When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I completely derped this up by not reading the graph right and the ECT is good, but I figured I'd still keep it in the list anyways.
I'm continuing on with the troubleshooting of the high CO/CO2 no emissions pass issue with my 95 T4R. I decided to test the resistance of the ECT sensor. Ambient tempt was 80-85F degrees, coolant temp was probably 75-80F degrees, ohm reading was 2.49K.
According to the FSM, it says I should be seeing around 0.5K ohms for the temp range I posted above. Unless I am reading this totally wrong.
Now I figured the ECT was bad so I went to Autozone and bought a Duralast SU4007 replacement. Now this is where my confusion comes from, as the FSM (Factory Service Manual) says what resistance I should be seeing as the acceptable range for the ECT at the given temp I'm testing at. I let the new ECT set in my house for a little bit to come to ambient tempt (75F degrees) and tested the resistance. Came up with 2.32K ohms. I know new parts can be bad, and non-factory parts don't always work as good as factory parts do, but is this a fluke or is it really just way out of spec? Because the new sensor is reading almost the same as the old sensor.
Also, I am using a good multimeter to take my readings (Fluke 179). What do y'all think?
Last edited by Boomer8404; 09-24-2015 at 12:47 PM.
Well you know how when you look at something sometimes and it doesn't always occur to you how to correctly interpret what you are looking at... well as it turns out I was reading the graph wrong. For some reason I thought you had to look diagonally up left from the temp to the resistance listing at a 45 degree angle.
I was reading it totally wrong, oops! Well I guess I will move on to the next item lol.
09-20-2015, 11:26 AM
