I replaced the MAF sensor. Seems to be running a bit better, but think I need to drive it for a bit to either reprogram the computer or wait for the code to come back. I am thinking the faulty MAF may have lead to the low fuel pressure. However I do have a fuel pump coming in the mail. The car has over 200k miles, and hasn't had the fuel pump done since at least before 65K. Where is the PEM located on a 04 S60 2.5L Turbo? It is not in the trunk like some other models. Is it accessible, or do I need to drop the tank?
High Fuel Pressure? Leaky Injector? Or something else.
-
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:03 pm
- Year and Model: 2004 S60 2.5 T FWD
- Location: CT
Re: High Fuel Pressure? Leaky Injector? Or something else.
- vtl
- Posts: 2097
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:35 pm
- Year and Model: 2005 XC70
- Location: Boston
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 98 times
Continue monitoring STFT and LTFT.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:02 am I replaced the MAF sensor. Seems to be running a bit better, but think I need to drive it for a bit to either reprogram the computer or wait for the code to come back. I am thinking the faulty MAF may have lead to the low fuel pressure.
Originally PEM was located near the fuel filter. It feels bad being there, Volvo even released a PEM relocation TSB.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:02 amHowever I do have a fuel pump coming in the mail. The car has over 200k miles, and hasn't had the fuel pump done since at least before 65K. Where is the PEM located on a 04 S60 2.5L Turbo? It is not in the trunk like some other models. Is it accessible, or do I need to drop the tank?
Fuel pump dies when duty cycle reaches 55-60+ %. New pump should read about 35%. Mine is 45% in summer and 50% in winter, at 248k miles.
I would also replace at least the front H2OS. They work for 10-12 years and get "dull".
05 XC70, 16 XC60, 19 Tundra
-
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:03 pm
- Year and Model: 2004 S60 2.5 T FWD
- Location: CT
Mine is a turbo, and read that 55-60psi is normal for a turbo. That's in the ballpark of where I am according to the scanner. Is that not correct? On cold start ups is when I am having the issues with fuel pressure, but at the moment it seems the new MAF sensor is improving that. Too early to tell.vtl wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:20 amContinue monitoring STFT and LTFT.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:02 am I replaced the MAF sensor. Seems to be running a bit better, but think I need to drive it for a bit to either reprogram the computer or wait for the code to come back. I am thinking the faulty MAF may have lead to the low fuel pressure.
Originally PEM was located near the fuel filter. It feels bad being there, Volvo even released a PEM relocation TSB.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:02 amHowever I do have a fuel pump coming in the mail. The car has over 200k miles, and hasn't had the fuel pump done since at least before 65K. Where is the PEM located on a 04 S60 2.5L Turbo? It is not in the trunk like some other models. Is it accessible, or do I need to drop the tank?
Fuel pump dies when duty cycle reaches 55-60+ %. New pump should read about 35%. Mine is 45% in summer and 50% in winter, at 248k miles.
I would also replace at least the front H2OS. They work for 10-12 years and get "dull".
I replaced the 02 sensors not too long and fixed all the vacuum leaks. Would I get a code for a faulty PEM? I am receiving nothing for a fuel pump.
- vtl
- Posts: 2097
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:35 pm
- Year and Model: 2005 XC70
- Location: Boston
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 98 times
In B5254T2 fuel pressure is 400 KPa, which is 58 PSI. It does not deviate much from this number.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:38 am Mine is a turbo, and read that 55-60psi is normal for a turbo. That's in the ballpark of where I am according to the scanner. Is that not correct? On cold start ups is when I am having the issues with fuel pressure, but at the moment it seems the new MAF sensor is improving that. Too early to tell.
I don't think there's a code for PEM. PEM is like an amplifier with no feedback.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:38 am I replaced the 02 sensors not too long and fixed all the vacuum leaks. Would I get a code for a faulty PEM? I am receiving nothing for a fuel pump.
05 XC70, 16 XC60, 19 Tundra
-
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:03 pm
- Year and Model: 2004 S60 2.5 T FWD
- Location: CT
Right. It consistently stays at about 400 KPA. Seems to oscillate a little bit between 399-402. Not much more than that.vtl wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:43 amIn B5254T2 fuel pressure is 400 KPa, which is 58 PSI. It does not deviate much from this number.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:38 am Mine is a turbo, and read that 55-60psi is normal for a turbo. That's in the ballpark of where I am according to the scanner. Is that not correct? On cold start ups is when I am having the issues with fuel pressure, but at the moment it seems the new MAF sensor is improving that. Too early to tell.I don't think there's a code for PEM. PEM is like an amplifier with no feedback.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:38 am I replaced the 02 sensors not too long and fixed all the vacuum leaks. Would I get a code for a faulty PEM? I am receiving nothing for a fuel pump.
