Engine cut out and hesitation - unresolved - Mitsubishi Lancer Register Forum
 
 

Go Back   Mitsubishi Lancer Register Forum > Technical > Technical Questions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 09-01-2020, 11:04   #1
zestyfesty
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 140
Engine cut out and hesitation - unresolved

Hi Guys,
I have a lingering problem with a hesitation under load which we haven’t solved - hoping for some general thoughts/advice on what we could do.

The mechanic built the engine 50,000km ago, has done all the work on it since, knows the car intimately, but we remain puzzled atm.

Initially the engine cut out during a circuit event, lights remained on, but failed to restart until 20mins later. Subsequently the car ran fine off boost to the mechanic, where it has been playing up ever since, but now the problem is manifest as a hesitation on boost, with some associates black exhaust smoke (richness or unburnt fuel)

Here are summmary comments if what’s been investigated so far


Did Compression and Leak Down Tests . all very good ( 170 psi , and less than 15% respectively )

We checked wiring in engine bay . Stripped back the Engine Loom , inspected and reassembled - no issue ,
and no evidence of shorting .
Checked and cleaned all Earths
Then Spark Plugs , Coils , Leads .... changed all , no difference
Changed the ECU , etc . Then Injector Resistor and wiring .

Replaced Fuel filter as a precaution , whilst we had access .
Checked fuel pressure - 3 bar - good
Changed Injectors , Fuel rail , and Regulator
No change

Note from the Pic : rich on Cylinders 1 & 2 . Normal / lean on 3 & 4 .
This is strange , as Coils spark 1 & 4 , and 2 & 3 .
But in this case we have variations in different pairs ( 1 & 2 , and 3 & 4 )

Could it be Mechanical ? So we removed Rocker Cover . All looks OK - cams, springs , lifters , etc

This is quite frustrating. The car is been as close to faultless as I could ever have hoped for the previous 50,000 road and 3000 competition kms

Any thoughts much appreciated
Jim
__________________
Location: Melbourne
Cars: Evo VI GSR, Subaru BRZ PP, Toyota Landcruiser 80 Series
zestyfesty is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to zestyfesty For This Useful Post:
djmisio85 (09-01-2020)
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 09-01-2020, 11:06   #2
djmisio85
Registered User
 
djmisio85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Gunma, Japan
Car: Lancer Evo 2 RS
Posts: 1,177
Have you tried the MAF?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
djmisio85 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2020, 11:31   #3
zestyfesty
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 140
Thanks
Yes, fine, and Frank angle sensor Ok too
__________________
Location: Melbourne
Cars: Evo VI GSR, Subaru BRZ PP, Toyota Landcruiser 80 Series
zestyfesty is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to zestyfesty For This Useful Post:
djmisio85 (09-01-2020)
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 09-01-2020, 11:39   #4
djmisio85
Registered User
 
djmisio85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Gunma, Japan
Car: Lancer Evo 2 RS
Posts: 1,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by zestyfesty View Post
Thanks
Yes, fine, and Frank angle sensor Ok too


Hmm you have got me stumped have you checked the turbo itself for play in the shaft? I doubt that would be the problem but worth checking?

Sounds more like a sensor/electrical issue to me though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
djmisio85 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2020, 11:50   #5
McGoo60
Senior User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 561
I'm probably talking crap but two things I would suggest if you say it drove fine off boost, the first you've probably checked but if not, check the vac hose to the fuel pressure regulator, I have seen these perish or split and cause problems, also if its an earlier evo the actuator on the turbo can let water in and corrode them, the later ones have a cover to prevent this.
McGoo60 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to McGoo60 For This Useful Post:
zestyfesty (09-01-2020)
Old 09-01-2020, 12:06   #6
plip1953
Phil
 
plip1953's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West Yorkshire
Car: Evo X RS
My Car
Posts: 10,801
Probably not relevant to your current issue. but a 15% variation in cylinder to cylinder compression readings is a lot!

