Jump to content

The RennTech.org community is Member supported!  Please consider an ANNUAL donation to help keep this site operating.
Click here to Donate

Welcome to RennTech.org Community, Guest

There are many great features available to you once you register at RennTech.org
You are free to view posts here, but you must log in to reply to existing posts, or to start your own new topic. Like most online communities, there are costs involved to maintain a site like this - so we encourage our members to donate. All donations go to the costs operating and maintaining this site. We prefer that guests take part in our community and we offer a lot in return to those willing to join our corner of the Porsche world. This site is 99 percent member supported (less than 1 percent comes from advertising) - so please consider an annual donation to keep this site running.

Here are some of the features available - once you register at RennTech.org

  • View Classified Ads
  • DIY Tutorials
  • Porsche TSB Listings (limited)
  • VIN Decoder
  • Special Offers
  • OBD II P-Codes
  • Paint Codes
  • Registry
  • Videos System
  • View Reviews
  • and get rid of this welcome message

It takes just a few minutes to register, and it's FREE

Contributing Members also get these additional benefits:
(you become a Contributing Member by donating money to the operation of this site)

  • No ads - advertisements are removed
  • Access the Contributors Only Forum
  • Contributing Members Only Downloads
  • Send attachments with PMs
  • All image/file storage limits are substantially increased for all Contributing Members
  • Option Codes Lookup
  • VIN Option Lookups (limited)

JFP in PA

Moderators
  • Content Count

    7,516
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    72

Posts posted by JFP in PA


  1. 1 hour ago, Angus M said:

    Thanks for your input  I'm of a similar mind to you but I did check voltage at the DME relay during cranking and it was 11.4 volts  looking at the wiring the main cable to the splitter block uk behind ac in passenger footwell all in good order infact all cabling is intact and grounds etc are all clean. The garage advised that the ecu is not registering the CPS during cranking (new sensor fitted) I did ask them to check wiring around this and the coil packs incase something had been disturbed during replacement after which this issue started  but they advised all is well there too. I have found a company that test and repair ecu so I'm awaiting info they advise a test inspection is £40 with a full refurb at £160  so think that will be an option to test first.  I know manufactures tweak thinks and add new numbers but I think the Bosch part number on the units are the same suggesting the change is in the software that was why I inquired as to flashing my map onto the 01 unit .

    Cant  spend crazy money  I would be better breaking the car selling the parts  and buying a newer model 

     

    Visual inspection of the.primary cables is fine, but it does not tell you what is going INSIDE the cables, where a slight increase in resistance can result in significant voltage drops, which screws up just about everything, including how the DME functions.  If your DME was expecting 12.0 volts or better and only gets 11.4, it is already outside the acceptable voltage drop range.  If that is the actual case, there may be nothing wrong with the DME, other than it does not see the correct voltage...........


  2. 17 minutes ago, Don Smethers said:

    Yes, very familiar with IMS conversation. This is early 2000. Part of this process would be to inspect and confirm the old double-rowIMS as seller claims, or do the upgrade, in addition to the other issues. But the question is can/should the DME be reset, considering engine would be freshened and maybe rebuilt. Wouldn't do that (or buy it) it that is unethical. thx 

     

    No, it CANNOT be reset.

     

    The ONLY way to know which style IMS bearing is in a 2000-2001 M96 Porsche is to take it apart and look, all other supposed methods are simply wishful thinking, so unless the seller could show you records of that being done, he is fabricating data.  Those of us that do IMS retrofits for a living would have told you that, and your PPI should have also caught any signs that the car had be pulled apart for such an inspection.  


  3. 1 hour ago, Angus M said:

    Update on starting issue

    Local independent has advised the ECU has a fault  and I am looking for a replacement  can anyone confirm if a 99661860102 be replaced with a 99661860101 ECU the garage advised they can re code etc   struggling to find a ##02 @ sensible cost .

    Thanks for any input 

    Regards Angus

     

    You still need to run a proper voltage drop across the primary battery cables.  This should be done before you do anything else as too high a voltage drop will cause all sorts of problems that can easily be misconstrued as something way more expensive, like replacing the DME.

     

    Going from the DME ending in 102 to one ending in 101 is going backwards, the 102 unit is the one that superseded the 101.  Porsche does not do this unless there was a problem with the older style unit.  Even the 102 has been superseded twice, the current model is the DX, which retails here for a touch over $5K.

     

    As these DME's do not fail very often, you really need to make sure you need to do this.


  4. 25 minutes ago, Porschelibrarian said:

    Agreed.  However once I find that cable will a PIWIS, PIWIS 2, or PIWIS 3 access and perform all rhebfuncti ok ns in a 996 997 Cup Car?

     

    It should on race cars using the MS 3.1 engine module, which I think was in play through 2007.


  5. 3 hours ago, mpaton said:

    I haven't driven it on the street yet, but the MAF and IAT in the MAF harness are working again, and the ABS/ PSM is also.

     

    I had intended to use soldered connections and heat shrink tubing and similar sized wires, and did so, although this practice always brings to mind being told in the late 70s, (by informed people) that crimping was way more reliable in the automotive environment, as the wiring could remain flexible, presumably due to not having stiff solder) and hence resistant to vibration induced damage. Maybe it's the greater availability of heat shrink tubing that makes the difference.

     

    Thanks for the help.

