P0171 troubles (bank 1) - redux
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Rocky Mountains, CO
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P0171 troubles (bank 1) - redux
My 4Runner starting throwing this code about a week ago. I cleaned the MAF which improved drivability and performance but the code keeps showing up.
Last night I hooked up my neighbor's Auterra Dyno-Scan and drove around. The MAF is showing volumes ranging from 0.50 to 11.00 and both of the EGO sensors look good. Do the Gen 3 V6s use heated EGOs? I didn't check the heater circuit...
Is there anything else I should look at? I took some captures which I can post if anyone is interested.
Last night I hooked up my neighbor's Auterra Dyno-Scan and drove around. The MAF is showing volumes ranging from 0.50 to 11.00 and both of the EGO sensors look good. Do the Gen 3 V6s use heated EGOs? I didn't check the heater circuit...
Is there anything else I should look at? I took some captures which I can post if anyone is interested.
#2
Registered User
A search popped up a couple of ideas...
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f2/p0171-s-c-7th-other-stuff-66459/
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f16/p0171-wont-go-away-help-56618/
Short form... Something's making the ECU think that you need less fuel than you really do. So.. MAF (you did that), air filter, O2 sensor... had you done the ISR mod? if so, look for something obstructing the air flow in the tube.
Did you reset the ECU after cleaning the MAF? You'll need to in order to clear the code, or you can use the Auterra to do it.
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f2/p0171-s-c-7th-other-stuff-66459/
https://www.yotatech.com/forums/f16/p0171-wont-go-away-help-56618/
Short form... Something's making the ECU think that you need less fuel than you really do. So.. MAF (you did that), air filter, O2 sensor... had you done the ISR mod? if so, look for something obstructing the air flow in the tube.
Did you reset the ECU after cleaning the MAF? You'll need to in order to clear the code, or you can use the Auterra to do it.
#3
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Rocky Mountains, CO
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I researched the problem here and elsewhere for the past week (including the threads you mention). I haven't been able to find anything to indicate I'm overlooking the obvious.
I didn't reset the ECU but I did clear the codes using my scan tool. I wondered if resetting the ECU might clear any funky entries in the adaptive learning tables.
No ISR mod and I haven't replaced the OS sensor. The output and response looked pretty good on the Auterra. That's the next step, I guess, if I can't find anything else.
Do the Toyota MAFs and OS sensors usually fail completely (e.g. no voltage) or do they simply become less sensitive? I know the VW MAFs usually fail completely when they go...
I didn't reset the ECU but I did clear the codes using my scan tool. I wondered if resetting the ECU might clear any funky entries in the adaptive learning tables.
No ISR mod and I haven't replaced the OS sensor. The output and response looked pretty good on the Auterra. That's the next step, I guess, if I can't find anything else.
Do the Toyota MAFs and OS sensors usually fail completely (e.g. no voltage) or do they simply become less sensitive? I know the VW MAFs usually fail completely when they go...
#4
Registered User
Originally Posted by RuffRider
I didn't reset the ECU but I did clear the codes using my scan tool. I wondered if resetting the ECU might clear any funky entries in the adaptive learning tables.
No ISR mod and I haven't replaced the OS sensor. The output and response looked pretty good on the Auterra. That's the next step, I guess, if I can't find anything else.
If you do end up swapping it out, then the best price we've all found is from URD USA (aka "Gadget"):
http://www.urdusa.com/product_info.p...s_id=430006000
Do the Toyota MAFs and OS sensors usually fail completely (e.g. no voltage) or do they simply become less sensitive? I know the VW MAFs usually fail completely when they go...
#5
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Rocky Mountains, CO
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by midiwall
It wouldn't hurt... The tables aren't necessarily used to "build up" to a fault code, but since you've cleaned the MAF and such, you should give the ECU a chance to re-learn.
Originally Posted by midiwall
Yeah, but it's an expensive attempt if it doesn't fix the problem. How many miles are on the present sensor? Is it the original?
Originally Posted by midiwall
If you do end up swapping it out, then the best price we've all found is from URD USA (aka "Gadget"):
http://www.urdusa.com/product_info.p...s_id=430006000
http://www.urdusa.com/product_info.p...s_id=430006000
#6
Registered User
Originally Posted by RuffRider
Understood. I was thinking of the air/fuel ratio adaptive tables. I used to write ECU software but not for Toyota so I'm making (perhaps wild) assumptions that they do that... Code P0171 is set when (ST Trim + LT Trim) > 35. Some manufacturers use the adaptive tables as modifiers for long term trim.
