3.5 Swap completed...Got fuel cut off problems past 5k rpms.
08-05-2006, 02:07 PM
#1
3.5 Swap completed...Got fuel cut off problems past 5k rpms.
3.5 swap completed, idle is fine and dandy, took the car out for a test drive. engine light came up, P0340=cam position sensor phase fault. Car can rev and has nice pick-ups, but it would not rev past exactly 5k rpms. It'll act like it has reached rev limit and experience fuel cut off.
The details of my swap are in this thread, detailed description of this problem is in post #23:
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=485451
Please chime in and help as much as you can. All help is appreciated at front.
-Peter-
The details of my swap are in this thread, detailed description of this problem is in post #23:
http://forums.maxima.org/showthread.php?t=485451
Please chime in and help as much as you can. All help is appreciated at front.
-Peter-
08-05-2006, 02:45 PM
#3
Kevlo, thanks for being the first to chime in again. LOL.
I really don't want to think it's the cams. These are 3.0 jwt cams which I really wouldn't perfer removing. but if it comes down to being the cams, I'll be darned. I'm hoping to see more inputs besides the cams. The mechanics think it's maybe the cam sprockets position or magnetism. We have a spare set, but to open that thing up again just scares the doodoo's outta my azz. We finally got the tooth lined up.
At once, I felt like that cut off is because of condition being too lean because this 3.5L engine is rolling with stock 4th gen injectors, maybe with the same duty cycle, it wouldn't squirt enough fuel into the chamber and creates a lean condition. We didn't have the time or the opportunity to test the air/fuel ratio, but I would need to rely on the mechanics to do that later on.
Anything else?
I really don't want to think it's the cams. These are 3.0 jwt cams which I really wouldn't perfer removing. but if it comes down to being the cams, I'll be darned. I'm hoping to see more inputs besides the cams. The mechanics think it's maybe the cam sprockets position or magnetism. We have a spare set, but to open that thing up again just scares the doodoo's outta my azz. We finally got the tooth lined up.
At once, I felt like that cut off is because of condition being too lean because this 3.5L engine is rolling with stock 4th gen injectors, maybe with the same duty cycle, it wouldn't squirt enough fuel into the chamber and creates a lean condition. We didn't have the time or the opportunity to test the air/fuel ratio, but I would need to rely on the mechanics to do that later on.
Anything else?
08-05-2006, 04:01 PM
#5
I've got EU, but it's not installed. Both me and the Mechanic wouldn't wanna install it before we debugged this problem. Besides, he wouldn't install EU for me. I'd have to pull this off by myself later on.
08-05-2006, 04:24 PM
#6
I find from research that it may be too much timing advance. SMT guys had this issue when they have too much timng advance. But I don't even have engine controller, how can my car be too advanced? Can it be because we lined up the cams in the advanced position?
08-05-2006, 06:08 PM
#7
I had the smt and we didnt have THIS problem. Ours wouldn't limit us revving. I don't know how much it can be advanced. How did you line the cams up in the advanced position(i dont know enought about cams 
)
)
08-05-2006, 07:44 PM
#8
well, if you turn the sprocket ahead a few degrees, it's advanced by cams to affect the timing signal from the ECU. I am just puzzled at this because we've lined it all up to original positions with the correct tooth. I don't see how this can come to be. I'm ruling out this one because we've checked over and over before closing up the timing chain cover.
Next assumption is that something weird is wrong with this setup. The ECU goes into a complete "SAFE MODE" operation, but that shouldn't limit my rev down to 5k rpms.
Then it can be the sprocket teeth counts. It's turned cycles that offset the whole mechanical timing setup, but this wouldn't make sense neither, because if so, it'll just become worse and finally die out. Well, my car idled fine for 15+ minutes and after which we would rev it and it won't go past 5k rpms. So, sprocket timing seems to be correct.
So, I'm out of possibilities again.
Next assumption is that something weird is wrong with this setup. The ECU goes into a complete "SAFE MODE" operation, but that shouldn't limit my rev down to 5k rpms.
Then it can be the sprocket teeth counts. It's turned cycles that offset the whole mechanical timing setup, but this wouldn't make sense neither, because if so, it'll just become worse and finally die out. Well, my car idled fine for 15+ minutes and after which we would rev it and it won't go past 5k rpms. So, sprocket timing seems to be correct.
So, I'm out of possibilities again.
08-06-2006, 08:08 AM
#10
Originally Posted by Kevlo911
While the car is on, unplug the cam sensor and see if it still runs, if it does, try to rev(is gonna be slow revs)
what can this prove?
I have ran it with 3 different cam pos sensors already. We can vouch that the cam sensors are fine.
