2001 XC70 ECM Ignition Ground failure P0301 P1367 Topic is solved

[RickHaleParker]

I would check for one last thing before I sent the ECM off ... a short between the ECM line and a 12V supply line. That would keep the ECM line from going low and firing the coil pack. Disconnect the ECM and see if the ECM line on #1 still stays high. If it stays high, it not the ECM holding it high.

[precopster]

Do you have a Dice, Windows laptop and internet connection or a tethered connection to 3G/4G through a mobile?

If so a used ECM can be cloned by one of MVS's online gurus without the waiting time and inconvenience of downtime.

I just did this recently on my own 2002 XC70. It took 45mins and a small fee.

Usually most of these repair services will do exactly that; clone another ECU, put it back in your case and tell you they repaired your own board.

[abscate]

abscate,

Thanks very much for your followup on my issue. It's really comforting to have an experienced Volvo guy tell you that there's not much more you can do. So I REALLY DO appreciate your comments. While I had come to the same conclusion a few days ago, I posted just to try to make sure there was not something obvious I was missing. While in the end I could still be wrong, at least I gave it my best shot. I'll need to decide who to send it to, but for sure I'll not be working with a Volvo dealership.

Thanks Again !

I'm an intermediate guy here,,,there are some guys here who make me look like a toddler with a playskool plastic toy set...glad we could help

Doublebug and Yagger are the ECU clone gurus here if you go the Internet route

[jcb]

RickHaleParker.

There is a saying that "all great minds think alike". While I don't want to go quite that far, when waking from a deep sleep this morning I kept asking myself if there was anything I needed to revisit. The only one had to do with what I considered the final straw, that only on #1 cyl the test light came on when the ECM was installed. I knew it didn't light several times when tested without the ECM installed, but I wasn't 100% certain the car's battery was connected at that time. Note that I disconnected the battery each time I installed or re-installed the ECM. So, if the battery was not connected, the light would not have come on and my conclusion wasn't valid = same thing you are suggesting as a possibility in your post (which at that time I hadn't seen).

So I told myself I would make one more light test. Later in the day as I was packing the ECM for shipment I saw your post which exactly confirmed my concern = somewhat scary ! So I went out and re-did the test with battery connected and ECM removed. The test light did NOT come on, confirming the ECM as still the culprit. Wish it was otherwise for obvious monetary reasons. I did ship it out and hopefully by this time next week I'll know more. I sent it to what I believe is a reputable outfit, and I will re-post at that time to let you know what happened - for good or bad. At this point I won't tell you who I sent it to.

What I really appreciate is for you "covering my back" by sticking with my problem and not giving up on being able to help. Your last suggestion was spot on and took quite a bit of thought to arrive at. If the tester light had come on, I'd be asking for your address so I could send you an X'mas present !

Thanks Again !

[abscate]

Test post by moderator.

OP is still having trouble, and reading tea leaves, is caught in a FCP-Xmodex snafu - to be followed up.

[abscate]

Follow up posted for OP by abscate...

As promised, this is my "end of story" follow up that I promised. First, my apologies to precopster and abscate for not responding to their last posts. Quite frankly, I somehow didn't see them although I should have according to their posting time. After RickHaleParker's last post I suppose I tuned out and made the move to send my ECM out for repair. Had I seen precopster's post prior to this I may have chosen a different approach.

In this case I placed a R&R (repair & return) order with FCP Euro, who has an arrangement with Xemodex (hereafter I'll refer to them as X ) to make the repair. X sends you the appropriate prepaid shipping labels and customs forms to sign, then you send it directly to them. FCP charges $416 for this R&R, while X's website shows $350 if you deal with them directly (don't know if shipping is extra). Although both offer lifetime guarantees, I chose FCP because I liked the idea of having a bigger outfit backing me in case there were issues. Also, X's website is very restrictive as to whether your ECM symptoms qualifies for their R&R program, versus FCP's which not only is less restrictive, but also seems to cover a much broader range of symptoms and repair possibilities.