EDITED: I initially read that as 15% variance on compressions, but now realise it related to the leakdown test. Nevertheless, 15% leakdown isn't very good at all, although it rather depends on the circumstances around how the testing was carried out.
__________________
Phil

Last edited by plip1953; 09-01-2020 at 17:20..
plip1953 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to plip1953 For This Useful Post:
zestyfesty (09-01-2020)
Old 09-01-2020, 17:14   #7
TrickyDick
Very Senior User
 
TrickyDick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Surrey
Car: VII FQ-300x2
Posts: 887
Cam sensor?
TrickyDick is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to TrickyDick For This Useful Post:
djmisio85 (10-01-2020)
Old 09-01-2020, 21:52   #8
john3355evo
Junior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: maidstone
Posts: 2
i had similar problem with my 6 ,turns out to be actuator. could possibly be that.
john3355evo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to john3355evo For This Useful Post:
zestyfesty (10-01-2020)
Old 09-01-2020, 23:47   #9
zestyfesty
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 140
Thanks - turbo currently being disassembled for check and rebuild

Quote:
Originally Posted by djmisio85 View Post
Hmm you have got me stumped have you checked the turbo itself for play in the shaft? I doubt that would be the problem but worth checking?

Sounds more like a sensor/electrical issue to me though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Location: Melbourne
Cars: Evo VI GSR, Subaru BRZ PP, Toyota Landcruiser 80 Series
zestyfesty is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to zestyfesty For This Useful Post:
djmisio85 (10-01-2020)
Old 09-01-2020, 23:49   #10
zestyfesty
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrickyDick View Post
Cam sensor?
Mmm thanks - noted
__________________
Location: Melbourne
Cars: Evo VI GSR, Subaru BRZ PP, Toyota Landcruiser 80 Series
zestyfesty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2020, 06:58   #11
jmhar
User
 
Join Date: Dec 2019
Location: West Yorkshire
Car: Evo VI Tommi Makinen Edition
Posts: 32
Have you considered the lambda sensor?

It may default to over fuelling to protect the engine, especially on boost.
jmhar is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to jmhar For This Useful Post:
zestyfesty (12-01-2020)
Old 17-01-2020, 04:42   #12
zestyfesty
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 140
Problem identified - centre thrust bearing wear leading to crank walk; striker blade was providing inconsistent signal to crank sensor due to walk and hence engine hesitation and cut.
Rebuild on the cards- thanks however for your suggestions gents.
__________________
Location: Melbourne
Cars: Evo VI GSR, Subaru BRZ PP, Toyota Landcruiser 80 Series
zestyfesty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17-01-2020, 07:23   #13
plip1953
Phil
 
plip1953's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West Yorkshire
Car: Evo X RS
My Car
Posts: 10,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by zestyfesty View Post
Problem identified - centre thrust bearing wear leading to crank walk; striker blade was providing inconsistent signal to crank sensor due to walk and hence engine hesitation and cut.
Rebuild on the cards- thanks however for your suggestions gents.
I’m interested to know how the wear on the thrust bearing has been shown to give an “inconsistent” signal to the crank sensor. Crank walk on a IV engine is well known, but thought it was rare on later models. What’s the amount of wear/amount needed to upset the crankshaft sensor?
__________________
Phil
plip1953 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-01-2020, 01:23   #14
MotoIntrest
Senior User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: london/kent
Car: Evo 4
Posts: 3,840
Quote:
Originally Posted by plip1953 View Post
I’m interested to know how the wear on the thrust bearing has been shown to give an “inconsistent” signal to the crank sensor. Crank walk on a IV engine is well known, but thought it was rare on later models. What’s the amount of wear/amount needed to upset the crankshaft sensor?
Have a read on “air gap” for crank sensors and you will be in the ball park.
__________________
Indigo GT boys are true gents
MotoIntrest is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MotoIntrest For This Useful Post:
plip1953 (18-01-2020)
Old 18-01-2020, 07:52   #15
plip1953
Phil
 
plip1953's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: West Yorkshire
Car: Evo X RS
My Car
Posts: 10,801
Quote:
Originally Posted by MotoIntrest View Post
Have a read on “air gap” for crank sensors and you will be in the ball park.
But surely the crank sensor is set at right angles to the crankshaft and is reading teeth as the crank rotates, and therefore the air gap will not change. What could change (if crankwalk is present) is the amount of longitudinal movement of the crank (ie in or out more than it should) but I'd be surprised if that could ever be enough to upset the ability of the crank sensor to do its job.
__________________
Phil
plip1953 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to plip1953 For This Useful Post:
Tavor12 (22-01-2020)
Mitsubishi Lancer Register
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 03:27.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.