Either way... yeah, reset the ECU.
#7
Change your MAF sensor
The 171 code is a blown MAF. The blown MAF is tricking the computer and causing the computer to run the engine lean. If you sit on the problem for too long your going to overwork your knock sensors and they will also blow.
Try to find someone to swap the MAF sensor to confirm the above.
MAF sensors on the internet are about $100.
Try to find someone to swap the MAF sensor to confirm the above.
MAF sensors on the internet are about $100.
Trending Topics
#8
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Rocky Mountains, CO
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by dogtrainer
The 171 code is a blown MAF. The blown MAF is tricking the computer and causing the computer to run the engine lean. If you sit on the problem for too long your going to overwork your knock sensors and they will also blow.
Originally Posted by dogtrainer
Try to find someone to swap the MAF sensor to confirm the above.
MAF sensors on the internet are about $100.
MAF sensors on the internet are about $100.
#9
Registered User
Originally Posted by dogtrainer
The 171 code is a blown MAF. The blown MAF is tricking the computer and causing the computer to run the engine lean.
If you sit on the problem for too long your going to overwork your knock sensors and they will also blow.
What can happen though is that excessive heat on the block from running REAL lean could affect the crystal... but you'd have other problems at that point - like a hole in a piston.
#10
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by RuffRider
Last night I hooked up my neighbor's Auterra Dyno-Scan and drove around. The MAF is showing volumes ranging from 0.50 to 11.00 and both of the EGO sensors look good. Do the Gen 3 V6s use heated EGOs? I didn't check the heater circuit...
Please excuse my ignorance here, but what is an EGOs? It sounds to me like you are talking about an O2 sensor? Or is it something else?
#11
Overworked Knock Sensor
The 171 code says (correctly) that you have a lean running engine. Lean running engines cause engine knock. The knock sensor will detect the knock and send a signal to the ECU (computer) to retard the timing so as to avoid engine knock.
All that work (extra) that the knock sensors are doing is at no cost. Electronic and mechanical components do wear out. Those that are working overtime will wear out sooner.
Put a timing light on the engine and compare it to the specs. in the manual. You will probably notice that it is not correct. You may even notice it fluctuating. Also note that you cannot change the timing yourself. The computer adjusts the timing. (The above would apply to latter model Toyota engines; you didn't say what year or engine model you have.)
All that work (extra) that the knock sensors are doing is at no cost. Electronic and mechanical components do wear out. Those that are working overtime will wear out sooner.
Put a timing light on the engine and compare it to the specs. in the manual. You will probably notice that it is not correct. You may even notice it fluctuating. Also note that you cannot change the timing yourself. The computer adjusts the timing. (The above would apply to latter model Toyota engines; you didn't say what year or engine model you have.)
#12
Registered User
Originally Posted by dogtrainer
The 171 code says (correctly) that you have a lean running engine. Lean running engines cause engine knock. The knock sensor will detect the knock and send a signal to the ECU (computer) to retard the timing so as to avoid engine knock.
All that work (extra) that the knock sensors are doing is at no cost. Electronic and mechanical components do wear out. Those that are working overtime will wear out sooner.
YES a knock sensor can go out, but it's not going to happen from engine knock. If the knock got THAT bad (i.e. causing a severe enough shock that it would crack the piezo crystal), then you'd have a piston flying through the block.
Put a timing light on the engine and compare it to the specs...
I used piezo mics all the time for Avant Garde' music work - some people call it Music Concrete'. I used to beat the daylights out of piezo elements with hammers, cement blocks, steel beams - striking forces WAY beyond the shock of pre-detonation. Sure, I had failures... but we're talking hitting a mic with a 10lb sledge in full-swing.
The knock sensor is the SAME technology. Practically the same device. In fact, a knock sensor is even more durable than what I used to beat on.
Repeated engine knock will not cause a knock sensor to fail.
Last edited by midiwall; 09-10-2005 at 11:19 PM.
#13
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Rocky Mountains, CO
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ironmike4x4
Please excuse my ignorance here, but what is an EGO? It sounds to me like you are talking about an O2 sensor? Or is it something else?
