Date: Fri, 01 Jan 1999 19:30:59 -0800 From: Justin VanAbrahams <jvanabranopsamnet> Subject: Re: info on a 9000 turbo
Trevor De Lew wrote: > > Although the AMM is not directly responsible for creating carbon, can it not > send erroneous data to the injection system causing inefficient burning > (carbon)? > > Since the Oxygen sensor is downstream of the combustion (where inefficient > burning is taking place), can there not be carbon present ? To answer your first question, yes it could. But, the reason the O2 sensor is downstream is so it can double check what's going on in the engine and make sure everything is okay. If things are too lean, it enriches the mixture, and if the mixture is too rich it'll lean it out. The O2 sensor is more responsible for proper running (after warm up) than the AMM is by an order of magnitude. Not only that, but unless the car the AMM came off of is an '89 or later with LH 2.4, and assuming it hasn't actually physically broken, the AMM *is* adjustable to account for problems like age and decay affecting its proper operation. > As for the bench test, I was relying on the mechanic's explanation. Understood. -Justin
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