08-06-2006, 08:32 AM
#11
okay now, I got a good theory on this now:
It's probably starved out of fuel at 5k rpms, though this can't really explain the cam pos sensor problem, I've seen many people who pulled this code due to other things...
But I think a good remedy would be walbro fuel pump and a fuel pressure regulator. But then this will have to wait because of the shipping time.
Other than that, I hope for inputs to keep coming. Thanks.
It's probably starved out of fuel at 5k rpms, though this can't really explain the cam pos sensor problem, I've seen many people who pulled this code due to other things...
But I think a good remedy would be walbro fuel pump and a fuel pressure regulator. But then this will have to wait because of the shipping time.
Other than that, I hope for inputs to keep coming. Thanks.
08-06-2006, 08:45 AM
#13
It reve fast and smooth with lots of torque to 5k rpms, then sudden cut off. Without taking it to 5k rpms, we didn't even know we'd have a cut off problem at all.
EDIT* To add to this: The only time it felt rough is at idle. It's got a very rough rhythm shaking and muscle car sound grun-grun-grun-grun...But this is mostly due to the lope of the cams. Other than that, it pulls hard and smooth to my faulty "new redline" at 5k rpms. LOL.
EDIT* To add to this: The only time it felt rough is at idle. It's got a very rough rhythm shaking and muscle car sound grun-grun-grun-grun...But this is mostly due to the lope of the cams. Other than that, it pulls hard and smooth to my faulty "new redline" at 5k rpms. LOL.
08-06-2006, 08:46 AM
#14
Originally Posted by GodFather
It reve fast and smooth with lots of torque to 5k rpms, then sudden cut off. Without taking it to 5k rpms, we didn't even know we'd have a cut off problem at all.
Might be a fuel problem. I wonder if the Maf is maxing out
Get some 370cc injectors ha.
Also, are your Pathy heads metal VC or the black plastic VC?
08-06-2006, 08:50 AM
#15
Originally Posted by GodFather
what can this prove?
I have ran it with 3 different cam pos sensors already. We can vouch that the cam sensors are fine.
I have ran it with 3 different cam pos sensors already. We can vouch that the cam sensors are fine.
08-06-2006, 09:50 AM
#16
Originally Posted by Kevlo911
Might be a fuel problem. I wonder if the Maf is maxing out
Get some 370cc injectors ha.
Also, are your Pathy heads metal VC or the black plastic VC?
Get some 370cc injectors ha.
Also, are your Pathy heads metal VC or the black plastic VC?
LoL, it's got pathy heads with my 4th gen valvecover so I can still use the splitfire ignitions.
Maf shouldn't have maxed out because I don't think I'd be pushing more than 250whp on this setup.
08-06-2006, 10:00 AM
#17
Maybe it is lack of fuel or something misfiring at 5K RPM. When I had a my OEM starter on the way out it would take a long time of cranking to start the engine. The starter wouldn't spin at a constant speed and it was awful starting this car. I would get Cam (P0340) sensor codes on start up cause of the uneven speed of the starter and how it effected the engine. I changed the cam sensor with the spare ones I had lying around, none of them fixed the problem. When I installed a rebuilt Autozone starter all these problems went away and the car starts right up everytime.
I know this one is out there but another guess is to check the grounding. If you don't have a grounding kit get one installed. When you installed the older cam sensor it could only rev to 2500 RPM which leads me to believe it's not getting enough signal to the ECU, maybe there is something that's causing the sensor to lose signal. Our OEM grounds are garbage and up here they corrode pretty badly, I've seen improvements with cleaning and sanding the grounding points but within a few months the problems return. Installing a grounding kit permantly fixed the problems I've had and makes the SMT run ALOT smoother.
Also the cam code that is asscioated with the SMT-6 is due to Crankshaft timing advancing far ahead of the CAM timing and the ECU get's confused. It does not cause a rev limit change the ECU just goes into a safe mode.
I know this one is out there but another guess is to check the grounding. If you don't have a grounding kit get one installed. When you installed the older cam sensor it could only rev to 2500 RPM which leads me to believe it's not getting enough signal to the ECU, maybe there is something that's causing the sensor to lose signal. Our OEM grounds are garbage and up here they corrode pretty badly, I've seen improvements with cleaning and sanding the grounding points but within a few months the problems return. Installing a grounding kit permantly fixed the problems I've had and makes the SMT run ALOT smoother.
Also the cam code that is asscioated with the SMT-6 is due to Crankshaft timing advancing far ahead of the CAM timing and the ECU get's confused. It does not cause a rev limit change the ECU just goes into a safe mode.
08-06-2006, 01:08 PM
#18
Sounds good.
I'll hit up the walbro fuel pump and a fpr first because I think it's starving outta fuel.
I do have a ground kit from Matt Blemhco, and it's installed. It shouldn't constitute to my problems.
