It's coming though the EGR valve, but I'm not sure as it's the cause of it - unless maybe it was cracked open when it shouldn't be. I'd be more concerned if the engine was running extra sootie.
Fuel mileage loss, fix = clean the Map Sensor again.
Fuel mileage loss, fix = clean the Map Sensor again.
I might just buy a couple of them and replace it every 12 months while cleaning every six months.
I have never had to do such a thing to any other vehicle I have owned. I have never owned a boosted car before.
Cheers.
I might just buy a couple of them and replace it every 12 months while cleaning every six months.
I have never had to do such a thing to any other vehicle I have owned. I have never owned a boosted car before.
Cheers.
41 - 60 of 111 Posts
Pretty much the only fix for now.Old problem, fairly easy fix. Either make sure you're not on the very last character of the text box, or hit A/A button.
See thread: http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/5-cruzetalk-site-issues/180698-cant-space.html
Still, it would be nice to get it stamped out for good.
this is a known issue on vbulletin 4 forums, unfortunately the developers of this platform (vbulletin) have not found a fix for this.Pullitoutandtakesomepicstoletusallknow....
WHY is this mess still happening?!?!?!!? I shouldn't have to retype my comments or anything like that to get the space bar to work properly!!! VERY FRUSTRATING!!!!:$#angry:
I like the info/content of this forum, but the forum itself is severely lacking compared to others I am on!!!!
Pull it out and take some pics to let us all know...
You can set your text editor to standard mode in your user cp to override this issue.
Lee
That seems to work, but that is counter intuitive to typing on ANY other forum or word processing and an extra step that you have to think about in order to reply to a quote here... Still annoying and frustrating...Old problem, fairly easy fix. Either make sure you're not on the very last character of the text box, or hit A/A button.
See thread: http://www.cruzetalk.com/forum/5-cruzetalk-site-issues/180698-cant-space.html
Still, it would be nice to get it stamped out for good.
EGR causes almost all the soot in our engines, look at the deleted clean MAP sensor as the example.It's coming though the EGR valve, but I'm not sure as it's the cause of it - unless maybe it was cracked open when it shouldn't be. I'd be more concerned if the engine was running extra sootie.
Just pulled mine and cleaned it. 48K miles. It was pretty dirty. Used compressed air and throttle body cleaner. Also blew out the manifold to the extent possible with air. There was clearly some soot build up. Didn't see any specific difference in performance, yet. Will look to see if there is any MPG improvement.
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Based on several of the posts this blog, I pulled mine last weekend @ 51K miles and found it coked up worse then those pics posted here. Can't say that the fuel mileage was any different then when the car was new and haven't noticed any improvement since cleaning. But it sure looked bad suggesting it should be clean as a regular maintenance procedure which information might imply around 50K miles.Just pulled mine and cleaned it. 48K miles. It was pretty dirty. Used compressed air and throttle body cleaner. Also blew out the manifold to the extent possible with air. There was clearly some soot build up. Didn't see any specific difference in performance, yet. Will look to see if there is any MPG improvement.
I change filter and oil every 5K miles using Pennzoil Euro L 5W-30, keep the air filter clean, use lots of diesel additive but here in Northern IL. I'm stuck with using fuel label as "<B20". So its hard to say the cause of the issue other then poor design / location of the MAP sensor.:sad:
Contrasting on my F350 6.0L PS the MAP sensor is mounted on the fire wall with a hose running back to the intake manifold. In 170K miles had to replace a defective sensor once but it was clean looking in comparison and never clean in the miles stated. This approach was probably too expensive for the Cruze application?:2cents:
The sensor on the CTD also is a Temp sensor... Thus firewall wouldn't work.Based on several of the posts this blog, I pulled mine last weekend @ 51K miles and found it coked up worse then those pics posted here. Can't say that the fuel mileage was any different then when the car was new and haven't noticed any improvement since cleaning. But it sure looked bad suggesting it should be clean as a regular maintenance procedure which information might imply around 50K miles.
I change filter and oil every 5K miles using Pennzoil Euro L 5W-30, keep the air filter clean, use lots of diesel additive but here in Northern IL. I'm stuck with using fuel label as "<B20". So its hard to say the cause of the issue other then poor design / location of the MAP sensor.:sad:
Contrasting on my F350 6.0L PS the MAP sensor is mounted on the fire wall with a hose running back to the intake manifold. In 170K miles had to replace a defective sensor once but it was clean looking in comparison and never clean in the miles stated. This approach was probably too expensive for the Cruze application?:2cents:
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
I've never even looked at mine in nearly 200K miles.
You might want to take a look at yours when you have a few free minutes to pull it, not that hard at all.I've never even looked at mine in nearly 200K miles.
The only difference since cleaning I might perceive is that the transmission shifting. Seat of the pants feel shifting seems a little crisper and more on target where as before cleaning it began to "feel" that more throttle was required to force a downshift. I believe that the MAP readings are part of the algorithm for determine shift points??
I'm right there with you.Based on several of the posts this blog, I pulled mine last weekend @ 51K miles and found it coked up worse then those pics posted here. Can't say that the fuel mileage was any different then when the car was new and haven't noticed any improvement since cleaning. But it sure looked bad suggesting it should be clean as a regular maintenance procedure which information might imply around 50K miles.
