Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys,

I have a NM35 Stagea and it wont start. i have Fault Code P1135 come up and googled and came up with this:

http://engine-codes.com/p1135_nissan.html

Possible causes
- Faulty Intake Valve Timing Control Solenoid Bank 2
- Intake Valve Timing Control Solenoid Bank 2 harness is open or shorted
- Intake Valve Timing Control Solenoid Bank 2 circuit poor electrical connection
- Faulty Crankshaft Position Sensor (POS)
- Faulty Camshaft Position Sensor
Tech notes
Since the Intake valve timing control solenoid valve uses oil flow to control timing, dirty oil can cause the valve to stuck open or close. Before replacing the valve, change engine oil and filter and reset engine code.
When is the code detected?
When there is a gap between angle of target and phase-control angle degree, the valve will stop working and the Engine Control Module (ECM) will trigger the P1135 code.
Possible symptoms
- Engine Light ON (or Service Engine Soon Warning Light)
- Possible engine lack/loss of power
- Posssible engine rough idle


Read more: http://engine-codes.com/p1135_nissan.html#ixzz38AhpLpuN

If anyone can give a bit more of an idea of what and where would be great.

Thanks in advance

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/445933-p1135-fault-code/
Share on other sites

The Tech notes say to change the oil and filter. Suggest you get an oil with good cleaning abilities - maybe a Heavy Duty aka diesel oil that's also SL SM or SN certified, or maybe a high mileage oil. I would also just use a cheap dino and change it regularly (eg every 3000kms), if there's any evidence the motor is sludged.

  • Like 1

The V35 uses an oil control solenoid for the cam actuation, but the VQ25 doesn't. Ignore that suggestion.

Likely you have a faulty crank or cam sensor. The car should run without the crank sensor plugged in, so try unplugging that first. If it still won't start, then one of the cam sensors on the back of the head is probably faulty.

The V35 uses an oil control solenoid for the cam actuation, but the VQ25 doesn't. Ignore that suggestion.

Likely you have a faulty crank or cam sensor. The car should run without the crank sensor plugged in, so try unplugging that first. If it still won't start, then one of the cam sensors on the back of the head is probably faulty.

Thanks Scott, ill give it all a go.

Cheers

well, i have tried swapping out both CAS and Sensors on the back of the heads and still nothing. i cleared the codes and it hasn't came back but im thinking it my not till the engine is running again. i have got another error that came back up and it P0121 and i have swapped out throttle body's and accelerator pedals and still no go with P0121 comming up again once cleared....

There has to be a short somewhere in the system, but i wouldnt have a clue where to start with the short!?!?! Any idea guys? or would i be better to get a auto elect. to have a look?

Low battery voltage can trigger random faults...

That code is the pedal sensor, did you play with it before the code popped up? Are you using known good parts when you swap?

Perhaps the sensor power has a dodgy connection, or a sensor earth fault perhaps? You could measure these with a multimeter...

I swapped the parts with my Stag and there are no faults on my car. im guessing a dodgy connection too.

Thanks for the help, i just want to get this thing started! lol

Low battery voltage can trigger random faults...

That code is the pedal sensor, did you play with it before the code popped up? Are you using known good parts when you swap?

Perhaps the sensor power has a dodgy connection, or a sensor earth fault perhaps? You could measure these with a multimeter...

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

    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
×
×
  • Create New...