22 minutes ago, AnnoyingPentium said:

Will mibbie replace it again

Hmm. 

3 minutes ago, Pete_Ex-Wino said:

Hmm. 

 

There's a 'mibbie' there as I'm somewhat sceptical that it'll make a difference. The fault happened not long after the MOT, or when that fuel filter was replaced since the old one was leaking. If that's of any use.

If you've changed the fuel filter with a good quality replacement since the problem started then there's no point replacing it again, unless you think it's dud for some reason.   I've had a brand new one leak on a brand new car but if it wasn't for bad luck with cars I'd not have any luck with them.

Pre-cat lambda had pretty FUBAR-ed wiring. I've taped it up for now. Car has stopped cutting out, although it's only been like this for a few days now, but it just seems better.

 

 

This saga appeared to progress beyond the realms of being able to be fixed by sticky tape and the prayers of a man praying to a non-specific deity.

 

The car was overfuelling... and as a result, skinning me alive in petrol alone. I threw quite a few sensors at it, but it appears both my pre-cat lambda and MAP sensor had both given up the ghost without setting the engine light into a screeching frenzy.

 

So maybe the moral here is to rely on your brain (or whatever is in that bit of yer heid) and not always on the OBD readings.

 

All I know is that it works now and that isn't bad. Electrical witchcraft seems to have sorted itself out mostly, too.

 

Win win.

Good news, you have it sorted it and learnt that computer program error codes and warnings are not the be all and end all but to use your human senses, eyes, ears, smell, (taste and touch) and your biological computer, your brain.  You can see the car's using too much fuel with your eyes, and work it out with your brain with simple maths.

 

Look at it this way, a computer might tell you a kick in the gonads isn't that bad and you'll get over it but whether you've ever suffered such or not your brain should say to deeply avoid it  - though engineers and mechanics might argue around the outcome. 🤣

 

55 minutes ago, nta16 said:

Good news, you have it sorted it and learnt that computer program error codes and warnings are not the be all and end all but to use your human senses, eyes, ears, smell, (taste and touch) and your biological computer, your brain.  You can see the car's using too much fuel with your eyes, and work it out with your brain with simple maths.

 

Look at it this way, a computer might tell you a kick in the gonads isn't that bad and you'll get over it but whether you've ever suffered such or not your brain should say to deeply avoid it  - though engineers and mechanics might argue around the outcome. 🤣

 

 

Yep! In fairness, the computer helped a little with diagnosis, but only through pulling live data from these sensors. 

 

It was mostly smell and a light wallet that alerted me to the running rich issue.

Live data is good, it can tell you that a leg is being swung with a boot on the end at your nether region, the smell and light wallet is your biological computer reacting to the sensation from groin  to head, never dismiss it and  possibly take it as conformation.  😉 

 

The newer car computer programs tell you a lot more but always question the information they give, computers running the car wot could possibly go wrong. 🤣