|
| | |
|
|
highplainsdox
Novice
Dec 5, 2010, 10:49 PM
Post #1 of 18
(20186 views)
|
2005 Ford Taurus SE
3.0L V6 - nothing fancy, just the "base" 3.0
Just under 90,000 mi.
I've been getting P0171 and P0174 pretty regularly. It only takes a few drive cycles for the codes to come back in again. My symptoms are: it's "cold blooded" to where I have to "nurse" it when the engine's cold, intermittent rough running at idle, and occasionally (but not often) rough running traveling city streets - up to 45-50 mph. I don't really notice anything at all at highway speeds. This weekend, I found that it was going into Closed Loop long before it should have - IMO. Here is the info at the moment loop status changed from OL-1 to CL-1:
Baro Press: 91 kPa (26.87" Hg)
Ambient Temp: +2 deg C
Cat Temp: 106 deg both banks.
Engine Temp: 120 deg
RPM: 1166
Relative Throttle: 0%
Throttle Pos. Angle: 17.3%
Ctrl Module Voltage: 14008
Fuel Rail Press, Relative to Man Vac: 3531 (pretty constant while running - 353.1 kPa(?) or 51 psi)
Long Term Fuel Trim, both banks: 0% (stayed there throughout the 80-second scan)
Short Term Fuel Trim, both banks: 5.5% (Increased to 66.4% within 15 seconds, stayed there for 6 seconds, then wildly variable. Fluctuates normally after
140 deg engine temp 67 seconds into scan - coincides with beginning to drive at 66 seconds into scan.)
MAF: 1.197 lb/min (appears to respond to changes normally when charting values)
I use AutoTap USB 3.10 with the basic parameters for Ford. Any idea what's going on here?
Thanks in advance,
-Dale
|
|
| |
|
|
Hammer Time
Ultimate Carjunky
/ Moderator
Dec 6, 2010, 3:34 AM
Post #2 of 18
(20175 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
We see that combination of codes a lot of Fords and it's nearly always caused by a bad vacuum leak. That's not the only possible cause but the most common. Check all the main vacuum feed lines. Listen for a hissing noise. They commonly suck holes right through the rubber connectors at the source or in other parts of the PCV system.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We offer help in answering questions, clarifying things or giving advice but we are not a substitute for an on-site inspection by a professional.
|
|
| |
|
|
highplainsdox
Novice
Dec 6, 2010, 5:10 AM
Post #3 of 18
(20170 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
Thanks. I will look for one.
Will a vaccuum leak also cause it to go into Closed Loop so soon?
Thanks again,
-Dale
|
|
| |
|
|
Hammer Time
Ultimate Carjunky
/ Moderator
Dec 6, 2010, 7:13 AM
Post #4 of 18
(20167 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
Too soon? Never heard of that happening for any reason.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We offer help in answering questions, clarifying things or giving advice but we are not a substitute for an on-site inspection by a professional.
|
|
| |
|
|
highplainsdox
Novice
Dec 6, 2010, 11:43 AM
Post #5 of 18
(20159 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
Cat Temp: 106 deg both banks.
Engine Temp: 120 deg
I had the understanding that Closed Loop happens after the cat temp, O2 temp, and engine temp come up to operating temp. At the time it went CL-1, the O2 sensors were still bottomed out. At the very least, it's not supposed to go CL until after the O2's start swinging, is it? Here, the marker is positioned at the first scan in Closed Loop. All of the data in my first post apply to this marker position.
|
|
| |
|
|
Hammer Time
Ultimate Carjunky
/ Moderator
Dec 6, 2010, 12:25 PM
Post #6 of 18
(20156 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
My understanding for closed loop was
- Engine temperature
- 0/2 response
- Internal timer expire
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We offer help in answering questions, clarifying things or giving advice but we are not a substitute for an on-site inspection by a professional.
|
|
| |
|
|
highplainsdox
Novice
Dec 6, 2010, 6:25 PM
Post #7 of 18
(20150 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
Engine temp at the marker was only 120 deg and the O2 response was nil at the time of going Closed Loop. Don't know what the timer is set at, but I would think it's more than 13 seconds of runtime. Haven't found the criteria yet. Struck me as being a little strange.
