correct Jon, we will finally address the tranny sleeve and possible output shaft seal, front and rear brakes and coils. After that Joel will hopefully have a trouble free relationship with his Jaguar again!!

 

If you recall i just had a similar problem. After not being able to locate a vacuum leak i took my car to my mechanic. He looked at it, hooked it up to his $30k computer and said it was the mass air flow sensor. I had recently cleaned it but he said to change it anyways. I found one on pretty cheap on ebay (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eB...K%3AMEWNX%3AIT) and replaced it. the codes went away permanently (knock on wood). Just thought id share that with you since you've been a big help to me.

Glad i could help

 

Kudos to you!

 

So you compared values from Joel (but didn't post them) and could see the MAF was wrong?

You didn't skip the above and instead threw in a MAF, did you?

 

Let me fill in a bit of the background...

Well Rick replaced everything vaccum related on the car a couple weekends ago, AND sprayed it down with carb cleaner, so there was no obvious vaccum leak.

When the airbox came off the wrong filter was in there, one edge was cut and the airbox, and even the tops of the cylinders had sand in them. After that was all cleaned out, and the oil leaks IMT and valve cover gaskets replaced the misfire codes went away.

We had decided it was either lack of fuel pressure or unmetered air.

When the fuel side proved to be good, and people started volunteering that there was no leak in their cars but the MAF caused the codes.

The MAF also showed a number at 1665 RPM - a scan that we had, that was WAY closer to idle than to my 2500 rpm pull.

So, knowing there was no obvious vac leak, and seeing that the fuel system was fine, and also knowing that the MAF had had sand and stuff through it, it was the obvious choice.

Take care,

George

 

Congrats on the fix!

 

It just seemed so EASY to get the figures at the same RPMs as were already posted.

 

This is true jagv8. It indeed would have been most informative to have to compare.

The story goes: Joel excels at academics not in shade tree mechanics. (Although he did replace the MAF all by himself today, successfully I may add!)

Joel lives 3 hours away, therefore I was not able to scan and download (upload) personally. I sent him my elm and he did the very best he could at sending data, the unfortunate part is he wasn't able to get it just right. Again he had mere hours to learn the ins and outs of it. He had sent me alot of data and after I reviewed many, many, many googles and threads here, George and I were very convinced that the MAF was bad, we just did not have the numbers for proof. Then srjag out of nowhere sent me a PM late last night explaining what had happened to his '03, 3.0, as you read above his MAF was bad and a new one corrected his problems.

At five this morning, I made a well calculated guess that the MAF was the issue at hand. I called Joel later in the morn and gave him my thoughts and "what I would do if the car was mine" speech. I believe that Joel and I have come to a trusting friendship over his vehicle through many hours of phone calls and emails. Yes, we threw the dart and scored a double bullseye. If it were not the MAF, Joel would have been heading back to the dealer with an open check book, it was worth the $86.00 gamble in everyones eye.

Prior to me sending the elm to Joel, he has a buddy that has a dad "in the business" that would do the live data scan for $75.00. Joel paid the professional the money and did not receive anything but codes (free at any of the BIG box auto stores here) and a lecture about having "a nobody" do the work on his car. Joel did not receive his money back until the "nobody" called and insisted in refunding the $75.00 a day later after finding this out.

What was one to do?!

 

Great work, Rick.
We had a wind-tunnel manager who always maintained: "A single test is worth a thousand expert opinions....and all the data analysis you can shake a stick at"
He'd be very proud of your results if he were following this saga.....

 

Rick,
I have been following this post and I must say that everyone involved did a great job. We often see the P0171 & P0174 and go directly to the vacuum system even after cleaning the MAFS and you know the routine. How many times do you see or hear of the MAFS failing? Pulling all the information together as a team and finding a solution is all anyone could ask for. Again Kudos to you and all involved!

 

A-men brothers!

 

Two things were at play here. First I trust Ricks mechanical work, and the determination that there wasn't a substantial enough vacuum leak when spraying carb cleaner to cause THAT much extra fuel being added.

What really had me leaning towards the MAF was the fact that you had to see this intake in this car. HALF an air filter, airbox open, sand in the bottom, and all the way into the intake manifold etc.

MAF's are basically two wire screens, basically the same thing as a resistive touchscreen, BUT instead of your finger pressing it, the airflow over them is that moves the screens. The only thing that really causes maf's to fail is foreign objects passing through them. If it's solvents (such as someone over oiling a K&N filter), MAF cleaner will work to bring them back to life. IF the internal wire mesh's are bent (in this case by the car ingesting sand via the intake), then there is no salvation to be had by cleaning them.

Gus, I can't help but make a comment regarding your repair page, and please don't take this the wrong way, but I don't recommend or thing you should take the cover for the fuel rail off and leave it off. It's designed to protect the fuel rail in the case of an impact strong enough to break the motor mounts thus allowing the engine to slide rearwards. If the fuel rail is unprotected, you run the risk of fuel (most likely under pressure, if the car OR fuel pump is still running), spraying all over a hot motor, with possibly injured or incapacitated occupants. That's just a formula for disaster. Granted the situation might be a bit extreme, but it was of enough of a concern that Jaguar put that cap there. AND yes it's a total pain to put back in, but it's there for a reason.

Take care,

George

 

Good read fellas, me likee the teamwork diagnosis. I always find troubleshooting other peoples car's more enjoyable...or perhaps its simply the disassociation of it not being my own? Either way, goot teamwork.

 

I'm glad it's fixed, whichever way worked, but sure would've been useful to have had those live data figures - especially at both RPMs.

 

Wow.....I was pm'd about this excellent post and how so many members came together to help a young guy with so many issues with his car!

Its posts like these where many members all come together / interact and provide helpful knowledge and contacts to resolve issues like these that make this forum what it is.

I would just like to say a Huge " Thank you to ALL concerned".....you know who you are!

 

Rick,

I'd be honored to have "a nobody" service our S-Type any day of the week. Extra kudos to you for chasing that fool down and demanding that he refund Joel's money after essentially picking his pocket....

This entire saga is essentially a great story with a fantastic outcome....

 

George,

Yes I know and I have the cover to reinstall and need to change my post.

 

Already made my trip, and it's running well!!!

 

Should be able to enjoy it now. Definitly should be worth keeping now.

 

Tell Rick I say hello and that I hope he has fun finishing up your car!

Glad it all worked out,

George