I am not sure about the starter because everything is transferred from my old 3.0 setup, even the timing signal plate on the crank. It's a bosche starter that has been good, never had a hint of a problem. But I'll definitely mention this to my mechanics and see what he says. But thanks for the input.
I'll hit up the walbro fuel pump and a fpr first because I think it's starving outta fuel.
I do have a ground kit from Matt Blemhco, and it's installed. It shouldn't constitute to my problems.
I am not sure about the starter because everything is transferred from my old 3.0 setup, even the timing signal plate on the crank. It's a bosche starter that has been good, never had a hint of a problem. But I'll definitely mention this to my mechanics and see what he says. But thanks for the input.
08-06-2006, 01:17 PM
#19
I know that on a 3.0 with stillen's base supercharger kit, it's supplied with a aux fuel pump and a fmu to get the fuel issues fixed at 240cc 4th gen injectors. That's running the engine at a rating of 270 whp.
On my 3.5 and my setup, I am not totally sure of what whp range I'd be running at 5k rpms cut off. But if it's close to 250whp already, I'd be reasonable to think that fuel has been starved out because of my old 155k miles fuel pump, stock fpr, and 240cc injectors. This is very reasonable for me to believe. So, I'll get the walbro's in. But in the meantime, I also hope to see more inputs coming. Thanks everyone.
On my 3.5 and my setup, I am not totally sure of what whp range I'd be running at 5k rpms cut off. But if it's close to 250whp already, I'd be reasonable to think that fuel has been starved out because of my old 155k miles fuel pump, stock fpr, and 240cc injectors. This is very reasonable for me to believe. So, I'll get the walbro's in. But in the meantime, I also hope to see more inputs coming. Thanks everyone.
08-06-2006, 02:15 PM
#21
Originally Posted by GodFather
I know that on a 3.0 with stillen's base supercharger kit, it's supplied with a aux fuel pump and a fmu to get the fuel issues fixed at 240cc 4th gen injectors. That's running the engine at a rating of 270 whp.
On my 3.5 and my setup, I am not totally sure of what whp range I'd be running at 5k rpms cut off. But if it's close to 250whp already, I'd be reasonable to think that fuel has been starved out because of my old 155k miles fuel pump, stock fpr, and 240cc injectors. This is very reasonable for me to believe. So, I'll get the walbro's in. But in the meantime, I also hope to see more inputs coming. Thanks everyone.
On my 3.5 and my setup, I am not totally sure of what whp range I'd be running at 5k rpms cut off. But if it's close to 250whp already, I'd be reasonable to think that fuel has been starved out because of my old 155k miles fuel pump, stock fpr, and 240cc injectors. This is very reasonable for me to believe. So, I'll get the walbro's in. But in the meantime, I also hope to see more inputs coming. Thanks everyone.
08-06-2006, 03:18 PM
#22
yes, I've done that, it's about the same results. It only lets me rev past 5k all the way to 6500rpms twice out of about 8 revs. But while driving, there's not once I get to go past 5k rpms. I can drive it normal all the way to 5th gear as long as I don't rev past 5k. I am thinking it's too lean because stock 4th gen injectors over this 3.5L setup is already going to lean out a little, now it's got the jwt cams that'll shine up it's lift after 4k rpms. I am really thinking that's when it's reaching too much air for too little fuel for combustion.
08-06-2006, 03:41 PM
#23
Originally Posted by GodFather
yes, I've done that, it's about the same results. It only lets me rev past 5k all the way to 6500rpms twice out of about 8 revs. But while driving, there's not once I get to go past 5k rpms. I can drive it normal all the way to 5th gear as long as I don't rev past 5k. I am thinking it's too lean because stock 4th gen injectors over this 3.5L setup is already going to lean out a little, now it's got the jwt cams that'll shine up it's lift after 4k rpms. I am really thinking that's when it's reaching too much air for too little fuel for combustion.
Also, just FYI, the 4th gen injectors are actually 270 CC per mardigrasmax's findings. I think someone else tested them as well and found the same thing to be true. A32/A33B injectors are both 270CC at 43 PSI. Based on this, i seriously doubt fuel is the issue.
08-06-2006, 03:53 PM
#24
Thanks nismology. I see what you're saying. That's a good point.
I'm giving up my work today. We've just got the timing chain cover taken out again, and found all teeth to be lined up and don't seem to see a problem with the timing setup. But my arms are tired as heck, so I'll leave it as is today and my mechanics will continue to find out what's up tomorrow. Boy, I'm spent.
I'm giving up my work today. We've just got the timing chain cover taken out again, and found all teeth to be lined up and don't seem to see a problem with the timing setup. But my arms are tired as heck, so I'll leave it as is today and my mechanics will continue to find out what's up tomorrow. Boy, I'm spent.
