Technical fiat 500 dualogic multiple failures

[bgunn]

Or: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/FIAT-500-...arts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item27bf9c63d6

Cheap way of doing a trial and error fix.

 

[Most Easterly Pandas]

It looks like you need number 1 from this diagram, price is £126.60 inc. VAT (according to December 2012 prices).

How you come to that conclusion - its a gearbox mounted sensor the gear potentiometer, not the selector lever.

 

[306maxi]

Tbh with Ahmett's driving style I'd probably go with broken lever than something on the box itself.

 

[ahmett]

Tbh with Ahmett's driving style I'd probably go with broken lever than something on the box itself.

Best would be just to dismantle the box and check both mechanisms out to be on the safe side. So far it is working ok these days and I will also wait and see how fiat replies to my email.

 

[jrkitching]

Tbh with Ahmett's driving style I'd probably go with broken lever than something on the box itself.

With Ahmett's driving style, all bets are off. I'd say Ahmett is the ultimate challenge to the concept of 'unbreakable' .

But I do hope, Ahmett, that it turns out to be a simple and inexpensive fix.

So far it is working ok these days

Maybe it's time to consider trading it in before something serious breaks outside of warranty. Perhaps if you can find a dealer that does not know the history of your car ....

 

[ahmett]

With Ahmett's driving style, all bets are off. I'd say Ahmett is the ultimate challenge to the concept of 'unbreakable' .

But I do hope, Ahmett, that it turns out to be a simple and inexpensive fix.



Maybe it's time to consider trading it in before something serious breaks outside of warranty. Perhaps if you can find a dealer that does not know the history of your car ....

I thought of that but fiat don't make a car I want anymore, I don't want the TA as I find the 1.4 more fun. My options are running out for a fun, stylish NA car! If they run out completely of NA cars, I might as well get a Diesel as a daily run around haha.

I will stick with this until it breaks, I have an indie who do things for me very cheap so i'll just use them.
I don't think I am ever going to a Fiat dealership again now I am out of warranty.

 

[jrkitching]

I thought of that but fiat don't make a car I want anymore, I don't want the TA as I find the 1.4 more fun.

I agree with you on this - I think the 1.4 is a more suitable engine for the kind of usage your car gets than the TA.

My options are running out for a fun, stylish NA car!

Not sure if it's available in Greece, but what about a Suzuki Swift Sport?

The 1.2 version would definitely be on my shortlist if I were looking for a 500 replacement.

And - whilst expecting some flak for this - I'd take a Swift Sport over a 500 Abarth any day, especially if I were the one paying the bills.

 

[ahmett]

I agree with you on this - I think the 1.4 is a more suitable engine for the kind of usage your car gets than the TA.



Not sure if it's available in Greece, but what about a Suzuki Swift Sport?

The 1.2 version would definitely be on my shortlist if I were looking for a 500 replacement.

And - whilst expecting some flak for this - I'd take a Swift Sport over a 500 Abarth any day, especially if I were the one paying the bills.

Yes specwise seems a great car! However i like the 500 more. Seriously there are very few cheap cars that i like. I thought the cooper was nice but the s is a turbo and really expensive if you spec it the same way as the fiat. The normal one didnt float my boat. It seems my next daily car will have to be a diesel by default! Should be interesting how long my 500 will last; i will keep you guys updated regularly!

 

[bgunn]

I agree with you on this - I think the 1.4 is a more suitable engine for the kind of usage your car gets than the TA.

You mean being thrashed on a daily basis?

 

[bgunn]

How you come to that conclusion - its a gearbox mounted sensor the gear potentiometer, not the selector lever.

The gear change is working in auto mode, so it can't be the actual selector unit, otherwise it'd be stuck in a gear and undriveable/not start able, the symptom he's getting is that the gear selection he requests isn't being made by the control unit.

New/replacement stick/selector, then do a clutch adjustment check/calibrate and EOL calibration via diagnostics.

 

[ahmett]

You mean being thrashed on a daily basis?

Meaning the engine feels happier at 6000 rpm + in NA guise instead of turbo.

 

[bgunn]

Meaning the engine feels happier at 6000 rpm + in NA guise instead of turbo.

I don't really agree with you here. The way an engine feels depends upon a number of factors, and there are plenty of turbocharged engines that are high revving screamers, equally many natasp engines that are low revving sluggers.

You're talking about the relative merits of an engine that's reasonably 'cammy' and set up to have quite a high torque peak (the 1.4 16v unit), vs an engine that's tuned for a relatively low torque peak with a noticable 'urge' at this point.

There's no 'standard definition' of what a turbo engine should feel like vs. a natasp one - you're just going on how FIAT has tuned a couple of their motors..

 

[ahmett]

I don't really agree with you here. The way an engine feels depends upon a number of factors, and there are plenty of turbocharged engines that are high revving screamers, equally many natasp engines that are low revving sluggers.

You're talking about the relative merits of an engine that's reasonably 'cammy' and set up to have quite a high torque peak (the 1.4 16v unit), vs an engine that's tuned for a relatively low torque peak with a noticable 'urge' at this point.

There's no 'standard definition' of what a turbo engine should feel like vs. a natasp one - you're just going on how FIAT has tuned a couple of their motors..

But from what I see NA engines are always tuned for higher revving than turbo ones with as you said torque more peaky.

 

[bgunn]

But from what I see NA engines are always tuned for higher revving than turbo ones with as you said torque more peaky.

That's 100% not true. You need to drive some more cars..

 

[ahmett]

That's 100% not true. You need to drive some more cars..

