The Nightmare Continues

[Semy]

Hi all,

I posted a while back about having power loss issues and I thought l would give you an update.

To date i have changed

S.C.V,s ,Turbo, VRV valve, MAF censor, 2x fuel filters, cleaned out Egr valve several times, 2 different diesel additives.

Toyota said it was turbo problem which it wasn't. I took to a mechanic that was recommended and he connected the computer and said the air temperatures were reading wrong, they were higher than it was. He disconnected the MAF censor on the air filter and all was good, he got hold of a second hand one and everything was fine.

Three weeks later and I start having the same problem, engine revs to around 3000 then starts pulling back until about 4000 revs. A couple of days later the problem has got worse I cant get above 2000 revs as the engine goes into limp mode.

The mechanic has looked at it again and said air temps are wrong again but even if MAF sensor is disabled the jeep still shows no sign of improvement.

Has anybody any idea what it could be, I've had to cancel our family holiday in a caravan due to this nightmare

Toyota Rav 4.2 D4D

2005

[Pogle]

Which additives have you used?

[Tech01]

A (partially) blocked oxidation catalyst - the first exhaust box after the turbo/downpipe - will produce this effect*. To check it out, simply remove the first box and remainder of the exhaust system, and test-drive the car with just the down-pipe in place. (It will be amazingly quiet.)

If power returns, then the cat is blocked. Replace, or remove contents of the box.

An easy check to do.

Chris

* Usually the effect is to limit revs to about 3000, beyond which a 'strangled' box will not allow a high flow of exhaust gases. In the early stages of blockage, much higher revs (at lighter throttle) might be possible, with difficulty, though.

[bothwell_buyer]

I'd go with Chris above. I have had a problem with a cat restricting the exhaust outlet causing overheating, albeit with my petrol turbo engine. We knocked out the Cat and all has been well since.

[Big Kev]

General Question.........are catalysers more problems than they solve? A whole industry of repair, cleaners, forums have sprung up based around them...

Big Kev

[Uncle Buck]

They're just a quick fix for emissions Kev & the by-product is a whole industry built up on replacing them ! They cost a fortune to replace & yet again the customer gets fleeced :(

[firemac]

General Question.........are catalysers more problems than they solve? A whole industry of repair, cleaners, forums have sprung up based around them...

Big Kev

Right on, Fella. They were forced on us by the motor industry and the commodities industry (i.e. city fatcats) who saw the opportunity for lots of replacements, repairs, etc. not to mention ensuring a very healthy price for platinum for the future.

The sensible alternative was lean burn petrol technology that didn't require cats. Funnily enough, we now have it in the many modern petrol engines which are producing diesel-rivalling fuel consumption figures - regrettably though, they still must have cats under construction & use law.

[Parts-King]

Not quite right Jim, forced on us by Maggie Thatcher and the EU. The start of the chasing down on CO and NOX emissions

Toyota and the like don't put CATS on vehicles where they don't need to, they have to in Europe by EU law................Don't start me off

King High Horse

[Hoovie]

General Question.........are catalysers more problems than they solve? A whole industry of repair, cleaners, forums have sprung up based around them...

Big Kev

Plus the low lifes cutting out the cats to fund a hit and causes hundreds or thousands of pounds worth of damage.

[firemac]

Not quite right Jim, forced on us by Maggie Thatcher and the EU. The start of the chasing down on CO and NOX emissions

Toyota and the like don't put CATS on vehicles where they don't need to, they have to in Europe by EU law................Don't start me off

King High Horse

The EU reacts to lobbyists, just like every other government and, just as in the case of today's super-MoT issue, the implementation of catalysts as the standard was driven by the vested interests in the motor trade & in the city. Don't forget that this all started in the US where GM, Ford & Chrysler had most to lose if cats weren't adopted since the entire US industry had already embraced them fully. If an alternative technology was tp prevail in Europe, with its massive market potential, then the same could happen in the Far East & the emerging markets such as BRIC with catastrophic impact on the financial well-being of the cat supporting businesses in the US.

I recall that there was a great deal of debate in the press generally at the time, especially the motoring press, about cats -vs- lean-burn. I also recall that Chrysler produced their ELB engine for some time in the 70's & 80's in some markets and this engine had no cat but still passed all the US federal emissions regs. Nevertheless, the vested interests killed it off and cats prevailed.

With respect, you can't blame Maggie for everything (unless your names's Arthur Scargill or Neil Kinnock).

[Parts-King]

Plus the low lifes cutting out the cats to fund a hit and causes hundreds or thousands of pounds worth of damage

We have to remove all CATS from 4x4 and vans, otherwise the scroats crawl underneath and just cut them out, causes thousands of ££££ worth of damage everytime because we have to change the whole exhaust section

With respect, you can't blame Maggie for everything (unless your names's Arthur Scargill or Neil Kinnock).

Quite right Jim, not everything, but I remember at the time she ploughed on with her decision (A la Maggie style) and DID'NT take notice of the best advice available. You then get the snowball effect. Govenments dont care about how manufacturers arrive at the technology, as long as targets are hit and they take in the maximum amount of tax possible from a captured audience

[firemac]

Plus the low lifes cutting out the cats to fund a hit and causes hundreds or thousands of pounds worth of damage

We have to remove all CATS from 4x4 and vans, otherwise the scroats crawl underneath and just cut them out, causes thousands of ££££ worth of damage everytime because we have to change the whole exhaust section

>With respect, you can't blame Maggie for everything (unless your names's Arthur Scargill or Neil Kinnock).

Quite right Jim, not everything, but I remember at the time she ploughed on with her decision (A la Maggie style) and DID'NT take notice of the best advice available. You then get the snowball effect. Govenments dont care about how manufacturers arrive at the technology, as long as targets are hit and they take in the maximum amount of tax possible from a captured audience

Indeed Maggie was single-minded and sometimes wrong but in this case it was an EU directive, which the UK would eventually have had to adopt even if HMG didn't particularly want to, therefore MT couldn't stop it anyway.

The main driver was the market aspect. Even if the UK said "no", the fact that all the other main markets (US, EU) had adopted cat technology would have forced the UK to comply; we could not have avoided EU C&U regs. The increasingly international aspect of car manufacture at that time meant that making non-cat models for the UK was out of the question and we'd have got them anyway, even if we somehow had got around the C&U issues.