08-06-2006, 06:25 PM
#25
Originally Posted by GodFather
Sounds good.
I'll hit up the walbro fuel pump and a fpr first because I think it's starving outta fuel.
I do have a ground kit from Matt Blemhco, and it's installed. It shouldn't constitute to my problems.
I am not sure about the starter because everything is transferred from my old 3.0 setup, even the timing signal plate on the crank. It's a bosche starter that has been good, never had a hint of a problem. But I'll definitely mention this to my mechanics and see what he says. But thanks for the input.
I'll hit up the walbro fuel pump and a fpr first because I think it's starving outta fuel.
I do have a ground kit from Matt Blemhco, and it's installed. It shouldn't constitute to my problems.
I am not sure about the starter because everything is transferred from my old 3.0 setup, even the timing signal plate on the crank. It's a bosche starter that has been good, never had a hint of a problem. But I'll definitely mention this to my mechanics and see what he says. But thanks for the input.
My point with the starter is that if the engine is not spining smoothly and consistanly turning it can cause a P0340 code. I was implying that the engine may have a misfire or something at 5K that is causing the cam code. Once the engine is running the starter has no effect on engine operation.
08-07-2006, 07:28 AM
#27
Yeah, I think so, too. I was trying to persuade my mechanics for me to install the Greddy EU, but he looked at it and said it'll take too long to wait for wiring and software setup, then a computer hook up usb cable is missing. Also, if I have trouble without EU, it's probably not going to be a good thing to work with. So, we'd just have to do it the ol'mechanic's way: pull out the timing assembly again and see what's up. I can't be at the shop today, but I totally trust this guy's works, so far I hear that he's putting the timing chain cover back. So we'll see what comes after that.
08-07-2006, 09:08 AM
#28
Update:
Took off the timing cover and looked at the timing setup. It's aligned correctly, all gear tooth are lined up in the right spots. Just done putting everything back and took it out for another spin. The result is the same. It's still running and can't pass 5k rpms. Same code appears: P0340=cam pos sensor phase fault. Well, I'm about to do what Chris'smax did...throw down the white towel and quit.
One last thing to try: We will replace the jwt 3.0 cams with the 3.5 stock cams and drilled spacers from Stephen Max. But this will take a few days. Till then, we have already run out of troubleshooting options. (Man, I am almost there, the car runs very strong, but it's just kept getting cut off at 5k rpms.)
Took off the timing cover and looked at the timing setup. It's aligned correctly, all gear tooth are lined up in the right spots. Just done putting everything back and took it out for another spin. The result is the same. It's still running and can't pass 5k rpms. Same code appears: P0340=cam pos sensor phase fault. Well, I'm about to do what Chris'smax did...throw down the white towel and quit.
One last thing to try: We will replace the jwt 3.0 cams with the 3.5 stock cams and drilled spacers from Stephen Max. But this will take a few days. Till then, we have already run out of troubleshooting options. (Man, I am almost there, the car runs very strong, but it's just kept getting cut off at 5k rpms.)
08-07-2006, 09:42 AM
#31
Originally Posted by Kevlo911
Hook up EU--- Power - Ground - TPS(optional) - CRANK SENSORS = data log rpms...
08-07-2006, 09:44 AM
#32
Originally Posted by GoalieKeg
I was thinking this too but didn't want to be wrong because I'm an EU n00b, even though I have one sitting in my garage.
Why are you online
Go install it 
08-07-2006, 10:52 AM
#34
Originally Posted by Kevlo911
Hook up EU--- Power - Ground - TPS(optional) - CRANK SENSORS = data log rpms...
Yeah, but my mechanics will quit the moment I try to install this thingy. So that's out of the ballpark at the moment.
I also have the MAP sensor from Greddy, I think if and when I install EU, I'll get rid of the MAF, making it easier for my supercharger to pipe-in and boost better without maxing out the maf. I have both 7psi and 14 psi supercharger setups ready at bay. I just have to work out the dynamics first and make sure N/A motor has no trouble before I even think about boosting this beast.
-Peter-
08-07-2006, 10:56 AM
#35
Kevlo, how come you're online all day, everyday? Are you trying to ***** threads? I see you in every thread out there. Kinda good to have someone like you constantly on the org. Very handy when there's trouble. 
08-07-2006, 11:29 AM
#36
Originally Posted by GodFather
Kevlo, how come you're online all day, everyday? Are you trying to ***** threads? I see you in every thread out there. Kinda good to have someone like you constantly on the org. Very handy when there's trouble.
08-07-2006, 07:47 PM
#40
Shouldn't you be working on getting your refund back? Stop whoring...J/K LOL. Somehow, at all angles, you're waaaay less aggrevating than nmexmax. (Wait till he sees this post I put down, I'll be flamed to ashes, lmao)