|
||
|
20th February 2013, 20:34 | #31 | |
Gets stuck in
Rover Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tarbert
Posts: 980
Thanks: 0
Thanked 19 Times in 9 Posts
|
Quote:
Ron
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] |
|
20th February 2013, 20:36 | #32 |
Posted a thing or two
Honda Jazz Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Llangollen
Posts: 1,024
Thanks: 301
Thanked 344 Times in 158 Posts
|
|
20th February 2013, 20:39 | #33 | |
MG ZT Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Posts: 20,151
Thanks: 3,565
Thanked 10,837 Times in 5,718 Posts
|
Quote:
Ok then Ron, this is my pledge to you, I will learn everything I need to know about your product. I will then, complete with reverse engineered circuit diagrams, explain the cause and effect of what this product does in relation to the diesel engine management system fitted to our cars. I'm sorry if you feel I'm being deliberately antagonistic toward you, however without asking an owner if they have one of your products fitted, I can see immediately by seeing the incorrect airflow figures given as greyed out figures on the live data screen. The Pierburg MAF is a reasonable compromise, but that is exactly what it is a compromise, which underfuels at 3000 RPM Brian |
|
20th February 2013, 20:51 | #34 | |
Gets stuck in
Rover Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tarbert
Posts: 980
Thanks: 0
Thanked 19 Times in 9 Posts
|
Quote:
99% of owners just want something that works and neither want to hear, nor would understand the technical aspects. Ron
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] |
|
20th February 2013, 21:18 | #35 |
Premium Trader
75 CDT Tourer,2.5 Launch Saloon, Omipro MG/Rover (T4) Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liversedge, West Yorkshire
Posts: 5,405
Thanks: 1,105
Thanked 1,340 Times in 661 Posts
|
Sorry Ron but Brians statement about the Bosch maf failures is correct, almost every Bosch maf that I've seen has failed with too high a signal.
I've seen hundreds of 75 and ZT diesels, I see them on an almost daily basis and sometimes multiples a day, I always check the maf voltage and airflow readings to see if they're in spec. I don't do this to sell anything to anyone, all I want is for owners to get the best out of their cars, if their maf has failed they're free to get a replacement from anywhere they want. I've also used a Synergy for years too, and know that using the mafam on a failing Bosch maf with too high a signal just throws the airflow readings even further out at both idle and higher up the rev range no matter what mafam setting. In no way am I knocking the Synergy in any way, it's provided an effective simple way of boosting the performance on our cars and enabled the use of the cheaper Pierburg maf, but the Pierburg does underfuel at 3000 revs. Russ
__________________
Replacement Key Service http://https://the75andztclub.co.uk/...d.php?t=244732 Full T4 Testbook diagnostics available. Diesel ECU repair and replacement. Options enabled or disabled as required. Diesel X-Power 135 and 160bhp, Rover 1.8T 150 to 160 MG 160 V6 to 177 upgrades available P.M. for details. Last edited by BigRuss; 20th February 2013 at 21:22.. |
20th February 2013, 21:27 | #36 | |
Gets stuck in
Rover Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tarbert
Posts: 980
Thanks: 0
Thanked 19 Times in 9 Posts
|
Quote:
I agree if the signal has become too high then the maf can considered to have failed and yes, boosting it even more will make matters worse. In my experience and that of my many customers, the maf goes out of spec and underfuells the car due to a drop in signal more often than failing high. Hence the Synergy 2 and mafams work. If there was no such thing as an underfuelling maf, neither the Synergy nor mafam would work as they do and in fact I may have need to design an attenuator instead of an amplifier. Ron
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] |
|
20th February 2013, 21:40 | #37 |
Premium Trader
75 CDT Tourer,2.5 Launch Saloon, Omipro MG/Rover (T4) Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Liversedge, West Yorkshire
Posts: 5,405
Thanks: 1,105
Thanked 1,340 Times in 661 Posts
|
With too the signal on the maf being high this translates to EMS seeing the airflow as being higher and fuels accordingly ie. it overfuels, not underfuels
So with nearly every failed Bosch maf I've seen the car has been overfuelling not underfuelling so using the mafam would just make matters worse. Russ
__________________
Replacement Key Service http://https://the75andztclub.co.uk/...d.php?t=244732 Full T4 Testbook diagnostics available. Diesel ECU repair and replacement. Options enabled or disabled as required. Diesel X-Power 135 and 160bhp, Rover 1.8T 150 to 160 MG 160 V6 to 177 upgrades available P.M. for details. Last edited by BigRuss; 20th February 2013 at 21:59.. |
20th February 2013, 21:53 | #38 | |
MG ZT Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Posts: 20,151
Thanks: 3,565
Thanked 10,837 Times in 5,718 Posts
|
Quote:
Owners deserve more than mystery, and "smoke and mirrors". I will as promised do this, and further more I will do it without charge to a single owner. I have pointed out that MAFAM and Pierburg is a reasonable compromise, certainly when the price of the Bosch MAF was in excess of £250. What is disingenuous, is to suggest that the Pierburg MAF in conjunction with MAFAM, is a direct drop in replacement for a genuine Bosch MAF, or indeed a failing Bosch MAF will be assisted by amplifying an already higher than normal output signal. The figures simply don't stack up I'm afraid. Out of the many hundreds of diesel 75 and ZT I've diagnosed, not one car fitted with either MAFAM, or Synergy in conjunction with ether a replacement Pierburg MAF, or indeed an original failing Bosch MAF has correct airflow readings, not one. You state over £1000000 worth of your related products have been sold, and indeed it would be reasonable to assume continuous improvement have been made to your products? If this is the case, they must given the intervening eight years of development be perfect? no? Just because there are many wrongs, do they they make a right ? It may be worthy to note, I have no vested interest in selling an owner a Bosch MAF, nor any "electronic correction" for an incorrect specification MAF. I do however have an analytical thought train, and will apply this in the interests of all Rover 75 and MG ZT owners. Brian |
|
20th February 2013, 21:54 | #39 | |
Gets stuck in
Rover Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Tarbert
Posts: 980
Thanks: 0
Thanked 19 Times in 9 Posts
|
Quote:
Its just not my experience even if it is yours. (which doesn't make either of us right) Logically if all my Synergy and mafam/digimfam customers had 'high' failed mafs and their engines were therefore being overfuelled by the ecm, then:- a)there'd be no loss of performance (apart from that due to gross over fuelling) b)the Synergy or mafam/digimafam would exacerbate the problem.
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC] |
|
20th February 2013, 22:06 | #40 | |
MG ZT Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne
Posts: 20,151
Thanks: 3,565
Thanked 10,837 Times in 5,718 Posts
|
Quote:
Brian |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|