Parish wrote:

On 23/06/2005 11:04 :::Jerry:::: wrote:

"Parish" wrote in message
...

On 23/06/2005 09:04 :::Jerry:::: wrote:

snip


This is the problem, many faults can cause the same or very

similar

faults, this is why the dealer checked the fault-code and didn't

just

steam-roller into changing the said sensor / component

Indeed, but I get the impression that the OP's garage is not a Ford
dealer with the Ford diagnostic kit and list of the error codes.


It would have to be a half-witted back-street garage for them no to
have such diagnostic kit, this equipment is not dealer specific


Really? So if I took the Fiesta, or my Saab, to say a Vauxhall dealer or
(good, competent) independent that they'd be able to hook them up to
their diagnostic kit and extract as much info as the respective main
dealers? I would have thought that the manufacturers would make their
systems (both in the car and the workshop) proprietary in order to
(attempt to) force people to use their dealers.

Yes, they tried, but european directives have forced them to open up
their codes and the specifications on many components to allow free
competition in the provision of after sales parts and diagnostic equipment.

Which is why you can get generic clutch and brake linings etc at much
lower costs than from the manufacturers. Though not all ARE made EXACTLY
to spec, caveat emptor...




and
the fault codes are available to the trade.


Again, that surprises me - for the reasons stated above.

BTW, I'm not being sarcastic, I'd be interested to know.

Regards,

Parish

:::Jerry:::: wrote:

"Parish" wrote in message
...
snip

Yes, some of them are better at printing money than fixing cars :-(
When I took the Fiesta in, the first thing they did was have a
technician go out for a test drive. As we were walking to the car I
explained the problem and he said, without hesitating, "It'll be the

MAF

sensor". After driving only a couple of hundred metres he said

"Yeah,

it's the MAF sensor" - this is what makes me suspect it's a common
problem - yet they still (allegedly) hooked it up to the diagnostic
station, probably more as a excuse for charging an extra 20 mins

labour

(for 5 mins work).


No, it's to double check that the diagnosis agrees with the
diagnostic, you would soon be shouting from the roof tops if they
fitted (say) a new MAF sensor and then find it's failure was a result
and not a cause...


Yeah., I took the Pug in and they said 'its the MAF sensor' because 99%
of the time it is.

Not this time tho. It was a water temp sensor ;-)

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
snip
dwell measurement. Of course at the end of the day, things like the
ECU
can only really be verified by substitution. However, the failure
rate of
these is very much less than the average mechanic might believe.


The problem is, when they fail it's often due to another fault further
down the line, unless that fault is corrected the new ECU is destined
to go the same way as the old one, hence the unthinking /
knowledgeable mechanic (which there are plenty in back street
workshops I sorry to say) will see an disproportionate number of
(repeat) ECU failures.

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
snip

Which is why you can get generic clutch and brake linings etc at
much
lower costs than from the manufacturers. Though not all ARE made
EXACTLY
to spec, caveat emptor...


Not always though, at one time (when I used to do more mechanical
work) I was able to buy a genuine complete clutch kit for a GM
Vauxhall / Opal car from the main dealer cheaper than I could from a
motor factor - even though GM bought the clutches from the same
component supplier...

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
:::Jerry:::: wrote:

"Parish" wrote in message
...

On 23/06/2005 09:04 :::Jerry:::: wrote:


snip

This is the problem, many faults can cause the same or very

similar

faults, this is why the dealer checked the fault-code and didn't

just

steam-roller into changing the said sensor / component

Indeed, but I get the impression that the OP's garage is not a
Ford
dealer with the Ford diagnostic kit and list of the error codes.


It would have to be a half-witted back-street garage for them no
to
have such diagnostic kit, this equipment is not dealer specific
and
the fault codes are available to the trade.


But the knowledge to interpret them is a little more specialised
than
teh average grease monkey has at his disposal.

Not now, fault code "E109" Book of wisdom E109 = fault with XYZ
sensor.

So, as long as the 'grease monkey' knows how to read....! Anyway, the
average grease monkey will just fit what someone else tells him or her
to fit.

In article ws.net,
:::Jerry:::: wrote:
dwell measurement. Of course at the end of the day, things like the
ECU can only really be verified by substitution. However, the failure
rate of these is very much less than the average mechanic might
believe.


The problem is, when they fail it's often due to another fault further
down the line, unless that fault is corrected the new ECU is destined
to go the same way as the old one, hence the unthinking /
knowledgeable mechanic (which there are plenty in back street
workshops I sorry to say) will see an disproportionate number of
(repeat) ECU failures.

Could be, although it's a poor design of ECU that can be taken out by
external component faults, as they're mainly fed of its power rails.

--
*He who laughs last, thinks slowest.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

In article ws.net,
:::Jerry:::: wrote:

dwell measurement. Of course at the end of the day, things like the
ECU can only really be verified by substitution. However, the failure
rate of these is very much less than the average mechanic might
believe.



The problem is, when they fail it's often due to another fault further
down the line, unless that fault is corrected the new ECU is destined
to go the same way as the old one, hence the unthinking /
knowledgeable mechanic (which there are plenty in back street
workshops I sorry to say) will see an disproportionate number of
(repeat) ECU failures.


Could be, although it's a poor design of ECU that can be taken out by
external component faults, as they're mainly fed of its power rails.

Ther sensor side no, but te driver side, yes. A shorted solenoid being
driven by a mosfet will smoke the fet.

In article ,
Parish writes

SWMBO has the same model and it developed _exactly_ the same problem.
The cause was a blocked or contaminated MAF (Mass Air Flow) sensor.

These can usually be recovered by spraying the insides with carb cleaner
and letting it dry. Bewa carb cleaner is nasty stuff. Do it outside.