D5 (D5244t I think), slow pick-up and whistling

[R-P]

When I drove it I didn't have the strut-bar for the engine connected, so maybe that wasn't too smart (didn't do much testing anyway).

The pic of the vacuum meter showing 85% vacuum (minus 0.85 bar) was after this run. I had the variable-turbo-nozzle-governor-solenoid bypassed and disconnected the engine-pads (one of them is leaking a little, but I've got bigger fish to fry, as this won't have that big of an effect as long as the solenoid cuts them off above 1000rpm anyway).

Beware that I don't have any error/warning messages. It just drives like poop below 2k and it's not gone break any speedrecords above that either (but at least you feel the Turbo is doing *something* above 2k...)

As for testing the governor: use the blow method. If you blow (normal blowing, not extremely hard blowing) on the environmental venting-block (take the cap off first!) at the top and you can feel it is leaking, then it is likely the membrane is torn.
Opening it up is a biatch and an *only once* job, as reassembling it is even harder than getting it apart. Have the bandaids at the ready when prying the metal ring loose with a screwdriver. This metal ring keeps the white and the black part in my pic connected to eachother.


One last remark: the needle from the vacuumgauge was moving like mad. I thought this was due to the vacuumpump having a specific frequency. This was only partly true. The vacuumpump does not pump continuously, but with pulses. This is of no consequence as long as there are no leaks! so the vacuum-gauge needle moving was the pulsing of the vacuumpump combined with the vacuum leaking away at the same time. I think. If you get what I mean. In short: if you have a leak, you may see this in the violent moving of any vacuumgauge you hook up. With the governor removed and the pads-solenoid also not hooked up, the minus 0.85 bar stayed on there for 15 minutes without any visible change before I unhooked it and thus 'broke' the vacuum. So the thing on the turbo and the vacuum tubes are not loosing any vacuum.

[R-P]

Changed the leaking turbo nozzle control valve slash governor-solenoid (for a new one).
Maybe the pick-up is a little better (1900 instead of 2000rpm), but not worth the trouble, even if it IS more than wishful thinking.

I also bought (but didn't yet fit) the piece of rubber just before the turbo, but this should rather cause a problem at high revs, not low revs, right?

Will blank off the possibly still somewhat leaking front engine-pad too to see if that makes a difference and/or do some testing with the vacuum-gauge in place, but I don't think I'm getting much closer to the solution of my problem...

Just to see how much trouble I'm in I did some 0-100kmh tests.
They should be 11.3 seconds and I hand-clocked it at 13.1 (no revving, just release the brake and floor the accelerator) and 12.8 (revving the engine to 3k before releasing the brake).
So pretty slow, but not ridiculously far from the manufacturers specs. When assuming I'm loosing 1 second in the rise to 2krpm in first gear, the power above 2krpm appears usable and this would bring the numbers close to the specs. (Car's done 215k km, engine about 100k km)

[hobbyhorse]

Originally Posted by R-P

Brilliant find, thanks for posting

[Bernard333]

Just to see how much trouble I'm in I did some 0-100kmh tests.
They should be 11.3 seconds and I hand-clocked it at 13.1 (no revving, just release the brake and floor the accelerator) and 12.8 (revving the engine to 3k before releasing the brake).
So pretty slow, but not ridiculously far from the manufacturers specs.

I know the geartronic will be a bit slower than a manual but surely its meant to be quicker than 11.3 0 to 62mph and 13 secs sounds a long way from spec to me ? I am reasonably certain that the Volvo claims for acceleration on the old 163bhp V70 D5 are conservative unlike Ford who are on the optomistic side so would expect yours to be doing sub 10seconds for this test on a good dry road .

[R-P]

@hobbyhorse: thanks. If only replacing it with the new one had solved anything for me....

@Bernard333: dry-road, wet-road, won't make any difference for my car .

Which is exaclty the problem I'm trying to solve

[R-P]

Took a while, but I rigged up a leakback test.

Please let me know if I am doing things wrong:
here's the clip (boring, so just read on for the results):

+ YouTube Video

Result: it leaked back too little to show with just idling, so we started revving the engine (not sure if this is supposed to be done with a leakback test).
The tubes used are 10ml (or cc) each, the glass jars about 20ml.
I asked for the engine to be revved when after 40 seconds, the tubes (10ml each) were still not trickling (so less than 10ml per injector leaked).

