b318isp

Cheers. I have VAGCom too, is there any chance it would talk the car at all?

As posted elsewhere, I find the stated tyre pressures too low. I'm running a few psi higher on 17". However, geting the tacking checked is a starting point.

Can anyone recommend a good fault and cheap code reader for the Mk3? I have a fault on the rear reversing sensors which I'd like to diagnose, so it must do the whole car (like VAG-Com). Unfortunately, it seems that each sensor cannot be diagnosed by listening to it, as per the Mk2.

16" are normal on the Zetec. Are you sure the 17" are runflats? Is it on the tyre and do you have a tyre pressure monitor?

I have the same rims but find the stated pressures too low, the outsides of the tyres are being eaten. Lower profile tyres tend to need higher pressures anyway. I'm currently running 43f/38r for normal driving, based on the wear profile I have seen on the last two sets of tyres.

There is a service request issued by Ford to cut back the rubber grommet that seal the floor pan at the rear of the car where the two pipes go to the rear evaporator. This grommet has a skirt on it which can rub off one of the pipes making a groove and causing it to fail. To see this, look under the rear of the car and you will see two aluminium pipes passing into what would be the spare wheel well. Pipes are around

I ended up removing the splined insert on the bolt, grinding 6 slight flats on it, and hammering an impact socket over it. Worked a treat.

This is not my experience, and I believe a misleading and simplified statement. Back in 1999 I started buying premium tyres - such as the Goodyear Eagle F1s and Bridgestone Potenza S02s - subsequently replace by the S03. I was moving from mid range Goodyears, Dunlops and Avons - I have not driven better road tyres since then, despite trying different brands on different vehicles. These tyres, when worn, were also used on a number of track days and performed very well. One thing that has struck me is that the performance of top tyres stays much more consistent as they wear. I agree that 2-3 psi can make a difference in the performance of tyre, and that sports cars are more sensitive to this. However, the correct tyre pressures are critical no matter what the vehicle. Often it can take a number of years to settle on the correct pressures for a particular style of driving - I run 47psi up front on the Alhambra now, as I tend to agressively turn in, causing the outer edge of the tyre to get a lot of wear. Running a higher pressure takes load off the edge of the tyres, evening out this wear. On the Alhambra, having had Dunlops and Bridgestone, the current Conti Sport Contacts 2 are significantly better for grip in all conditions, but have worn faster. I strongly belive that paying a little extra for tyres is a bit like insurance - you may never need its benefits, but when you do, then you do!

The point about having new tyres on the rear was based on the fact the most driver feedback regarding grip comes from the front tyres. If new tyres are on the rear, you tend to drive within the (lower) limits of the fronts. However, if you put the new tyres on the front, you may drive in such a way that you end up over stretching the rears - spinning the car. Personally, I'm not convinced of the arguement for strongly front weight biased or understeering cars, like the Alhambra. The front tyres take a huge amount of abuse compared to the rears - so I'm clear of where I want the best tyres. Regarding cost / performance, my experience is that you pay for what you get. Best tyres I have ever run are the Goodyear Eagle F1s, Bridgestone Potenza S02 and S03s, Conti Sport Contact 2s, etc. I have thrown 3 month old Nankangs off the rear of FWD cars, they were so bad. That said - there are exceptions - e.g. Toyo Proxes T1s, Yokahams AVS, Falkens (can't remember the exact model) which are really good value at the mid price levels.

Hope you let the turbo cool down by idling for a few minutes...

http://www.ross-tech.com/vag-com/

I have the demo VAG-COM, and the main connection issue is to make sure that the Com ports and IRQs align with your software (see Device Manager in Control Panel).

Yes, 3rd is rpm. This is just a cross section of the full file - but it is over varfying gradients, loads, gears, etc.

