home register FAQ memberlist calendar

Go Back   Turbobricks Forums > Mechanical > maintenance & nonperformance

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-15-2021, 04:23 PM   #1
Klech
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Default New Genuine Volvo Maf sensor same old tests?

Does anyone have any experience with the new Genuine Volvo MAF sensors with P/N 8251497 that are supposed to be a direct replacement for the Bosch 0 280 212 016?
I was wondering if the same Bentley manual tests apply to these new units when diagnosing the sensor because I'm on my 2nd unit from FCPeuro and both seem to be faulty according to the bentley tests for LH-2.4 as well as my old Bosch maf working perfectly when swapped out with these new maf sensors I've ordered on the car.

The reason I'm asking is because the bentley manual says pins 2 and 3 on the sensor should have 2.5-4 ohms but both of the new Volvo sensors show no continuity and infinite resistance unlike my Bosch sensor which shows 3.0 ohms just as the bentley suggests. My car stalls out everytime with the new Genuine Volvo sensors but drives fine with each Bosch maf I have.

Any insight? Is there something im missing with the new sensor that replaced the old Bosch part such as a different harness or something more in depth im supposed to replace with the new sensor? The pins don't seem do do the exact same things as the Bosch sensors pins. My car is a 1992 240 DL B230f N/A.

Thank you
Klech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2021, 05:52 PM   #2
dl242gt
Happy playing the blues
 
dl242gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: S NJ, a suburb of Phila.
Default

What you are measuring is the resistance of the platinum wire. Does this new sensor have the same construction as the old Bosch one? In other words do you see the little brackets inside holding the platinum wire? If it looks the same then yes your new sensor has a bad platinum wire. Another possibility is that they changed the sensor internally so it's not a platinum wire based unit. However, the stalling sure indicates it's bad and I'd say you have bad new sensors.
__________________
Dave,
1982 242 turbo. 338k miles. MVP coilovers and 3" exhaust. Flowed 405 with a V15. Cossie turbine housing with upgraded compressor housing. 90+, IPD remote oil filter. Some other goodness, too. Been lots of fun over 25 years. Restored in 2k. Now ready for a 2nd restoration.

1993 245 Classic, 435k miles, enem V15. IPD bars and chassis braces. Simons sport exhaust from Scandix. sbabbs ezk chip. Been a good road warrior. Genuine Volvo rebuilt leaky M47.
dl242gt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2021, 06:31 PM   #3
Klech
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Default

The only difference i can see between the Bosch unit ending in 016 and the new one is instead of there being the wire exposed, it is instead what looks to be a circuit board with 2 suspended resistors inside of 2 cut out sections on each side of the board that are slightly offset from eachother inside of a small cylinder that is suspended inside the airway of the maf. The heat sink looking metal part looks to be the same. Aside from that I can't tell any difference. What seems to be going on is that there isn't a platinum wire anymore. There is a very short wire on each side of the 2 suspended resistors that may be 1mm long each which is what connects them to the circuit board, but its a completely different design from what it looks like.

From what you said it seems that the wire that communicates the resistance was phased out by this design? IPD and FCP were completely unhelpful except for directing me to the company that makes the sensors called GCP. They have email that I've messaged but don't have a number to call in order for me to figure out if the same book tests are supposed to work on this sensor or not, as well as letting me know if there is more to it than simply hooking up the sensor. I don't want to have to send back another one if there's something else I'm supposed to be doing.
Klech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2021, 08:07 PM   #4
dl242gt
Happy playing the blues
 
dl242gt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: S NJ, a suburb of Phila.
Default

That sounds like you are describing the hot film type of maf. That is the type used with the LH3.1 240 series. Probably cheaper to make them now after all these years. But if the sensor is causing stalling that isn't a good one. I looked at the FCP description and they do say it's a hot film mass air sensor.

A friend of mine bought the cheapie ebay $25 sensor and it worked fine and has lasted several months so far.
dl242gt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-15-2021, 09:10 PM   #5
brian smith
Board Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: N.Y.
Default Disregard multimeter, focus on something known to work.