|
|
| |
|
|
Hammer Time
Ultimate Carjunky
/ Moderator
Dec 6, 2010, 6:28 PM
Post #8 of 18
(20147 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
I don't know. I would suspect either your scan tool is giving you bad info about the loop status or there is a problem with the PCM. Have you got a different scanner to try?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We offer help in answering questions, clarifying things or giving advice but we are not a substitute for an on-site inspection by a professional.
|
|
| |
|
|
highplainsdox
Novice
Dec 6, 2010, 7:00 PM
Post #9 of 18
(20143 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
No, I don't have another one. This one was just upgraded at the factory very recently.
|
|
| |
|
|
Sidom
Veteran
/ Moderator
Dec 6, 2010, 8:29 PM
Post #10 of 18
(20138 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
A fuel injected engine with no problems should actually go into closed loop rather quickly. The time you posted is normal. There is no way it's going to wait until the engine is at operating tempature, that would take too long. In open loop the PCM is ignoring the O2 signal and using a base calculation so the emissions would be way too dirty for too long waiting for a 195° coolant temp. You should be getting some good crosscounts so I'm not sure I trust your data (plus the scaling looks wrong for the O2s). If I was getting counts like that with no O2 performance codes, I would probably hook a scope up to the signal wire and get a reading right off the O2.
You can google "criteria for closed loop" and "fuel trims" and should get some good info to read on those subjects.
As for your lean banks 1 & 2, HT posted the common problems for those and that really needs to be looked at 1st. The easiest thing to do is pop the hood and listen for a hissing noise. Find a big vacuum leak and there is your problem. No vacuum leaks and then it gets a little harder.
With these codes pretty much ANYTHING can cause them. The 1st thing you need to narrow down is the cause. Is it too much air, false air or too little fuel?
This is where freeze frame data and your fuel trims come in handy. Freeze frame date is just some basic info the computer saves at the time of the failure. It's there so the tech can see what was going on at the time the code was set and try to duplicate the conditions to get the same failure.
On this one the main PIDs you are going to be looking at is vehicle speed and engine load. A vacuum leak will have it's biggest effect on the trims at idle and almost no effect at high rpm and engine load. Lack of fuel will have its biggest effect on the trims at high rpm and engine load and almost no effect at idle. So in at nutshell, how fast was the car going when the codes set?
If you can't access freeze frame then get a driver, get in the passenger seat, hook up your scanner and go for a spin. You are going to be looking at the LTFT PID and while I haven't found an exact number, with Fords, once the the LTFT gets up over +25%, you are going to set a lean code. On the reverse, when the LTFT goes -25% you are going to get rich codes...
One other common problem on Fords is under reporting MAF sensors. One clue is the baro reading being skewed (there is no baro sensor on this car it's a calculation from the MAF). I'm at sea level so am use to seeing readings of 29.9 or 30.0 ". 26 & under is a red flag and at 1st thought yours was skewed but I see you are close to 4000' where you are at so this is probably a normal reading.
Look for the obvious stuff 1st, if nothing jumps out then you are going to want to narrow it down to air or fuel.
(This post was edited by Sidom on Dec 6, 2010, 8:33 PM)
|
|
| |
|
|
highplainsdox
Novice
Dec 6, 2010, 10:29 PM
Post #11 of 18
(20129 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
Thanks, Sidom. Good info there. I will go after the vacuum leak(s). I've got some high freq loss in my hearing, so may have to get someone with better ears to help.
The LTFT is around 3% - 8.6% at about 55 mph. Symptoms I mention are at the low end of the speedometer - less than 30mph or so. No freeze frame data shows up, but it does have the capability to show FF. No crosscounts available. (That info is in the "enhanced" parameters. I just have the basic stuff for Ford.) The data I furnished was during warmup while sitting still. Yes, I am at about 3600'.
At 56 mph and 70% TPS, Absolute Load is 71% and Calculated Load is 97%.
Here's a section of a chart from a recent session to illustrate.
Thanks again for your help.
-Dale
|
|
| |
|
|
highplainsdox
Novice
Dec 7, 2010, 5:26 AM
Post #13 of 18
(20120 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
My readings seem to coincide with what Sidom was saying above with respect to a vacuum leak. You guys are on the same page. All I need to do now is get out there and try to hunt it down. :)
I'll remember to resize my charts in the future. Thanks, HT.
|
|
| |
|
|
Sidom
Veteran
/ Moderator
Dec 7, 2010, 11:42 AM
Post #14 of 18
(20116 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
Out of all the data you've posted, I really haven't seen any of the PIDs I would really be looking at for lean or rich codes. If you are limited to 4 PIDs, the ones I would be looking at would be STFT, LTFT, ENGINE LOAD, RPM/vehicle speed.