So here is the short version as to how things turned out - X corrected a ground condition associated with #1 cylinder by replacing the "coil driver". I received it back from them late Monday evening and installed it Tuesday. The wagon started right up and has ran smoothly since with no indication of any type of misfire. So I would have to say success and I am basically satisfied. I say "basically" because the whole process was not without issues, and could easily have resulted in a more expensive outcome, or no repair at all. I suspect many of you may want to know about what the pitfalls were, so here goes:

X received my ECM early in the morning and did their testing quickly. By noon I received a call that there was a problem which would require transferring my ECM data to another re-manufactured ECM, for an additional $250. I had sent them a lot of detail on my test findings, to include suggesting I suspected a ground on pin A31, and thought it would be an easy fix. I asked to talk to a technician because nothing was being offered as to why mine couldn't be repaired. At the end of the day a technician did call me back. He told me that they could not confirm my findings, saying that the ECM signal to all five cylinders lit up when they turned the ignition on. In effect, the #1 cyl was no different from any others, so all was good. I told him the ignition didn't have to be on to test this, only using a test light with the ECM installed or uninstalled to see the difference. He said he would test it that way and get back to me. Next morning he called to confirm my findings and had fixed it by changing the coil driver. Great news, but what if I hadn't pushed it ? So what problems led to this:

- Limited testing ability - I asked the tech why they didn't see that #1 signal wasn't pulsing in their testing. He said that they couldn't detect pulses to either the coil packs or injectors. I'm not certain, but he implied that this was because of the immobilizer and they didn't have the CEM. Note that FCP's write up only says that the CEM needs to be sent in if you have one specific code or a "no-start" condition. Neither of these applied to my situation.

- The tech told me that their testing could find nothing wrong with my ECM. If that was the case, why not just send it back to me instead of transferring the data to another ECM at my expense ? or ask for my CEM if they needed it for full testing ?

- I told the first person to deliver the $250 bad news was that there was no way I was going to pay more than the $599 total that X charges for that transfer service if needed, nor a $75 test fee they wanted if I simply told them to send it back. I asked about FCP's role in any of this and nothing was offered.

- After installing the ECM and finding all was OK, I contacted FCP just to let them know what happened. I basically told their rep that there was too much of a discrepancy between what X advertises for this service versus what FCP describes. Does FCP truly offer more coverage ? What would have been their response to the extra $250 or the $75 test fee if returned. There is nothing in their description that covers any of these "what ifs". The FCP rep listened intently to all of this and promised to pass it on to others.


I just want to end by saying that everyone I talked to at both X and FCP was very cordial and wanted to help. So I have no real problem with the individuals, just what the X / FCP responsibilities are in this arrangement.


JCB

[jcb]

Just like to thank abscate for getting my above follow-up post entered. For some reason, probably the result of a problem on my end, I had been unable enter it. If you can see this post, that problem has obviously been corrected.

[RickHaleParker]

So here is the short version as to how things turned out - X corrected a ground condition associated with #1 cylinder by replacing the "coil driver".

The I/O port on the driver chip was defective or the finial transistor was defective. Depending on how the ECM is constructed.


So I have no real problem with the individuals, just what the X / FCP responsibilities are in this arrangement.

XeMODeX's customer is FCP Euro. XeMODeX is responsibilities is to deliver what FCP Euro contracted them to do. Exactly what is between them and not a deal your a party in. If there is a problem it is their problem, never take ownership of a problem between the contractor and a subcontractor. It is their problem don't make it your problem.

FCP Euro's customer is you. FCP Euro responsibilities is to deliver what you contracted them to do.
What is on XeMODeX website does not matter, you did not buy their service, you bought FCP Euro's service.

[RickHaleParker]

What I would like to know is, did XeMODeX and/or FCP Euro try to process you as if you where XeMODeX's customer not FCP Euro's customer?

[jcb]

this is another test to see if I can post - sorry !