But if the fuel pressure is as low as 7 psi at the rail on startup, would that indicate a weak pump in your opinion or a PEM? Especially if the FRP is consistently at 400~ KPA while running?
- vtl
- Posts: 2097
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:35 pm
- Year and Model: 2005 XC70
- Location: Boston
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 98 times
Let the key stay in position II for a second before cranking the engine. Those late fuel systems with no return line have some sort of a morning pressure buildup lag.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:55 am Right. It consistently stays at about 400 KPA. Seems to oscillate a little bit between 399-402. Not much more than that.
But if the fuel pressure is as low as 7 psi at the rail on startup, would that indicate a weak pump in your opinion or a PEM? Especially if the FRP is consistently at 400~ KPA while running?
05 XC70, 16 XC60, 19 Tundra
- abscate
- MVS Moderator
- Posts: 24068
- Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2013 5:54 pm
- Year and Model: 99T5 ,99S70,2005V70
- Location: NYC, ALBANY NY
- Has thanked: 457 times
- Been thanked: 1359 times
There is a spec of fuel pressure 20 minutes after shutdown, but no spec on cold start up, so It could bleed to zero.
In the XC90 forum, there is a detailed link to PEM waveforms by user shockwave who diagnosed a nasty fuel problem from a kinked line.
The MAF is completely independent from fuel pressure.
In the XC90 forum, there is a detailed link to PEM waveforms by user shockwave who diagnosed a nasty fuel problem from a kinked line.
The MAF is completely independent from fuel pressure.
Empty Nester
A Captain in a Sea of Estrogen
1999-V70-T5M56 2005-V70-M56 1999-S70 VW T4 BMW
Link to Maintenance record thread
Link To Volvo Glossary
A Captain in a Sea of Estrogen
1999-V70-T5M56 2005-V70-M56 1999-S70 VW T4 BMW
Link to Maintenance record thread
Link To Volvo Glossary
-
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:03 pm
- Year and Model: 2004 S60 2.5 T FWD
- Location: CT
I have tried leaving the key in the II position thinking it would help, but nothing as of yet. Why would the engine surge up and down for about a minute straight on a hot day when starting up the engine? This is the same problem I am attempting to describe, but much worse it seems on hotter days.vtl wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 10:03 amLet the key stay in position II for a second before cranking the engine. Those late fuel systems with no return line have some sort of a morning pressure buildup lag.JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 9:55 am Right. It consistently stays at about 400 KPA. Seems to oscillate a little bit between 399-402. Not much more than that.
But if the fuel pressure is as low as 7 psi at the rail on startup, would that indicate a weak pump in your opinion or a PEM? Especially if the FRP is consistently at 400~ KPA while running?
- vtl
- Posts: 2097
- Joined: Thu Aug 16, 2012 1:35 pm
- Year and Model: 2005 XC70
- Location: Boston
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 98 times
How old are the spark plugs? Are they Volvo original (our turbo often dislikes aftermarket spark plugs)? Tightened to the spec? Coil packs sit tight and torqued to the spec, ground contacts are clean on both the valve cover and the pack?JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 10:42 am I have tried leaving the key in the II position thinking it would help, but nothing as of yet. Why would the engine surge up and down for about a minute straight on a hot day when starting up the engine? This is the same problem I am attempting to describe, but much worse it seems on hotter days.
People often/usually miss that coil pack high-voltage ground contact and fight for ever with misfires, bad sparks and prematurely dying coil packs.
05 XC70, 16 XC60, 19 Tundra
-
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2018 1:03 pm
- Year and Model: 2004 S60 2.5 T FWD
- Location: CT
I purchased the car about 10,000 miles ago. The previous owner, a friend that didn't take care of the car, said he installed cheap aftermarket spark plugs in the car shortly before I bought it from him. How would your turbo behave with aftermarket spark plugs?vtl wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 11:21 amHow old are the spark plugs? Are they Volvo original (our turbo often dislikes aftermarket spark plugs)? Tightened to the spec? Coil packs sit tight and torqued to the spec, ground contacts are clean on both the valve cover and the pack?JohnnyBee323 wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 10:42 am I have tried leaving the key in the II position thinking it would help, but nothing as of yet. Why would the engine surge up and down for about a minute straight on a hot day when starting up the engine? This is the same problem I am attempting to describe, but much worse it seems on hotter days.
People often/usually miss that coil pack high-voltage ground contact and fight for ever with misfires, bad sparks and prematurely dying coil packs.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 15 Replies
- 1702 Views
-
Last post by sjanssen15
-
- 44 Replies
- 1417 Views
-
Last post by logscool
-
- 3 Replies
- 1118 Views
-
Last post by bugeye
-
- 12 Replies
- 1656 Views
-
Last post by darrylrobert
-
- 13 Replies
- 1771 Views
-
Last post by oragex