Had a brand new turbo fitted to our Alhambra 1.9TDi PD 115bhp due to failed bearings. Before that, I felt that economy and performance were deteriorating slightly. With the new turbo fitted, the car doesn't seem to have the torque at around 2k that it had before. Checked for faults (none, other than for the turbo failure) so no clues there. So, ran the car with VAG-COM plugged in and recording key parameters. I noticed that the MAF (specified) and the MAF (actual) reading s oftened were miles apart. Plotting the data with respect to rpm showed that over 2000rpm there is very poor correlation between the two - and that the standard deviation (or range of deviations) got worse at higher rpms. That said, under full acceleration the MAF (specified) jumps to 850 - so I guess the car wouldn't react that quickly. I'm wondering if I should replace the MAF anyway. Anyone know exactly what these figures are indicating. I've some of the data below: MAF MAF Engine (specified) (actual) speed mg/str mg/str /min 240 274.4 1911 240 259.7 1995 240 249.9 2016 240 377.3 2016 240 382.2 2037 240 298.9 2079 240 367.5 2079 240 264.6 2100 240 372.4 2100 245 455.7 1764 245 421.4 1764 245 249.9 1764 245 230.3 1785 245 235.2 1785 245 230.3 1806 245 274.4 1806 245 235.2 1827 245 377.3 2310 245 377.3 2310 245 382.2 2331 250 205.8 903 250 240.1 903 250 240.1 903 250 245 1176 250 264.6 2142 250 392 2352 250 406.7 2394 250 372.4 2415 250 401.8 2457 250 436.1 2478 250 377.3 2751 250 377.3 2835 250 318.5 2940 250 392 2940 255 176.4 945 255 303.8 1449 255 431.2 1701 255 372.4 2079 255 249.9 2121 255 494.9 2184 255 225.4 2310 280 289.1 2814 280 455.7 2940 285 289.1 1470 285 303.8 1869 300 352.8 2961 310 313.6 2268 315 279.3 1911 330 426.3 1470 330 377.3 1491 330 357.7 1995 335 333.2 1491 340 392 2205 340 480.2 3087 345 269.5 2016 370 392 2310 380 377.3 1974 380 431.2 3045 385 387.1 1869 385 431.2 1911 385 480.2 2457 390 445.9 1806 390 372.4 1911 390 387.1 3087 395 382.2 1995 400 401.8 1470 400 357.7 1491 430 392 2016 435 441 1932 435 445.9 2394 440 445.9 1932 440 504.7 2436 445 396.9 2289 450 416.5 2163 470 494.9 1890 470 460.6 2226 470 436.1 3066 475 480.2 1848 475 509.6 2205 475 509.6 2352 485 485.1 1764 485 352.8 2058 490 514.5 2016 490 499.8 2121 515 396.9 3234 520 480.2 1743 555 387.1 3276 565 431.2 3066 570 416.5 1890 575 494.9 1743 575 573.3 2184 590 529.2 2037 610 475.3 3108 620 548.8 2856 640 485.1 3339 655 455.7 1470 665 509.6 1974 690 543.9 1764 710 529.2 1764 720 529.2 2058 735 597.8 2058 735 504.7 2079 735 392 3423 810 558.6 2268 850 323.4 1218 850 524.3 1491 850 563.5 1491 850 534.1 2373 850 700.7 2394 850 627.2 2415 850 651.7 2457 850 622.3 2457 850 637 2478 850 690.9 2478 850 396.9 3549 850 597.8 3570 850 607.6 3675 850 588 3864 850 563.5 4200 850 553.7 4305 850 524.3 4494 855 401.8 1848 865 210.7 1491 880 514.5 2163 925 455.7 2961

Need to arrange the new turbo as I can't imagine it being anything else!

Thanks, a great article. However it seems more complex than I thought - I just can't afford the time to do this myself.

The other half arrived home today with a noise coming from the engine and smoke coming from the exhaust. It happened about 1 mile from home. It sounds like a collapsed bearing - initial thoughts were that it was the aircon compressor/clutch, as the sound only occured about a second or so after the engine was started - i.e. there was no noise at all for a moment and then it would appear. When the engine was switched off, the noise carried on for a moment. However, light grey smoke from the exhausts cancelled that train of thought. It would appear to be the turbo. Question is, is a turbo swap straight forward. I don't have a lift but to have axle stands. Would this be a job outside of a car DIYer? Anyone know of a write up? I have the Ford TIS, but don't see anything helpful.

Ours started out as a vibration. Then it started to get noisy especially near idle. I think it reduced when the clutch was depressed.

I've had two problems: 1. O-ring leak of the receiever-drier causing all the gas to escape 2. Failure of the auxillary heater glowplug Both DIY, other than regassing!

Thanks. As far as I know, the lower headligth retining screws need to be loosened, and the upper ones removed to take out the lights. Is this right?

On my Alhambra, the driver's headlight is slighty lower than the passenger's. I have tried turning the adjusting screw with an allen key, but it does not move the lamp at all. I know there is an adjustment for left-right aligning, but I'm sure I'm turning the vertical one. Any idea's on what is happening (or not!)?

Was this the front or rear beeper? I guess the front - if so, do you know where it is? Just had the same problem over the weekend!

Checked all mounts and had a look at the bolts, but could not see anything...

Brought car to mechanic today and he reckons in is the dual mass flywheel, having come across similar symptoms in a Toledo. Anyone heard of this before? BTW, is there any workshop manuals available to cover the 1.9PD TDi engine?

A sudden vibration has developed in my engine. It is noticeable at idle, peaks at about 1000rpm and reduces thereafter. I think it is slightly there throughout the rev range. In all other respects, the car is running fine - plenty of power etc. I checked under the bonnet and spotted a cracked vacuum hose leading to what looks like a diaphragm valve at the rear of the rocker cover. However, repairing this did nothing to improve matters. Anyone any ideas on this???