So my 147TS decided not to start after I parked up after a 30min city traffic drive to take a phone call yesterday. No funny warnings on the dash, starter motor spins engine over like a top so battery good, can't hear the fuel system pressurise but not sure I ever do even though it depressurises noisily when it gets turned off.
After about 15mins of head scratching I try it again and it starts up like nothing has happened. Bloody. Drove to my next destination about 5km away wondering if it was something obscure like the integrated alarm system volume sensor triggering (like the central locking does if you fail to lock it when you leave the car) because I was sat in the car chatting on the phone. Just as I was pulling up at my destination the engine cut out (clutch in, engine at idle) and wouldn't restart. Bloody. Anyway had coffee with friend, as one does, came back and car started first go. Drove 30mis across town to my girlfriends abode with no problems. This morning again started first turn, drove to work (35min) stopping car twice (at my house to pick up laptop'n'stuff and at a servo for fuel on the way) no problems. Drove home this evening no problems. Sat in car at home reading handbook about alarm system operation for 10 mins and again car started first turn when I tried.
If I was a betting man I would suspect the crank sensor. What other symptoms would that give? Engine spins sweetly from idle to redline at full throttle and part throttle. Rev limiter kicks in as one would expect. Up to this point it has been a perfect starter, hot or cold. The weather has been a bit cold and damp in Adelaide the last few days after a hot spell but I went for a " sporting" drive in the hills on Saturday in the rain and it started easily when hot and damp.
Any other ideas?
When it cranks but won't start, is your tacho dead?
p.s. If the sensor, buy new. A used one will only get you to a more inconvenient place when it fails. Also, having run the "long cable" early type (as will be yours) a couple of times I think to make a bridging cable and use the newer style sensor, might be a nicer option. You'll swear more once, but only the once.
Ill take special note of the tacho if it happens again.... but whats the betting that now I have some interest in it happening again it won't! Are the newer style sensors of which you speak a 147 part from series 2 or a JTS part? I'll order new for exactly the reasons you bring up.
100% it is a crank angle sensor.
Thanks Mick A and Citroenbender. Did the commute to and from work yesterday with no problems, but the idle was a little unstable at times. After I got home I let it heat soak for 10 mins then tried to start it. No start and no tacho reading as engine turned over.
New sensors ordered. Amazing how fast it went from being good to being, well, buggered. Ordered two and will keep one as an on board spare!
I've got to lay in a spare for one of mine, too.
If you are going to adapt the "leadless" type, please advise on the correct harness plug to fit, I'm keen to know.
Either way, remember to disconnect the battery when you do the replacement!
Eper outlines the procedure, apart from the battery, it's necessary to get the flex exhaust out the way, or ideally the whole dual cat/down pipe shebang.
I decided not to use the "leadless" type instead buying two brown connector OEM type sensors, although I do wish that the second sensor that I bought was of that type as I could sort out a lead at my leisure.
Why disconnect the battery? It would surprise me if that circuit was live with the ignition switched off and the key in my pocket. Still my first step was to disconnect at the brown connector on the loom above the intake manifold just to be sure.
I'm blessed with the combination of small hands and long limbs so all I did was remove the plastic engine cover (with its cool captive torx fasteners) wriggle my hand/arm past the the air mass sensor at just the right angle and reach under the starter motor to undo the 5mm allen bolt and remove the sensor. To be honest chasing the cable was a bigger PTA than the sensor.
I was happy to attempt it this way as I like disturb as little as possible in case my fiddling creates a new problem where there was previously none. Did end up with some scratches on my arm for my efforts though.
Anyway thanks for the help guys, my little 147 is running happy again!
And while I have your attention, what is this? On the inlet side of the head, at the drive belt end. Water temp sensor? That its leaking onto its connector is something i'll like to fix
That is the Variator Solenoid. When activated it directs engine oil into the Variator. The Variator is a cylindrical device mounted between the front of the intake cam & the intake camshaft pulley, as it fills with oil pressure it varies the intake cam position on the camshaft, thus giving variable cam timing.