I see what you mean but with NA cars you generally need to go higher in the rev range to get power while in turbo cars you don't need to.
I naturally like reving an engine, for me its a more rewarding driving experience.
I don't like explosions of power from 1500 onwards like turbo cars!

 

[bgunn]

do you know any turbo road cars with a rev limit of 9500 rpm?

The BMW S63B44TU does 7200 - and it's a 560PS 4.4l twin turbo V8.

You're clearly quoting the LFA's 1LR-GUE engine, and yes, it's redline is 9500, peak torque is actually made at 6800, and peak power therefore follows at 8700. Remember our favourite old calculation?

So having digested this, you need to remember:

A natasp engine cannot fill its cylinders as quickly as a turbocharged engine, so the only way to develop a larger amount of power is to change the other variable in the equation - i.e the rpm, so by using higher lift, and longer duration camshaft profiles, you promote better cylinder filling (remember air has a mass, so by getting it to move faster - so it has more inertia), and thus burn more (of your poorly filled) cylinders of air per minute. A turbocharged engine has forced induction, so VE is greater than 100%, and thus torque is generated at lower crankshaft speeds so there isn't the NEED to rev so hard to generate 'power' (which is, in reality, a construct that doesn't actually 'mean' anything).

I suggest that you're looking at things far too simplistically, I've said this before, and you clearly haven't heeded my advice; I suggest you read up about some key things about engine theory (and practice):

Volumetric Efficiency
What power is, vs. torque
Camshaft design
How head porting design affects how an engine behaves.

And come back to me when you have..

Anyway, my comment was in jest. You clearly thrash the knackers out of your car on an almost daily basis, and it's probably a miracle that it survives

 

[bgunn]

I see what you mean but with NA cars you generally need to go higher in the rev range to get power while in turbo cars you don't need to.
I naturally like reving an engine, for me its a more rewarding driving experience.
I don't like explosions of power from 1500 onwards like turbo cars!

Ha, you edited your post to make more sense. That's fair enough - but needlessly flogging an engine way past its torque peak makes no sense, so my (and others) jesting comments have basis. Feed the power, use the torque.

I suspect what you like is 'free revving' engines, ones that have quite a linear torque curve. There are plenty of turbo motors that are like that, they tend to be bigger though (and not running on that vile smelly fuel - diesel if you're wondering what I mean).

 

[ahmett]

The BMW S63B44TU does 7200 - and it's a 560PS 4.4l twin turbo V8.

You're clearly quoting the LFA's 1LR-GUE engine, and yes, it's redline is 9500, peak torque is actually made at 6800, and peak power therefore follows at 8700. Remember our favourite old calculation?

So having digested this, you need to remember:

A natasp engine cannot fill its cylinders as quickly as a turbocharged engine, so the only way to develop a larger amount of power is to change the other variable in the equation - i.e the rpm, so by using higher lift, and longer duration camshaft profiles, you promote better cylinder filling (remember air has a mass, so by getting it to move faster - so it has more inertia), and thus burn more (of your poorly filled) cylinders of air per minute. A turbocharged engine has forced induction, so VE is greater than 100%, and thus torque is generated at lower crankshaft speeds so there isn't the NEED to rev so hard to generate 'power' (which is, in reality, a construct that doesn't actually 'mean' anything).

I suggest that you're looking at things far too simplistically, I've said this before, and you clearly haven't heeded my advice; I suggest you read up about some key things about engine theory (and practice):

Volumetric Efficiency
What power is, vs. torque
Camshaft design
How head porting design affects how an engine behaves.

And come back to me when you have..

Anyway, my comment was in jest. You clearly thrash the knackers out of your car on an almost daily basis, and it's probably a miracle that it survives

hahaha seriously though I am no engineer so I cant really have a conversation on the things you are talking about!

regarding the reving, from what I know you cant damage the engine by revving it hard as long as it has oil in it and is up to temperature, no? I mean that's what fuel cutoff is for no?

And I actually drive it rather calmly, but to get anywhere with the car you have to rev it a lot. As I mentioned before in 1st gear you have to go to 7200 rpm to get to 4500 in 2nd gear which is the power band of maximum torque.

 

[bgunn]

hahaha seriously though I am no engineer so I cant really have a conversation on the things you are talking about!

regarding the reving, from what I know you cant damage the engine by revving it hard as long as it has oil in it and is up to temperature, no? I mean that's what fuel cutoff is for no?

Well, no, the rev limiter is to stop you revving it too hard and causing catastrophic damage (which will happen in seconds, rather than hundreds, or thousands of miles). Revving an engine hard is definitely not a bad thing, but doing it consistently and repeatedly probably won't promote its long life, especially if you're changing the oil on the manufacturers intervals; the engine simply isn't designed for that.

And I actually drive it rather calmly, but to get anywhere with the car you have to rev it a lot. As I mentioned before in 1st gear you have to go to 7200 rpm to get to 4500 in 2nd gear which is the power band of maximum torque.

You say you 'have to'. I don't believe that's the case - you have to in order to make absolute maximum progress, but I can't believe you drive around like this all of the time? Surely you'd have no driving licence due to speeding fines by engaging in such behaviour? I enjoy driving my car and exploiting its performance, but most of the time I'm just following other traffic, and so limited by that.

 

[jrkitching]

...from what I know you cant damage the engine by revving it hard as long as it has oil in it and is up to temperature, no? I mean that's what fuel cutoff is for no?

And I actually drive it rather calmly

...but to get anywhere with the car you have to rev it a lot.

Err, I've gone almost 20,000 miles in mine & I've never had to rev it above 2500

After 20,000 miles spent continuously bouncing it off the rev limiter, your engine will basically have been reduced to a very large out-of-warranty claim just waiting to happen.