Beware this pic is not perfect: When unplugging the tubes from the injectors, some diesel leaked out at the wrong side of the tube instead of into the jars, that's why I will calculate after this pic based on the perceived/estimated levels at the end of the vid.


The endresult is about (glass jar + what's in the tube):
Injector one: 7.5ml + 10ml = 17.5ml
Injector two: 10ml + 10ml = 20ml
Injector three: 10ml + 10ml = 20ml
Injector four: 12.5ml + 10ml = 22.5ml
Injector five: 10ml + 10ml = 20ml

Question: is this something to worry about or should I leave it alone?

[Bernard333]

I have tried this myself and made a mess using tubes and jam jars but I was happy with the result because I estimated that the leak back was consistent between all five injectors and at a fairly low rate . I think what matters is that you have not got one or two which are spraying out which I think means trouble , I would say you have a reasonably even result .

[R-P]

Bernard,

I read you had a MAF problem here.
It has been suggested on the Dutch forum a broken MAF may cause all my problems.

Can you confirm you did not have a faultcode when having your MAF issue? (Or don't/didn't you have a code-reader?)
My code-reader (ELM327 based) does not show any airflow information apart from the air-temperature and I have no faultcodes, yet my D5 has no torque down low worth mentioning, so I stay convinced there is something wrong.

If this is the likely culprit, I may be able to borrow the one from my neighbors 2002 D5 for a testrun, but obviously I do not want to run even the slightest risk of damaging that one and having to buy a new one for him too.....

[Bernard333]

Codes have been read by two different mechanics ( not me ) using Sykes Pickavant gear in one case and the other I dont know the make but neither were able to pick up any fault codes and the SP gear would apparently read any OBD11 engine related codes and also see live data such as produced by the MAF and other engine sensors . Disconnecting the MAF was done in desperation having tried nearly everything else for an intermittant power loss problem . I have run the car on short test runs 4 or 5 times since with the MAF unplugged with no apparent harm , I am reasonably sure but not 100% that the plug connector may not have been fully connecting on all the pins , could have been a bit of dirt or corrosion or maybe deformed pins etc but the first time I tried it made a difference . Running without the MAF just seemed to have no power but not particularly rough . My V70 D5 is today running well taking into account its 144k miles with no sensors or other major parts ever having been replaced on the car and despite all my ramblings on the forum its frustrating me that I cant pin down what caused the power loss problem in the first place . The power loss problem was not connected with the in tank fuel pump failure I experienced although it had similar symptoms and at one stage ran in parallel with the main problem making it even harder to figure out what was happening . I dont think you would have a problem with using your neighbours sensor as the internal built in regulation of the MAF is very accurately controlled and the electronics will not be damaged by variations in your cars electrical system voltage .

[v_matt_v]

Originally Posted by R-P

Bernard,

I read you had a MAF problem here.
It has been suggested on the Dutch forum a broken MAF may cause all my problems.

Can you confirm you did not have a faultcode when having your MAF issue? (Or don't/didn't you have a code-reader?)
My code-reader (ELM327 based) does not show any airflow information apart from the air-temperature and I have no faultcodes, yet my D5 has no torque down low worth mentioning, so I stay convinced there is something wrong.

If this is the likely culprit, I may be able to borrow the one from my neighbors 2002 D5 for a testrun, but obviously I do not want to run even the slightest risk of damaging that one and having to buy a new one for him too.....

RP,

After your explanations one conclusion comes to my mind after I sorted out my problem here http://volvoforums.org.uk/showthread.php?t=93130&page=2 . It looks like the vanes in your turbo are stuck. It's almost like your turbo doesn't respond to the vacuum supplied by the vacuum pump. If I remember correctly when the vacuum is applied the governor opens the vanes to increase the angle under which the exhasut hits the vanes and the turbo shaft spins faster giving higher pressure - more power and torque. At high revs, above 3000 RPM the turbo has to slow down and that's when the governor starts to let go by reducing the vacuum.
If the turbo doesn't respond to the vacuum at low revs when the vacuum on the governor is the highest the vanes are stuck closed and the exhaust hits the vanes under smaller angle. It still spins the turbo (there is some boost) but more slowly giving it a lack of power and torque. After the engine is at certain revs everything is back to normal.
Try contacting local dealer and ask them to run boost pressure tests. You could even try doing it yourself by installing boost pressure gauge and running the car.