1.9 Auto - no power - Partially solved

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 14:22

Well - I've had the car for 6 years and lived with the fact that the power sucks. (Especially uphill & with A/C on.)
I've serviced the car religiously, TLC etc. The car is in really good nick - but I'm finally getting really frustrated.
I suspect there has been something not quite right from day 1 (if my kid's Civic1.6 Auto has much more power - in the lower gears)
How do I discern if something is not right?
Anybody willing to give me some direction

Please.......

Z3cade · Post by **Z3cade** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 14:47

Sell it and buy an M.. You will have a big smile on your face then

Captain · Post by **Captain** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 15:42

Have a compression test done to start with.

Sent from my GT-I8190 using Tapatalk 2

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 16:18

I guess the only way to be certain is on a dyno, but measuring the 0-60 time will give some measure of how the car performs against what would be expected. I find my 1.9 very nippy - appreciate that I have a manual and you have an auto, but I can't think the difference is that great.

Paulh · Post by **Paulh** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 16:47

I've recently bought a 1.9 1998 and to be honest it's never going to set the world alight in terms of performance, it requires a fair degree of effort to make half decent progress, thankfully I didn't buy it for performance and I'm sure the 2.8 pulls like a train by comparison. I'd run it on a dyno to establish what bhp it's putting out compared to the factory figures and as suggested time 0-60, be minded however that iirc factory 0-60 times are worked out under optimum driving conditions.

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 16:51

So....Does anybody have an idea the 0-60 for a M44 1.9L auto?

Badman gee · Post by **Badman gee** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 16:53

BonBon wrote:So....Does anybody have an idea the 0-60 for a M44 1.9L auto?

20 minutes

Brian H · Post by **Brian H** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 17:00

Badman gee wrote:
BonBon wrote:So....Does anybody have an idea the 0-60 for a M44 1.9L auto?
20 minutes

ooooh bad, Badman

@BonBon

1.9 M44
0-60 = 9.2 secs
Top Speed = 127 mph
140 bhp

Source Parkers

Del · Post by **Del** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 17:05

Just to embellish the helpful info. provided so far, my original handbook (M44 engine) states 0 - 100km/h (62 mile/h):-

Manual 9.5 seconds
Automatic 10.5 seconds

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 17:25

Ok - I have some homework.
I don't know what i want the result to be....
BTW - does the handbook specify if it is in "E" or "S" ?(Economy of Sport)

Del · Post by **Del** » Thu 15 Aug, 2013 19:34

The handbook doesn’t make any distinction between automatic modes.

The M44 engine is a tough little engine with a cast iron block. Because of its sporty character it has its own race competition via E36 318 Compact Cars in the Marangoni/Gaz Shocks Compact Cup Championship http://www.bmwracedays.co.uk/forum/

The technical forum has one or two posts on power loss and invariably air leaks are mentioned. The M44 engine has a lot of vacuum pipework from the MAF bellows to each injector. This is prone to splitting, causing air leaks and resulting in power loss.

Part B13.41.1.247.782 and
Part B13.53.1.739.618

I’ve changed these on mine and I noticed a difference. I eat Z3Ms for breakfast now – particularly on a cold start where the M has to wait 20 minutes for the oil to get up to operating temperature.

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 06:00

Indeed the results suck. 14.5 secs (no real diff 'E' or 'S')
Next step diagnostics....

OXO · Post by **OXO** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 07:11

Del wrote: I eat Z3Ms for breakfast now – particularly on a cold start where the M has to wait 20 minutes for the oil to get up to operating temperature.

After you have waited 5 mins for yours to get up to temperature surely?

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 07:28

Sure.
Flat road, fans & AC off, no passenger, iphone stopwatch, etc etc.
My indy said it can be anything and aded that he usually finds that this type of problem is the MAF or the cat converter.
If anyone fancies doing an acceleration test - it would be welcome for comparison

Badman gee · Post by **Badman gee** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 07:35

Del wrote: I eat Z3Ms for breakfast now – particularly on a cold start where the M has to wait 20 minutes for the oil to get up to operating temperature.

Dream on boy!

Del · Post by **Del** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 08:32

BonBon wrote:My indy said it can be anything and aded that he usually finds that this type of problem is the MAF or the cat converter.