'Variable', in my mind, implies that the inlet valve timing can vary infinitely within a range, but in reality it only changes from one position to another ('normal' and advanced, I think). Still a 'good thing' to have, as opposed to not (at least until the variator dies...).
Baldrick, I have to disagree that Torx fasteners are in any way 'cool'. IMO they are a PITA, especially in the smaller sizes that take very little force to self destruct either the fitting or the tool. Why is it that somebody felt a need to re-invent the wheel, when hex and Allen headed fasteners work very well already...
Regards,
John.
I'll wear the pedant's cap this time and point out those engine cover fasteners are not Torx but Ribe type. ;)
With the variator solenoid, I'm still keen to dissect one. That pictured has the same leak as mine, where oil pressure is escaping via the connector pins. I'd like to know why it happens to some, and moreover, if with such a leak there becomes a "buffer" of oil which impedes free movement of the solenoid plunger.
It's usually me that gets accused with pedantry (often with cause...). I possess no Ribe type tools, just as well that the fasteners on the engine cover work pefectly well with a 5mm allen key.
Not that it matters in my case, my engine cover lives on a shelf in my workshop. I'd rather look at the coil packs than what is in my opinion an ugly piece of superfluous plastic. Pity the actual camshaft cover isn't a more attractive aluminium casting instead of being a very utilitarian plastic carapace, but at least it's functionally unattractive...
It's possible to test the speed with which the variator acts, or that it acts at all, by artificially activating it with some wires connected to the battery. At idle, the smoothness of the idle will abruptly worsen dramatically when the solenoid is energised, and becomes just like that of a 'normal' engine that has substantial valve overlap in the cam grind, i.e. rough.
Regards,
John.
The mud of pedantry sticks to me as well.... johnl from what you say re testing the variator solenoid with wires from the battery that the inlet cam is in its "retarded" position - for the lack of a better expression - with the variator unactivated and when activated the cam is "advanced", thus a car with an inactive or fritzed solenoid will idle sweetly. Shame its not the inverse as a grumpy idle would be an easy giveaway that the variator system is not working.
That being said my 147 does seem to run sweetly all the way through the rev range but as its the only TS engine I have driven I have no comparison to how it should feel if it is working as it should, or not. Did you drive the car with the solenoid wired directly to the battery?
The easy answer would be to replace the solenoid and see what happens, but none can be found to buy new for some strange reason. Maybe they never fail!
From memory, there was a supersession on the solenoid. I won't be in a position to check for several hours.
Also, if I recall correctly, the new price is extortionate; typical automotive electrovalve pricing of $600+ per unit.
If your car runs well, don't sweat it. Just check the oil weep doesn't push all the way to the ECU connector!
Quote from: baldrick on April 23, 2018, 08:40:17 AM
The mud of pedantry sticks to me as well.... johnl from what you say re testing the variator solenoid with wires from the battery that the inlet cam is in its "retarded" position - for the lack of a better expression - with the variator unactivated and when activated the cam is "advanced", thus a car with an inactive or fritzed solenoid will idle sweetly. Shame its not the inverse as a grumpy idle would be an easy giveaway that the variator system is not working.
That being said my 147 does seem to run sweetly all the way through the rev range but as its the only TS engine I have driven I have no comparison to how it should feel if it is working as it should, or not. Did you drive the car with the solenoid wired directly to the battery?
It's my understanding that the inlet timing advances when the solenoid activates. So, the 'normal' inlet timing is relatively 'retarded' at relatively low rpm (when the solenoid is not activated), and advanced at higher rpm (when it is activated). However, it seems that the timing retards again above 5000 rpm (if Wikipedia is to be believed), which seems very strange to me, as I would assume less overlap would inhibit power over 5000 rpm...
I haven't tried driving with the variator 'artificially' engaged at all rpm. I would expect the low rpm overlap would result in poor low rpm power due to the overlap itself, and perhaps the lack of suitable ECU mapping for such a low rpm 'overlapped' condition (?).