Hey, this thread really helped me out:
http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=299455
__________________
the howdeedoo:
http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=288872
brian smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 09:39 AM   #6
Klech
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Default

Your information definitely cleared a few things up for me so I really appreciate it. I wasn't aware of what a hot film sensor was and so it leads me to another question.

Are the hot film sensors found to be hit or miss more often than the hot wire sensors from before? I found a hot film cheapo maf in my shed that works fine in the new Volvo Maf sensors place so that made me feel I actually did recieve 2 bad mafs so far, as well as there being a chance this design does actually have the potential to work.

With that being said are there any bosch reman/exchanges out there for the hot wire sensors still? I noticed that on rock auto they have the Bosch remanufactured sensor just like i have like I have but at $700 there's got to be a way to get those cheaper in order to not struggle with the hot film sensor Volvo sells now.
Klech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 12:29 PM   #7
Klech
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2020
Default

Hey man that is a really good thread. That basically explains my whole thought process is wrong haha.

With this new Volvo part being a hot film type, am I supposed to have a throttle position sensor like the version the 3.1 uses? Apparently the hot film maf for 3.1 needs a potentiometer type of tps to operate correctly. Since my lh-2.4 tps is simply a switch, could that be why this new hot film version MAF sensor volvo is selling could be having issues?

I would assume that since the new genuine part is supposed to replace the 0 280 212 016, it should work fine with the tps switch the lh-2.4 uses but it seems there's no definite answer yet.
Klech is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-16-2021, 01:41 PM   #8
gsellstr
Vintage anti-ricer
 
gsellstr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Somewhere in a northern California smog bank
Default

Typically they don't switch styles of MAF on a given engine management system, but it does appear they did that in this case, possibly not correctly done. The FCP site lists it as being an HFM instead of hot wire as well. LH will be looking for a specific signal on there. Given there's no wire, but a circuit board instead, the resistance check likely won't be the same. As for swapping TPS's, that won't work, as 2.4 is looking for just an idle vs. not signal. 3.1 uses the variable resistance.

Might be worth reaching out to FCP, find out where they are getting them, as they aren't compatible with your car and are a different design than what it came with.
__________________
RIP
Doug Williams "Mr. Doug" 4/15/2009
Pete Fluitman "fivehundred" 7/14/2013
Mick Starkey "TrickMick" 1/10/14
Mark Baldwin "blue850t5" 7/19/18
Nick Fengler "fengler" 8/6/18
Thomas Fritz "stealthfti" 10/11/18


74 144 B20
http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=224983

90 745Ti
http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=334698

If you need Superpro bushings PM me for price and availability!
gsellstr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-17-2021, 08:22 PM   #9
cleanflametrap
Board Member
 
cleanflametrap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: near baltimore
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klech View Post
...
I would assume that since the new genuine part is supposed to replace the 0 280 212 016, it should work fine with the tps switch the lh-2.4 uses but it seems there's no definite answer yet.
I agree with you, and a very definite answer regarding the potentiometer version throttle position sensor is, no, you need to stick with your switch type, as the circuitry in the LH2.4 ECU does not have the capability of reading the variable resistor.

I'm guessing hot platinum wire is old school and finicky to manufacture just for a few replacements on 30 year old cars, so GCP spec'd a film sensor that will approximate the curve expected from the hot wire sensor. Could be the modern film sensors are a lot faster than the first ones were as things are miniaturized and thermal mass in the sensor is reduced.
__________________
-Art
cleanflametrap is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2021, 06:28 AM   #10
Otto Mattik
board member
 
Otto Mattik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Upper Midwest more or less
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Klech View Post
I would assume that since the new genuine part is supposed to replace the 0 280 212 016, it should work fine with the tps switch the lh-2.4 uses but it seems there's no definite answer yet.
I know someone who has the newer type(film) MAF in a LH 2.4 car and I have never heard mention of any issues. After looking on FCP's website they show a lifetime replacement on all parts. I'm curious, what has FCP suggested ?


__________________
Desperate need of elf assistant for interior work - Cash/Beer option $


Feedback thread: http://forums.turbobricks.com/showthread.php?t=323689
Otto Mattik is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:46 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.