EGO = Exhaust Gas Oxygen (sensor)
HEGO = Heated Exhaust Gas Oxygen (sensor)
Last edited by RuffRider; 09-10-2005 at 09:56 PM.
#14
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Rocky Mountains, CO
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dogtrainer makes a good point about knock though. Earlier this week I had knock problems for a day or so. Under slight load it would knock like crazy. Once I would tip-in further then it would go away. I strongly suspected it was related but I still couldn't narrow it down to either the MAF or the O2s (and I had just refueled at an unfamilair gas station). It was around then that I got a code for TPS circuit failure which could also cause knock. The code never returned once I cleared it and neither did the knock.
I'm not sure what Toyota's control algorithm looks like but Ford and VW both use values from MAF _and_ O2s to determine the correct air/fuel mixture (the Stoichiometric ratio). So, in the case of a failed MAF, or one O2 in a bank of two, it is still possible to determine the trim required to get back to stoich. If both fail then the control system will run in open loop and things can get ugly (holes in pistons can develop, cats ruined, etc).
I'll keep everyone posted. I'd like to develop a test to differentiate between the two sensors without having to swap then out.
I'm not sure what Toyota's control algorithm looks like but Ford and VW both use values from MAF _and_ O2s to determine the correct air/fuel mixture (the Stoichiometric ratio). So, in the case of a failed MAF, or one O2 in a bank of two, it is still possible to determine the trim required to get back to stoich. If both fail then the control system will run in open loop and things can get ugly (holes in pistons can develop, cats ruined, etc).
I'll keep everyone posted. I'd like to develop a test to differentiate between the two sensors without having to swap then out.
#16
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Rocky Mountains, CO
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RuffRider
The MAF is showing volumes ranging from 0.50 to 11.00 and both of the EGO sensors look good.
#18
Contributing Member
I have seen cases where people clean the MAF sensor and it still does not respond as expected from the ECU and thus it continues to throw CELs.
Have you tried just going to the junkyard and grabbing one from a 99-02 3rd gen?
Have you tried just going to the junkyard and grabbing one from a 99-02 3rd gen?
#19
Contributing Member
Originally Posted by RuffRider
dogtrainer makes a good point about knock though. Earlier this week I had knock problems for a day or so. Under slight load it would knock like crazy. Once I would tip-in further then it would go away. I strongly suspected it was related but I still couldn't narrow it down to either the MAF or the O2s (and I had just refueled at an unfamilair gas station). It was around then that I got a code for TPS circuit failure which could also cause knock. The code never returned once I cleared it and neither did the knock.
I'm not sure what Toyota's control algorithm looks like but Ford and VW both use values from MAF _and_ O2s to determine the correct air/fuel mixture (the Stoichiometric ratio). So, in the case of a failed MAF, or one O2 in a bank of two, it is still possible to determine the trim required to get back to stoich. If both fail then the control system will run in open loop and things can get ugly (holes in pistons can develop, cats ruined, etc).
I'll keep everyone posted. I'd like to develop a test to differentiate between the two sensors without having to swap then out.
I'm not sure what Toyota's control algorithm looks like but Ford and VW both use values from MAF _and_ O2s to determine the correct air/fuel mixture (the Stoichiometric ratio). So, in the case of a failed MAF, or one O2 in a bank of two, it is still possible to determine the trim required to get back to stoich. If both fail then the control system will run in open loop and things can get ugly (holes in pistons can develop, cats ruined, etc).
I'll keep everyone posted. I'd like to develop a test to differentiate between the two sensors without having to swap then out.
#20
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: The Rocky Mountains, CO
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those who haven't been following the thread (or are just lazy) - my MAF appears to be very responsive and functioning. I also purchased a replacement and awaiting its arrival.
I figure it would be nice to know the normal range of operation for future reference. A former co-worker is in town this week at the SAE J1962 (OBDII) conference in Pasadena so I'll bend his ear over breakfast tomorrow.
Also, I am curious as to what your favorite scan tools are. I've been using Auterra due to the rave reviews but I find the interface very klunky. Maybe I should just write my own...
I figure it would be nice to know the normal range of operation for future reference. A former co-worker is in town this week at the SAE J1962 (OBDII) conference in Pasadena so I'll bend his ear over breakfast tomorrow.
Also, I am curious as to what your favorite scan tools are. I've been using Auterra due to the rave reviews but I find the interface very klunky. Maybe I should just write my own...