My TS runs sweetly most of the time, but sometimes seems to lose power and become quite 'doughy'. This seems somewhat associated with ambient temperature, i.e. on hotter days the power can become noticably 'subdued', but not in colder ambient temperatures. When this happens it is accompanied by a change in engine note, which gets a bit quieter and less 'raspy' (I can hear my engine quite well due to having replaced one of the engine stay rubber bushes with a spherical rod end, which transmits sound more directly into the chassis structure).
This 'doughiness' seems to not happen if I disengage 'ASR' as I've habitually been doing for the last couple of weeks, but it has also not been so hot of late, so I'm unsure what is having the greater affect...
Regards,
John.
The Wikipedia stuff was interesting. I wasn't aware that the 147 2.0 TS engine had variable inlet tracts as well as variable inlet cam timing. In isolation having the inlet cam retard in the upper rev ranges seems curious but actually what the quote from Fiat in the Wiki article was saying that as revs rise from idle the cam changes progressively until at peak torque revs, wide open throttle the cam is fully advanced and the inlets are switched to the longer runners. As the engine heads to peak power the engine progresses to the shorter runners. As the TS has quite a soft feeling rev limiter I suspect that the cam retarding after peak power rpm but before the redline is part of the engine control strategy.
With a fly-by-wire throttle informing the ECU which co-ordinates the ignition timing, fuel injection, inlet cam timing and inlet tract length to suit no wonder the TS is such a sweet motor. I get to drive quite a brand new few hire cars in the 1.8 - 2.0 litre range and its surprising how unrefined and flat through the midrange their motors feel compared to my '03 147.
With your TS going doughy in hot weather, I would guess its a more likely a function of the ecu reacting to the knock sensor. Are you using standard unleaded? The combination of hot engine temps, a lean burn engine for fuel economy and emissions reasons and under spec fuel would be enough to cause your problems. Can't see how the ASR system would cause the issue, especially as the its integrated into the ABS system rather than a stand alone system.
Which rubber did you replace with the "rose joint"? And why?
Quote from: baldrick on April 24, 2018, 10:58:48 AM
The Wikipedia stuff was interesting. I wasn't aware that the 147 2.0 TS engine had variable inlet tracts as well as variable inlet cam timing.
You can see the variable length intake activating mechanism on the side of the manifold.
Quote from: baldrick on April 24, 2018, 10:58:48 AMIn isolation having the inlet cam retard in the upper rev ranges seems curious but actually what the quote from Fiat in the Wiki article was saying that as revs rise from idle the cam changes progressively until at peak torque revs, wide open throttle the cam is fully advanced.....
It's my understanding that the variator is either activated or it's not, with no in between. I've been wrong before...
Quote from: baldrick on April 24, 2018, 10:58:48 AM.....and the inlets are switched to the longer runners. As the engine heads to peak power the engine progresses to the shorter runners.
Sorry if the following is obvious. Longer inlet tract works better at lower rpm, shorter at higher rpm. It's to do with the length of time it takes for pressure waves to pass up and down the tract, which always happens at the speed of sound (i.e. the speed of the pressure waves is more or less fixed, though it does vary a bit with temperature). At lower rpm the constant speed pressure waves need a longer distance to travel (in a longer time) in order for a positive pressure pulse to arrive at the inlet valves as the valves open, and at higher rpm a shorter tract length is needed for the positive wave to arrive at the inlet valves as they open. If we were to run just short runners then at lower rpm there would be negative pressure waves arriving at the opening inlet valves (which would hinder cylinder filling), and if we were to just use long runners then this unwanted situation would exist at higher rpm. Using variable length runners is an attempt to have the best of both worlds.
It's very similar to what happens with 'tuned length' primary exhaust pipe tubes (it would be good to have variable length primary pipes in the exhaust, just
very hard to engineer...). Of course with the inlet side we want positive pressure waves to arrive as the valves open, and with the exhaust side we want negative pressure waves to arrive.