Assuming everything inside the engine is fine he's right, also the injectors might benefit from a professional clean and old lambda sensors get slower/lazy with age. Haynes recommends changing them proactively at 50k miles and Bentley at 100k. I intend to change my single, pre-cat, 15-year old (80k) lambda this winter. In the past I have proactively changed a lambda on a non-BMW car my son and I were working on and it made a very noticeable difference.

Finally, what might seem like a daft suggestion, but I have also encountered a situation where an old fuel filter was causing problems - but admittedly it was on a car where the fuel filter was smaller than the BMW one. Obviously they get more restricted with dirt and I reckon they can start to breakdown with age.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/380072659398? ... 1423.l2649

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 09:55

Thanks Del.
I had a new aftermarket MAF on the shelf for a rainy day. Just put it in.....it's still raining

I'll leave it in for a while.
I also checked the vac tubing & boot and it looks fine. My Lambda is 3 years old.
What is the cheapest way to characterize "inside the engine"?
This humble toy is a hobby - so I guess I have a challenge to keep me busy. It must be something pretty inherent as it's been pretty poor from day 1.
I wonder if previous owners beat the crap out of it (and there were several before me)
On the positive side - I changed the front Shocks which must have been 15 years old - what a difference. Next service the rear shocks (5 years 100k km)

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 10:30

Unless it uses a lot of oil or is smoky, I wouldn't worry about what previous owners have done in terms of how they drove it - might be worth checking what they've done in terms of maintenance, specifically if they've replaced any sensors (eg, Cam sensor) with aftermarket ones that can cause problems.

Might be worth checking the DISA valve, as that directly affects engine performance, and also the PCV.

Have you changed/checked the fluid in the auto box too - it could be that the engine's ok but that you're losing out somewhere in the drive train.

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 11:11

Cheers guys for your thoughts.....I enjoy team efforts.....prefer football to golf...
No black smoke or anything unsightly or odd anywhere.........everything by me is cool except for the power. Over my 6 years I've had every single ailment on this board....or so I thought. This is obviously a new one.
A few of more bits of info:
1. In my 120k km (out of the present 285k) the camshaft sensor has not been changed. (But I thought failure here would be pretty obvious).
2. The PCV or CCV generally known on the forum (Cranckcase control valve) was replaced 18 months ago is quiet (when it failed it leaked and car did nor run properly)
3. (Coincidence) I just went out to the car to take a pic - of the "round black thing" that is whining where the noise changes when I touch it (pic below) - Seems like it's the DISA valve. Is that correct? How do I diagnose if that's the problem?

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 11:31

Yes, that is the DISA valve. Mine also make a noise. I don't really know how to test that it works properly other than just unplug it and see if I can tell the difference. I guess putting a voltage across the terminals would allow you to see if it moves correctly (once you'd taken it out, which is very easy)

I just plan to replace it at some point.

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 11:53

Shyte - and I thought we were onto something.....

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 12:01

BonBon wrote:Shyte - and I thought we were onto something.....

Why do you say that? You could well be onto something. The DISA affects the power and torque of the engine - if it's not functioning it will have an impact.

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 12:09

Cuz I thought the noise was odd. If you also have noise - I guess it was not out of the ordinary.
(Besides my garage has been servicing it for years and they would have commented -I think its always made a fine whine and I once asked them)

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 12:23

I think it is out of the ordinary - that's why I plan on replacing it!

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 12:34

Do you have a flat 500 yard straight near your house that'll be quite over the weekend?
I'd be really interested how close you are to the spec'ed 0-60. (No way it can be as bad as mine..... when I try a moderate climb I am overtaken by Mazda 2s ......with the AC I practically roll backwards - not to mentions when the other 'alf is with me)

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 12:38

I'll give it a go. Purely in the interests of this forum, of course!

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 13:09

Cheers

btw - searching for the DISA valve costs it appears that 2 different parts are good for mine. 11611438404 and discontinued 11611247202
There appears to be a significant cost difference between them (factor 3) - I wonder why the difference and do they both perform the same.
http://www.realoem.com/bmw/showparts.do ... g=11&fg=40
http://parts.bmwofsouthatlanta.com/prod ... 47202.html
http://parts.bmwofsouthatlanta.com/prod ... 38404.html
update - 11611247202 is not actually available from the above supplier - although it does appear on some sites - which is a bit suspicious

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 13:57

I'd say part number 11611438404 is the right one, judging from RealOem - perhaps the other is a previous part number of the same thing? Try this for a reasonable price:

http://www.bmminiparts.com/PartDetails. ... A31DB6782E

Brian H · Post by **Brian H** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 15:13

I am fairly certain the DISA valves make a noise by default, I had this on my 1.9 M44 and I too though it a strange noise but it never caused any harm or issues so I left it alone.

