Year of Manufacture *: 2002 Engine Size and Code *: 2.0 ltr HDI ( Optional ) ECU Type: Bosch EDC 15 ( Optional ) Scanner Used: Autocom ( Optional) Fault Codes: None
Greetings,
I was going to append this to Glen Strachan's post below, but don't wish to hijack it.
This vehicle has a lack of power and after waving Autocom at it I diagnosed a faulty MAF Sensor. Customer who is a garage mechanic disagrees. Apparently it has been into Peugeot dealership and they can find no fault with it. My diagnosis was based on these readings:
MAF WOT 3.5v MAF WOT 388 mg/h
I believe the voltage should read approx. 4,2v but I do not know what the mg/h should be on WOT. I have been told it should be approx. 500 mg/h.
I would appreciate guidance on this from my learned friends!
I don't intend to get further involved in this vehicle for the following reason:
I was called to remap this vehicle because the owner wanted more performance. As standard procedure before a remap I always conduct a DTC check and ask various questions about the vehicle to ensure it will be a success. The vehicle has about 160K on the clock and is over 10yrs old and because of this, I took more time on this preparation as I would normally. The owner told me he had no problems with it and has had it for 6 weeks. It had two fault codes which were erased and did not re-appear. One was for Fuel Pressure and the other for over-heating. There was a broken wire to the Fuel Pressure Sensor which had been repaired and the customer reckoned the cooling fan wasn't working. I remapped the vehicle and on road test there was no increase in performance. A remap would increase the performance by about 35BHP and I have done loads of these to good effect. Normally, a failure of the extra performance is due to a faulty MAF sensor which cannot cope with the extra BHP and does not always produce a fault code. Further tests showed the figures that I published in my first post and the fuel pressure from memory went from 300 bar to I think about 800 bar from memory. Further questioning of the customer established that he realised it had lack of power and after Peugeot could find nothing wrong, he incorrectly assumed a remap would solve the problem.
If I had been made aware of this prior to the remap I would have checked the MAF with Autocom and just charged him a diagnostic fee. Sadly, customer relations deteriorated when he got into an argument about it with my soft-ware fella and I decided to re-install the original map and walk away from it.
I wasn't going to post the original query but check the readings on my next Pug 206 and see how they compare, but I saw the previous post about the BMW and thought I would ask the question.
I am pretty sure the MAF is the problem and I was confident about the voltage readings being below par. However, I am unfamiliar with mg/h readings and did know what to expect. My soft-ware chappy states I should expect about 500 mg/h. I believe the EGR could also be an issue, but I was there to remap a vehicle and not argue the toss with a customer who has been told by main dealer that the MAF and EGR were in good working order.
Sorry for the long post, but I thought I should put the full facts in front of you. In essence, I wasted 3hrs of my time .... but such is life.
Regards
Pete M
PS. Carl, nice to have put a face to a name at last!
Hi Pete, I have some captured live data taken from a 306 2.0 HDI 2000 RHY engine which I believe is the same as your one, although the data list doesn't actually mention mg/h
Regards Dave
You can trim a sheeps wool many times, but you can only fleece it once !
Yep, I think you have got it. I didn't take note of the reading at idle but from memory that figure is about the same as mine. I was told the figure at WOT should be at least 500 which is about what you have captured.
As I previously said I am not interested in the "why's and wherefores" on why the reading is low. The customer appeared to doubt the validity of the re-map and probably thought I was a cowboy trying it on. If he had been more amenable and accepted that he had a problem with the car I would have got more involved.
Thanks Dave (again) for taking an interest and the time for providing your help.
on July 2, 2013, 10:13 pm, in reply to "