Until you can see your LTFTs go in to the 20% range you aren't in the problem area. I haven't see a Ford yet that will code in the teens. This is where freeze frame data can be so helpful. Right now you having to try this condition and that one to find the area. With FF you can see temp, speed, load, etc. 1/2 the battle is finding out when it's failing after that, then its "what hell is causing this"..
I haven't had a problem with the Taurus but the 4.0 Explorers had a plenum issue with gaskets and bolt and would only code after a cold soak (sat all night). After they warmed up, everything expanded, sealed and the trims would come in line for the rest of the day. So you'd think, I'll just look at the trims after a cold soak and that will tell me.....
That would be too easy.....
On Fords, part of their cold start strategy the is trims go high, real high for a little bit, which makes sense, this means the PCM is adding fuel which you want when it's cold so if you go that route you have to be real familiar with what normal high trims look like and what trims that are too high for too long and will set a code look like. Honestly in these cases where FF is pointing to a cold soak problem, I just smoke the manifold after it's sat all night. Its much quicker and more accurate (unless an installer does me a favor and warms the car up for me before I get there....that's always a fun phone call for the SA  ).
So 1st I'm assuming you already followed HTs original advise and looked for the obvious leaks, looking at the PCV hose very carefully and making sure then snorkel was hooked up to the throttle body with no cracks or splits, no obvious exhaust leaks....the basics... If all the is done then you have to find the spot where the LTFTs go over 20% until you do that, you're in the wrong area and chasing ghosts......
I did see a TSB for the 4V 3.0 for an O ring problem on the intake but that is for the S engine not the U engine and IIRC you said you had the U.
|
|
| |
|
|
highplainsdox
Novice
Mar 27, 2011, 1:07 PM
Post #15 of 18
(19617 views)
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
I fixed this problem about a week ago - finally! Had trouble finding the time to chase it down. My LTFT soared and pegged out at 25% on both banks over these few months since my original post.
I found the problem to be a vacuum leak at the o-ring on the IMT Valve - Intake Manifold Tuning Valve. Couldn't nail it down until I ran across a TSB (#08-12-4) and followed its lead. I found this on a Sunday and had to go to a local auto parts store and hunt down a gasket/O-ring. I found one for a 1985 Audi 5000 Turbo's thermostat housing that worked great. (ROL Gasket number WO8413-001) A test drive under various conditions with scan my tool (ATUSB 3.1) attached and recording data showed that the LTFT is back to 0 again on both banks. All else appears normal.
FWIW, this Taurus is my first Ford product, so I'm not all that familiar with all of its ins-and-outs. Until this car, I was a life-long GM owner. Didn't know the IMT Valve existed, or what its purpose is. I suspect that it's to keep the volume of air constant between both banks - just a wild guess.
Thanks for all the info you guys have passed on here. I appreciate it.
|
|
| |
|
|
techforfree
User
Apr 15, 2011, 10:00 AM
Post #16 of 18
(19461 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
Aggggggggggggg...the dreaded ford with the 171/174 codes....does it sound as if theres a vacuum leak when its idling ?If so pay close attn to the intake manifold tuning valve There is an 0ring for a seal and it becomes hard and sucks air and will give you these dreaded codes..but also a faulty pcv valve can cause it,don't rule out manifold gaskets,this is a big problem on a lot of fords but honestly havn't seen it much og the 3.0 engine...Good luck
|
|
| |
|
|
techforfree
User
Apr 15, 2011, 10:03 AM
Post #17 of 18
(19460 views)
|
|
Re: P0171 and P0174
|
Sign In
|
|
the auto manufacturers want all vehicles to go into closed loop as fast as possable,thats the reason for heated 02 sensors..honestly no such thing as to fast.
|
|
| |
|
Auto Repair Home
SEARCH
WHO'S 
LOG 
Lukewarm Heat............
Buy Flualprazolam Powder Online Whatsapp: +1(424) 328-1086
1989 toyota pickup 3.0 crank no start
