perhaps the AFM I tried form the wrecker was stuffed too.

I need to get my hands on a known working r33 s2 AFM.

tryed yet another AFM and car still didnt work.

It must be the ECU??????????

but why did the diagnostice test read no.12 afm errror.

is is the processor within the ECU for the AFM thats fried?????

anyone got a ECU for sale?

cheers for your help guys but 'buck' sorted me out.

i've got a happy 33 again.

I replaced the ecu and it started first thing.

what confuses me is that the diagnostic error code was no. 12 which is AFM error, but it was in fact the ECU????

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

    • Version 1 aluminium airbox is.......not acceptable No pics as I "didn't like the look.....alot" Even after all my "CAD", and measurements, the leg near the fusebox just didn't sit right as it ended up about 10mm long and made the angle of the dangle look wrong, the height was a little short as well, meh, I wasn't that confident that Version 1 was going to be an instant winner I might give Version 2 another go, there's plenty of aluminium at work, but, after having in on and off a few times, and laying in the old OEM airbox without the new pod filter and MAF, there may be an option to modify the OEM air box and still use the Autoexe front cover and filter.... maybe This >  Needs to fit in here, but using the panel, and not the pod, the MAF will need to fit in the airbox though> I'm thinking as the old OEM box and Autoexe cover that is sitting in the shed is just sitting around doing nothing, and they are relatively abundant and cheap to replace if I mess it up and need another, it may well fit with some modifications to how the Autoexe brackets mounts to the rad support, and some dremiling to move it get in there, should give me some more room for activities, as I don't want to move the MAF and affect the tune Sealing the hole it requires to stick it in the air box is simple, a tight fit and some pinch weld will seal it up tight  I am calling this a later problem though
    • and it ends up being already priced in as though you're just on 91RON without any ethanol. Car will lose a bit of economy as the short and long term fuel trims bring down the AFR back to stoich or whatever it is for cruise/idle for the engine.  
    • Oh, you are right. But, in Australia E10 is based on 91RON fuel and ends up being 94RON. Hence it being the cheaper option for economy cars. The more performance oriented cars go for the 98RON fuel that has no ethanol mixed in. The only step up we have left then at some petrol stations is E85.
    • There is a warning that "this thread is super old" but they ignore that anyway...
    • With 10% Ethanol, we're talking 2-3% fuel consumption difference. The emissions reductions and octane boost in my opinion far outweigh this almost non existent loss.    My tanks sitting at 80%. Luckily that should go down fast as I'm on vacation again for the next two weeks. 
×
×
  • Create New...