     

    Does anyone know what the mystery option not on my car could be? 3 wires, brown,  orange with red tracer, and purple with green tracer. connected to 3 female pins in 6 place inline AMP connector with BMW part number on it.

     

    Your hypothesis about crimping being better is dead wrong.  Soldering is always better for a simple, often misunderstood reason; resistance in the circuit.  Crimp connectors add a different thickness material (often aluminum) to the electrical circuit, and that can have huge implications to what happens next, especially sensor circuits like the MAF.

     

    Equal lengths of twisted copper wire and aluminum tube have different inherent resistance when measured a very low ohm levels.  This changes the voltage levels sensor's see under the exact same conditions, the lower the voltage level, the bigger the impact.  Add in that crimp connectors add dissimilar metal and the possibility for corrosion to develop, further altering the electrical properties of the circuit, and situation gets even worse.

     

    We had a car in the shop with complaints of repeated stalling for no reason while sitting at a traffic light or stop sign.  The warmer the engine was, the worse the problem. We went all over the MAF sensor and harness, looking for something obvious, but found nothing that jumped out at us.  While reading the car's PID values at idle, we noted that the MAF voltages would suddenly change slightly for no reason, and the engine would stall. Changing to our shop "sample MAF", it did the exact same thing, so it was not the sensor itself.  We disconnected the MAF harness and tested it for continuity, and it was fine under all conditions.  But when we tried looking at each wire for very small changes in resistance when the harness was moved or subjected to hot air from a heat gun, two circuits saw the resistance jump very slightly.  We cut the harness open and found those two circuits had small crimp connector repairs in them, both of which showed slight internal corrosion against the copper wires.  We cleaned the wires, soldered them, and heat shrink covered the repairs; problem totally disappeared, and has not reoccurred in more than four years of daily use.

     

    Sensor circuits, particularly low or factional voltage signal circuits like the MAF, O2 sensors, temp sensors, etc., act totally different when very slight differences in resistance appear in the circuit.  On these, solder and heat shrink are the ONLY viable repair methods.


  6. 1 hour ago, Porschelibrarian said:

    I'm looking for the adapter cable for the 996 and 997 cup car.  Does anyone have one or where to order one?

     

    Bit of an odd item, I got mine with a Durametric Pro system, but they do not sell the cup car cable separately. You might want to Google it around as they come up for sale from time to time.

     

    spacer.png


  7. 4 hours ago, edebes said:

    I was running DT40 until Jack Raby recommended 10w30 diesel to protect the engine from getting worse if bore scoring was the problem.  So I changed oil Fall, 2019. Regardless of what oil I have used, the tapping continues.  I have not used a recommended 5w50. Thoughts on this?  What about the idle issue, 665 rpm is not correct when hot? Can bore scoring create a very low hot RPM?  

     

    OK, you are running high film strength and ZDDP oils, which is what you should be doing.  Your idle speed is a bit low (spec is around 775-790), but as yours is an e-gas throttle body, the idle speed is software controlled and cannot easily be changed.  Idle speed can be altered by a variety of factors, so while it is a bit low, I wouldn’t be pursing that at this juncture.

     

    Bore scoring could alter your idle speed due to excessive drag at low speeds in the damaged cylinder(s), but it is not necessarily a given that low idle speed indicates bore scoring.  I think it is time for you to bore scope the engine; we have been bouncing around possibilities for long enough, it is time to identify solid data on what is going on and start either eliminating possibles or zeroing in on what is going on.


  8. 1 hour ago, Mike Blaszczak said:

    I know that the switch is on the transmission. That isn't my question.

     

    Great, thanks. If the shifting cable adjustment isn't a possible cause, I know to focus on the switch itself.

     

    As you had trans work done earlier, it is the obvious place to start as the switch is in a location that is not easy to see if the harness is fully plugged in.


  9. 24 minutes ago, Mike Blaszczak said:

     

    Obviously! 🙂 The B5 fuse is for the reverse lights, but it's fine. I suppose it's possible that both reverse lights blew, but I don't think it's probable.

    Indeed, there's no switch on the shift console -- just the parking brake switch and the switch for the storage box being closed (and the windows, and the courtesy light in the ash tray). My concern is that I haven't adjusted the cables correctly and, in reverse, I'm in some sweet spot that engages reverse gear mechanically, but isn't far enough (or too far?) that the switch on the transmission housing engages.

    It that's possible, then I have to take apart the console and adjust the shifter cables again. If that's not possible, then I know I have to get the car in the air, take apart the belly pan, and fuss with the switch.

    Is it possible that the reverse gear engages, but the switch isn't activated due to the adjustment of the shift cables?

     

    See my post above...........😉  I'll bet the connector has come off the switch as the shifter has nothing to do with the back up lights, if it were so maladjusted that the gear did not contact the switch, it would pop out of gear every time you tried to back up....


  10. That part number ( pcg 201 221 01) is not a correct Porsche part number, and bears no relationship to any of the part numbers that have preceded the one I gave you.  I think they are trying to sell you what they have rather than what you need.  And you cannot simply block off lines that happen to not be included with this part, the car will at a minimum code on your, at worst not even run.


  11. The correct EVAP canister, #996-201-221-08, is still available. This part has been superseded a couple of times over the years (996-201-221-02, 996-201-221-05, 996-201-221-09), but it still looks the same as your original unit according to the Porsche parts system.

     

    spacer.png

     

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.