Call of the week. Still unsolved. Air Fuel Imbalance Codes
Starts. Normal idle flair. Idles fine until it goes into closed loop. At that point, the fuel trims go to -30 (subtracting fuel) and the engine idles rough. The codes are P119A A/F Imbalance, P119E - A/F Port Imbalance, P119F - A/F Direct imbalance.
This engine has both port fuel injectors and direct fuel injectors. It also has the ability to calculate the timing of the exhaust pulses going by the A/F sensor to calculate if the injectors are “balanced”.
The problem started after a used engine (long block) was installed. The intake (including injectors) and sensors were swapped over. Smoke tested the intake for leaks, no leaks. Swapped MAF = same. Disconnect the front A/F (Air Fuel Ratio) sensor, the engine runs good. It doesn't run better with a vacuum leak (unmeasured intake air leak forcing it lean), It doesn't run better with propane whiffed into the air filter box (forced rich).
It runs rough on either port injectors or direct injectors when in closed loop and commanded to do so with the scan tool. Why does forced open loop make it run better? Why does the PCM think there is a rich cylinder (assumed because of the -30 Long Term Fuel Trim)? I thought the port fuel injector connectors were swapped thus when it saw a rich cylinder and subtracted injector pulse from that cylinder, it was making another cylinder lean. Verified injector wire colors. I have the tech scoping the port injectors to see what cylinder’s injector pulse is being reduced.
What else should I ask the tech for?
Before CL, what do the exhaust sensors read? Are they disagreeing about AFR? Aren't their PID's for cylinder balance? I am guessing that the A/F sensor was damaged before or during the engine replacement, but -30% seems too much to be based on this sensor. Why was the engine replaced? BTW, shouldn't there be a bounty on this, considering your position? ;-)
Todd, To understand the P 119 E/F we have to grasp the idea that the A/F Ratio sensor is one of the methods of capturing the main concern, an imbalance of cylinder contribution. the Crank sensor is also in play here. Without more information on the work done the condition of the engine and tune up we are working in the blind here.
Don't forget engines mechanical. The vehicle was an older version of AF imbalance. Is the O2 voltage clean without with out hash?
Good point Steve! Even Spark plug configuration, brand and Gap can play in the P0119 E/F game. For the life of me I cant see how a misfire will drive Fuel Trim negative. Possibly there are more than one game in play, possibly Post Cat O2 info can help. I believe that with more info we could find 1 root cause.
Todd, I agree with Steven Ethridge that the Crank Sensor is seriously in play here. The way I interpret the DTC set criteria, I believe the crank signal may be in play more here than the AFR. From what I understand, the FIRST test run by the PCM will be the crank sensor at or near idle, the SECOND test would be the Crank Sensor test AND the AFR sensor test. I would think that Toyota is using…
Here is some food for thought, #1 I agree with Gary on the wall, #2 Todd, can we look at post cat O2 sensor readings. The sensors are seeing information that doesn't fit, now the question is is it induced or accurate? The first iterations of this code looked solely at O2 sensors to see evidence of a torque imbalance.
Torque imbalance per ignition event. Which bank or cylinder is causing the issue?
Wow, that narrows it down a lot Steve! 2015 Scion FR-S 2.0L (FA20) 6-spd (TL70) P119f - A/F Direct Imbalance P119e - A/F Port Imbalance P119a A/F Imbalance
Just wondering what the 5 gas is telling you...
Exactly. Kinda need to know that one way or another since they all seem to be rationality codes.
I agree with taking a strong look at what the crank sensor is doing. The reluctor is wedged between the flywheel and crank. Could it have been possibly damaged? Have the tech scope the crank signal.
Ive never dealt with these specific codes. But after reviewing the information in Alldata, it looks to me like this is very much like monitoring for a misfire. Does the tech feel a misfire? Can he check a misfire counter in the scan tool? Everything in the troubleshooting tree for theses codes is exactly what one would be checking for if it where a misfire....
The misfire has not occurred yet.
We have 300 codes that haven't been set, leads me to believe Steve Caruso is right. this is something before misfire.
Would concentrate on the negative fuel trim. Is this a dual injection system? If so look at the injector.
I recommend reading the original post before replying; he answered your question in it.
Good point Marlin. Since the vehicle has two injectors per cylinder, fuel trim of -30% one of the injectors may be leaking providing that this not a bank issue. A couple of things come to mind: how are the "known" good cylinders doing. Since the codes could based off of two ignition events, could the others cylinders be throwing off the calculation? How is the injector balance? Was a…
I suggested monitoring the cylinder balance PID's, which seems like one of the most basic checks. Your mention of a possible leaking injector is a … point; however, I expect the system to be "smart" enough to react differently to that, since it would be leaking so little that it doesn't cause a misfire directly.
Well we gave Todd a lot of good ideas and food for thought. I am sure we will be looking forward to seeing what Todd finds outs and his explanation of everything.
Yes, I hope that we get some … information out of this. Unfortunately, whomever he is working with is the critical factor at this point.
With negative fuel trims either the engine is receiving too much fuel based on the sensor readings, a fuel leak into the intake, or a breathing problem that the engine is not breathing as well as the computer thinks. Need to look at valve timing, was the timing chain properly installed? Timing of the injectors? Timing of the Fuel pressure pulse with the injector? If the Chain is stretched and…
From the top. Martin. This is a single bank flat 4. I assume the A/F ratio sensor is off line (not awake yet) before closed loop. I think the ECM is subtracting fuel from just one cylinder when it goes into closed loop which is why it “runs bad” in closed loop but “runs good” in open loop (A/F sensor disconnected). Steven. I interpreted the codes as a fuel imbalance not a crank speed (torque)…
I am Marlin. I am a straight-shooter (gun brand), martins are birds. LOL. Operation of the front sensor must be occurring before CL. Whether the PCM is subtracting from only one cylinder or not, will be observable by exhaust sensor signals and control PID's. I am certain that there are related PID's, though I have never work on this vehicle model.
I will look.
I would stop and take the lean up against the tool box overview and ask "What changed" same ECM and injectors are the same and the calculation of the exhaust impulses have to have a base line which is provided by the only thing it can read is the crank position sensor. I would definitely scope the Crank/ Cam sensors against a known good to see if the timing has gone whacky . I would also check…
I'm looking forward to hearing the resolution of this vehicle. Hope we get there. First a question. Is the P119a accurate or is it supposed to be a P219A? TIS does not show the 119a code in the menu for this application. This imbalance system detection for the D4-S has a couple of iterations. There are units with PIDS showing the imbalance level by cylinder and under what type of injection…
Jim, Great research on the subject. You have a good understanding of the code. From the information that I have on this, you are correct on the detection, AFR for rich conditions and CKP for the lean side. For conversation purposes, because this is such a big negative fuel trim, would it not be fair to say we have an over-fueling concern? Not knowing the condition of the replacement engine…
From SI on this specific vehicle the detection appears to be happening at idle using the engine speed fluctuation method. If it was only making the decision from the AFR it SHOULD.......only set the P219A code. The P119E/F codes are idle tests. It does not think the AFR is stuck because the P2195 and P2196 codes would put us outside of enabling conditions for the monitor. I see no listed…
Has this been resolved?