Quote from: baldrick on April 24, 2018, 10:58:48 AMAs the TS has quite a soft feeling rev limiter I suspect that the cam retarding after peak power rpm but before the redline is part of the engine control strategy.
I think I agree. I suspect that switching back to the 'long' induction runners at 5000rpm (or so) acts to discourage the use of particularly high rpm, maybe to decrease the chance of something going 'bang' (?). I certainly don't find any need to use more than a bit more than 5000rpm with this engine, I haven't found any extra power after that...
Quote from: baldrick on April 24, 2018, 10:58:48 AMWith your TS going doughy in hot weather, I would guess its a more likely a function of the ecu reacting to the knock sensor. Are you using standard unleaded? The combination of hot engine temps, a lean burn engine for fuel economy and emissions reasons and under spec fuel would be enough to cause your problems. Can't see how the ASR system would cause the issue, especially as the its integrated into the ABS system rather than a stand alone system.
It's crossed my mind that it could be a knock detection issue in hotter weather. I use 95 octane fuel, only. I have tried 98, but the engine seems a bit 'flat' when using it, and doesn't come back 'on song' until most of the 98 has been replaced with 95.
It's also crossed my mind that perhaps there might be a problem with the sensor that measures intake air temperature, i.e. the one incorporated into the air flow meter? If it were to be telling the ECU that the intake air was significantly hotter than it actually is, then perhaps the ECU might 'play it safe' in some ways? I think I'm probably clutching at straws...
Lean burn engine? I'd be very surprised if the A/F ratio were ever significantly lean with this engine. I've been wrong before...
The ASR may be another straw. I can't see why it should have the affect it subjectively seems to be having, yet when I turn ASR off the engine feels much happier, 'fizzier' and more powerful all of the time, instead of only some of the time when the ASR is left on. With ASR off it even sounds better (all the time).
Quote from: baldrick on April 24, 2018, 10:58:48 AMWhich rubber did you replace with the "rose joint"? And why?
The engine stay / steady / brace (whatever we call it) at the top of the engine on the right hand side. It has a 'U' shaped fitting at one end, which attaches to a rubber bush that is captive to the engine, and at the other end of the stay there is a soft rubber bush that attaches to a bracket that is bolted to the chassis.
The bush that is captive to the chassis was torn, so that when the stay was removed the inner part of the bush fell out, leaving half the rubber (as a ring) still in position on the engine and half the rubber still attached to the inner crush tube, in my hand. I cut a very short length of thick walled steel tube and forced this into the rubber still remaining on the engine. I then forced the inner crush tube and its' still attched rubber into the ID of the thick walled tube (a fair bit of force, and some rubber grease to get it squeezed in there). This resulted in a bush that is effectively substantially stiffer than it would have been when new.
So, the engine was no longer free to rock back and forth so much as it had been, and this made the drivetrain feel quite a bit more 'connected' to the chassis. When you get on the throttle the power feels to pass to the wheels more sharply, the car feels more responsive to the throttle.
I thought that I'd like more of that, so decided to delete the soft bush at the other end of the stay, and replace it with a compliance free spherical rod end. This was easy to do; cut off the bushing by cutting the stay tube, then thread the inside of the tube to suit the thread on the (male) rod end. The eye of the rod end is mounted using shims as needed on the chassis mounting bolt.
The result is even more 'direct' connection between engine and chassis, and an even better feeling of 'sharpness' in the power delivery. As a bonus, the more solid connection between engine and chassis causes more sound to be transferred directly into the chassis. I like this because prior to this I found the engine sound rather subdued, but now it sounds rather 'sporting', without the car being embarrasingly boy racer loud from the outside.
I can hear induction noises, I can hear some cam whine, and what I think is probably the gearbox. It's not very loud, but loud enough, and the sounds are nice sounds. If someone tried this and didn't like it, then it could be reversed for the cost of a replacement engine stay...
Regards,
John.