injector pulsing problem, was ign. switch. how to replace?

Does anyone know what causes the injectors to "pulse"? Looking on the PCM schematics, I doesnt appear that the PCM controls this feature on a 96 riviera.

My injectors are not pulsing...got spark, fuel at the rail, power everywhere else. Who knows what else Im missing that causes the injectors to pulse.

The injectors got power, but no pulsing. A node light will light up when testing, but wont pulse. It stays lit. Car wont start.

doesnt the crank position sensor disable the injectors?

Mr.Riviera wrote:

doesnt the crank position sensor disable the injectors?

lol, my mechanic called me and told me this like 2 minutes before you sent this. I hope youre both right. Thanks for reaffirming this.

when we hooked up a 98 pcm we fried something (cause the pinouts were wrong) and have been having hell figuring out what it was. Replaced the CAM sensor but not the crank.

Injectors fire by the PCM sending a quick ground signal. It's the same way an ignition coil sparks - always got positive, then grounds to fire.

Not sure about a '96, but scanning the PCM in my '98 shows IPW, IFR, and duty cycles. Also the concept of running a MAFF table would require the PCM have a way to adjust fueling, so it seems the injectors would need to be controlled by the PCM.

Maybe the crank position sensor controls the timing of each pulse, but the PCM controls fuel pressure and the duration of each pulse.

AA wrote:

Not sure about a '96, but scanning the PCM in my '98 shows IPW, IFR, and duty cycles. Also the concept of running a MAFF table would require the PCM have a way to adjust fueling, so it seems the injectors would need to be controlled by the PCM.

I think its different on the 96...the pcm pinout blueprints dont show individual pinouts for each injector like the 98 pcm pinout blueprints do.

The 96 also doesnt have an option for IPW in the powertuner. Once I replace the crankposition sensor on friday I'll know for sure.

dreww wrote:

The 96 also doesnt have an option for IPW in the powertuner

Strange, my PowrTuner allows me to view this parameter on my car.

Hmmm... now that is mighty interesting.

what version(s) of powertuner are you guys using?

deekster_caddy wrote:

what version(s) of powertuner are you guys using?

I cant quite remember and i won't be home from school for at least a month to look. Maybe I can have my brother check for me. Tonysmooth89 may also have some input on this.

my tuner doesnt even have the option for IPW.

but it has options for fan time on after ignition and a feature to disable to security system. But neither of those options actually do anything to my car. Who knows what other features in there dont work.

the fan time on after ignition is cut not working is pretty common knowledge on 96's though. hopefully I will get some of those options back after I put in a 97 computer for my new trans.

Fan turn-on when off doesn't work in any years as far as I know, at least for my '98 it doesn't.

The tables you see in PowrTuner software aren't all that exist, only the ones selected by DHP to include with each car. It's possible they forgot to include some for '96, or it's possible they did this for a reason.

yea the riv's fan will not stay on no matter what year or how you "tune" them.
Our 96's have some things limited, but i know i can scan for IPW with devins DHP. however i can not skew the injectors with the tunere like the 97+ cars can. maybe you need to update your software, or maybe devin or tony can send you a 96 bin to play with and upload.

IPW is a setting you would scan for, not a table to adjust. It is calculated by current fuel demand, and injector size. Fuel demand is determined by MAF reading, MAP reading, RPM, TPS and many other factors.

If you are changing injectors you would change your IFR table, Injector Flow Rate.

Fan on after keyoff doesn't work on my PCM either. I heard there is some little trick to making it work, but it involves cracking open the PCM and dropping some solder across a couple pins somewhere, something I'd rather not do.

dreww wrote:

Once I replace the crankposition sensor on friday I'll know for sure.

FINALLY found the problem, although its not fixed yet. The crank position sensor did NOT fix the problem. We went to the PCM and found out that the ignition in wasn't getting power, and one of the two ignition power wires wasn't getting power. We jumped a wire with power into the power ignition wire with no power and WHAM, car started right up!

So my mechanic says its the ignition switch. We know its not the ignition module, we already tested that while cold and warmed up. Passed four times in a row.

I did a search, has anyone replaced the ignition switch in the steering column? I found absolutely nothing on this topic. Only found stuff on the ignition module.

The ignition switch (all of the electrical parts) is down on the steering column under the insulation panel, not where the key goes in. It's actually easy to replace.

Rickw wrote:

The ignition switch (all of the electrical parts) is down on the steering column under the insulation panel, not where the key goes in. It's actually easy to replace.

It used to be down on the steering column, under the dash, but now it's in the same housing as the key cylinder... According to this book, you have to pull the knee bolster, drop the column, remove 6 screws to separate the upper and lower parts of the housing where the ignition is, and then 2 screws from the switch itself on the left side, below the turn signal lever.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/24229483@N07/

Thanks for the correction.
I should have looked it up before posting.

Rickw wrote:

The ignition switch (all of the electrical parts) is down on the steering column under the insulation panel, not where the key goes in. It's actually easy to replace.

WTF, I admitted my mistake.
Feel like I'm walking on eggshells around here.
Very easy to stop posting altogether if that's the way people feel.

Rick, what am I missing, I don't understand your last post?

Rick, I don't get it either... You responded to my post, thanking me for the correction. Then you posted again, quoting yourself, and said you were walking on eggshells. I don't see anyone else bitching about it in between.

Eldo wrote:

Rickw wrote:

The ignition switch (all of the electrical parts) is down on the steering column under the insulation panel, not where the key goes in. It's actually easy to replace.

It used to be down on the steering column, under the dash, but now it's in the same housing as the key cylinder... According to this book, you have to pull the knee bolster, drop the column, remove 6 screws to separate the upper and lower parts of the housing where the ignition is, and then 2 screws from the switch itself on the left side, below the turn signal lever.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/24229483@N07/

OK... Now what could be a remotely rational reason for giving a negative vote to my explanation of how to do this, AND the diagram that I posted?!?

(And I know it wasn't Rick...)




PS - I don't think that this was the problem, but I interpret the same way as 1998Riv said, and the way it is listed when you cursor over it: "teach"... I suppose I could have used instead, but I've used it a bit lately and wanted something different... It's not like I used or ...

Hell if I know, it wasn't me. I don't think anything negative was intended, just is a way of bringing attention to the information.

Guys, the post in question (Rick's) contained incorrect information. Doesn't matter if Rick apologized for the error, it was still posted, and I can see why someone felt a negative vote should be given, if for nothing more than to flag the info for future readers.

Rick, you are among the highest ranking here in Integrity score. There is a standard that must be upheld to keep that score, and that includes posting correct information. You were wrong, someone banged you, and you still have an awesome Integrity score. What's the problem?

Mark, I agree that in your case it was uncalled for. The teacher smiley was appropriate, actually! I am voting positive in your followup post to offset the negative someone gave to you earlier.

AA wrote:

Guys, the post in question (Rick's) contained incorrect information. ..

I think we all understand that. I'm unclear on Rick's followup post. None of us can see the voting on our OWN posts though, right? I can't...

If the post is in reaction to his scores changing, my advice is to ignore those numbers, just not significant enough to let it bother you. I never look at my numbers, I personally see them as meaningless unless a member wanted to take a lot of time to compare them to other member's numbers. I see value if they showed as negatives...