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 15:16

I know that on the 6-cyl cars there are instance of failure of the DISA valve due to wear in the mounting for the pivot pin - in fairness, I have no idea whether or not it should make a noise, but it was just one of those peace-of-mind things that I'd like to do.

colb · Post by **colb** » Fri 16 Aug, 2013 16:33

My 1.9 seemed to be slow off the mark, codes read, camshaft sensor showed up, changed that but still slow, eventually changed the MAF for a new Bosch unit and also changed the Disa Valve as it was clacking.
Improved no end, had to put in a new Lambda pre cat and she runs like a top and pulls like a train.

Only use OEM parts.

Colb

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Sat 17 Aug, 2013 17:50

Colb,
Can you estimate what made the difference or was it a combination of all 3 changes? (Lambda, MAF and DISA)

colb · Post by **colb** » Sat 17 Aug, 2013 19:46

BonBon

I reckon main culprit was the MAF, tried a cheap aftermarket one which improved it a little but sent it back and replaced it with a Bosch OEM unit, difference was amazing. Once I had it running smoothly I watched the Exhaust sensors on my Engine Check software pre cat wasn't performing very fast I swapped that out for a Bosch one and it operated much faster. Changing out the Disa valve solved the clacking noise it was making. My experience of tracking down the culprit(s) is that the car will set codes if something is out of norm but its a bit of an art tracing which sensor is at fault as one code may be set by the way another sensor is operating and can lead you in the wrong direction.
What ever you do don't waste money on pattern parts they seldom work always go for OEM don't rely on your pattern part MAF to have rectified anything. Software would show you how it's performing as Bad MAF's dont always set a code in my experience.

Its also worth putting some engine cleaner in the oil and running the car to get rid of any varnish build up on the hydraulic tappets, I got rid of a slight tick mine made when starting from cold, engine smooth as silk now.

Its very easy to throw parts at these cars but it can be a tad expensive to do that, invest in a good code reader or software to read your codes, a lot on this forum use the INPA software, search INPA and have a look at some of the posts on it. It's BMW specific and will tell you more than other types.

Ensure all the air hoses from filter housing to intake are sealed with no splits or cracks, leaks here will create all sorts of problems with the sensors.

Colb

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Sat 17 Aug, 2013 20:48

1. While the aftermarket MAF is not expected to be "perfect", I would have assumed that if the old Bosch MAF was the problem - the new aftermarket one would have made some difference. Was exactly the same 14.5sec crawl to 62mph.
2. Your statement is not clear: "Software would show you how it's performing as Bad MAF's dont always set a code in my experience". Do you mean that "Software would NOT show you ....."
3. I will try an engine cleaner in the oil - will go for Wurth engine oil additive (never done that before - only cleaners in the petrol in order to reduce emissions before MOTs)

colb · Post by **colb** » Sat 17 Aug, 2013 22:12

BonBon

If you have access to software that will show you live sensor readings you would be able to watch the MAF performing whilst using the throttle pedal, mine reports litres of air per second at least you would know its working at different throttle positions.

I think the MAF sensor in our 1.9's also contains the intake air temperature sensor as I couldn't find one in the filter box or air pipes, if that is failed or false reading that could confuse things and set codes of other sensors and alter the fueling of the engine.

Colb

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Sat 17 Aug, 2013 22:27

Got it - Software vs standard codes....
Yes, it has a diode that measures temp. Here is a link to a pic http://www.zroadster.net/forum/viewtopi ... =clean+MAF
For the reasons outlined above I don't think it's the MAF (I also don't have any idling problems).
Hoping to see the 0-60 results of other 1.9ers....

then probably to find a good diagnostics guy (unfortunately most shops here are farmers)

Post by **Robert T** » Sat 17 Aug, 2013 22:45

M44 has an air temperature sensor on the front of the air filter box - part #11 below:

Suction silencer/filter cartridge - BMW parts catalog

Cheers R.

colb · Post by **colb** » Sat 17 Aug, 2013 22:47

BonBon

PM me with your email address and I will send you the last OBDii recording of the sensors on my car when all my problems were solved, its an Excel File.

Colb

colb · Post by **colb** » Sat 17 Aug, 2013 23:11

Robert
Intake Temp Sensor on my 1999 1.9 is not on the airbox its incorporated in the MAF sensor
it shows the airbox sensor in the OEM diagram but is not listed in the parts list when displaying for my car so not fitted.

Colb

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 05:39

Another bit of info:
I see that a number of people have disconnected the MAF to get a comparison (with and without).
Noting that I have an Automatic -when I disconnected the MAF, it idled fine but driving was a mess. There was strong knocking when moving into gear.
Just clarifying - the car seems fine - except for trying to pull power from the mark and in low revs - it's like it's struggling for oxygen or pinking.
I'm liking a fuel filter problem...
I also found this thread which would be cute http://www.zroadster.net/forum/viewtopi ... uel+filter

Post by **Robert T** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 06:44

colb wrote:Intake Temp Sensor on my 1999 1.9 is not on the airbox its incorporated in the MAF sensor
it shows the airbox sensor in the OEM diagram but is not listed in the parts list when displaying for my car so not fitted.

It *is* on my 01/99 built M44. I had to unplug it to remove the airbox. Interesting that yours isn't. What is the build date of your car?

Cheers R.

Sent from my Galaxy SII using Tapatalk 2

colb · Post by **colb** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 09:16

Robert

Build date 12/99

Colb

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 15:05

BonBon wrote:Do you have a flat 500 yard straight near your house that'll be quite over the weekend?
I'd be really interested how close you are to the spec'ed 0-60. (No way it can be as bad as mine..... when I try a moderate climb I am overtaken by Mazda 2s ......with the AC I practically roll backwards - not to mentions when the other 'alf is with me)

Ok. I tried this. Bear in mind I was driving and operating the stopwatch, used the speedometer rather than a GPS (the gps decided this would be a good day to stop displaying speed!) so there is a reasonable amount of scope for inaccuracy, however I measured a time of 9.5 seconds. Give me half a second or a second for the various inaccuracies, but it's still near enough the quoted time to suggest that your car is way off.

Post by **Robert T** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 16:59

colb wrote:Build date 12/99

Are you sure you have a 16-valve M44? To my knowledge all facelift (post 04/99) UK spec 1.9 Z3's had 8-valve M43 engines.

Cheers R.

Sent from my Galaxy SII using Tapatalk 2

BladeRunner919 · Post by **BladeRunner919** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 17:11

Robert T wrote:
colb wrote:Build date 12/99
Are you sure you have a 16-valve M44? To my knowledge all facelift (post 04/99) UK spec 1.9 Z3's had 8-valve M43 engines.

Cheers R.

Sent from my Galaxy SII using Tapatalk 2

I notice that Colb lists his car as a 1.8 in his sig, which would suggest an M43, as I think they were designated as 1.8 despite being 1.9, so you are probably right.

colb · Post by **colb** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 18:16

Blade Runner is correct badged 1.8 with the M43 8valve engine

Colb

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 18:23

Blade - thanks for the measurement and confirming I'm in the crapper.
Another yet as mentioned artifact - a delay between pressing the gas pedal and it's impact on acceleration. The affect is diffuse and not acute.
I'm leaning towards an engine clean, fuel system clean and the cat converter - but who knows - maybe it is the MAF.

Post by **Robert T** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 18:43

My point was that the M44 has a separate temp sensor in the airbox, so I assume there isn't another in the MAF. If you think the temp sensor is suspect, a replacement should be a darn sight cheaper than a new MAF. You could also try cleaning it first.

Cheers R.

Sent from my Galaxy SII using Tapatalk 2

BonBon · Post by **BonBon** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 21:12

From this site it seems that two main culprits can be the MAF and also the Throttle Position Sensor
http://bmwz3diys.weebly.com/troubleshooting.html
Can somebody shed some light on the TPS and if this may be the problem???

colb · Post by **colb** » Sun 18 Aug, 2013 22:11

Best get yourself some diagnostic software to plug in its going to be the best money you will spend and in the long run likely to save you cash in identifying sensor problems. If you get software that reads live info from the sensors you would be able to see if the TPS was working.

Colb