I change filter and oil every 5K miles using Pennzoil Euro L 5W-30, keep the air filter clean, use lots of diesel additive but here in Northern IL. I'm stuck with using fuel label as "<B20". So its hard to say the cause of the issue other then poor design / location of the MAP sensor.:sad:
Contrasting on my F350 6.0L PS the MAP sensor is mounted on the fire wall with a hose running back to the intake manifold. In 170K miles had to replace a defective sensor once but it was clean looking in comparison and never clean in the miles stated. This approach was probably too expensive for the Cruze application?:2cents:
Where in N IL are you? I'm in Dixon.
Sent from my ASUS_Z01BDC using Tapatalk
Just east of U, 88/39I'm right there with you.
Where in N IL are you? I'm in Dixon.
Sent from my ASUS_Z01BDC using Tapatalk
That is not too bad.. mine was worse at 46k, but cleaned up easy.Yummy.
![]()
Sent from my SCH-R970 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Didn't realize someone was so close.Just east of U, 88/39
Sent from my ASUS_Z01BDC using Tapatalk
Subjectively, cleaning the MAP may make a difference. Objectively, we can look at this using our SC II. Look at the MAP numbers before cleaning it and when cold, warm and hot and document those. Let car cool overnight, clean MAP per above and do the same readings with SC II and see how they compare. If the cleaning works, there is an objective verification of the results.
Ive done this with my SC C55 with the MAF and there is a difference when clean versus dirty. We've done this on dyno. The MAF in the C55 is a round plastic unit with a single vertical wire that acts as the measuring unit. This wire gets dirty. A quick clean of the wire with brake cleaner or MAF cleaner and wipe down with shop towel and you can see and feel the differences.
Ive done this with my SC C55 with the MAF and there is a difference when clean versus dirty. We've done this on dyno. The MAF in the C55 is a round plastic unit with a single vertical wire that acts as the measuring unit. This wire gets dirty. A quick clean of the wire with brake cleaner or MAF cleaner and wipe down with shop towel and you can see and feel the differences.
I only do mileage checks after 15 - 20 mins of driving.Subjectively, cleaning the MAP may make a difference. Objectively, we can look at this using our SC II. Look at the MAP numbers before cleaning it and when cold, warm and hot and document those. Let car cool overnight, clean MAP per above and do the same readings with SC II and see how they compare. If the cleaning works, there is an objective verification of the results.
Ive done this with my SC C55 with the MAF and there is a difference when clean versus dirty. We've done this on dyno. The MAF in the C55 is a round plastic unit with a single vertical wire that acts as the measuring unit. This wire gets dirty. A quick clean of the wire with brake cleaner or MAF cleaner and wipe down with shop towel and you can see and feel the differences.
I checked the mileage after 15 - 20 mins of driving, took out the map sensor cleaned it up and drove for 15 - 20 mins then checked the mileage again. Right after the mileage had changed at the same speed by 1.5 lphk from 5.0 to 3.5 which is a massive difference.
Thats going from 47 mpg to 67 mpg thats HUGE!!
That mileage change only lasted about a month which I think is how long it takes my sensor to start getting sooted up. It must be running rich or eventually changes to running rich.
I took mine out today and gave it a clean with canned air and MAP cleaner. Mine was not as sooty as the others I've seen on this site, but maybe it's because the car has 27,000 miles on it. I couldn't really notice any difference in drivability, and I agree that without data (such as from the Scangauge), any before-and-after comparison is going to be pretty speculative. Nonetheless, it's a pretty easy thing to check and clean from time to time.
As for drivers like Diesel, who've gone forever without cleaning it...I imagine that under normal operating conditions, the sensors accumulate only so much soot and that the operating parameters of the sensors are designed to accommodate that. Just like EGR systems; they may look all yucky and gross, but that's just part of the design, and that's how they're designed to work.
As for drivers like Diesel, who've gone forever without cleaning it...I imagine that under normal operating conditions, the sensors accumulate only so much soot and that the operating parameters of the sensors are designed to accommodate that. Just like EGR systems; they may look all yucky and gross, but that's just part of the design, and that's how they're designed to work.
Off topic a little but the 2.0L diesel maybe a little new to arrive at this conclusion, but I can say that if the EGR is all gunky on a 6.0L PS the turbo really acts wired (surges) and there is considerable power loss.Just like EGR systems; they may look all yucky and gross, but that's just part of the design, and that's how they're designed to work.
One of the things I set out to do on this car from the beginning was to do as little as possible on things like this, so that I could observe how long it takes things to get gummed up. I was fully expecting issues at 60-80K miles with sensors gunking up, based on data from other diesels like BMWs and VWs. So far, I'm pushing 202K miles and have not had any issues as a result of intake/sensor gunking up.I took mine out today and gave it a clean with canned air and MAP cleaner. Mine was not as sooty as the others I've seen on this site, but maybe it's because the car has 27,000 miles on it. I couldn't really notice any difference in drivability, and I agree that without data (such as from the Scangauge), any before-and-after comparison is going to be pretty speculative. Nonetheless, it's a pretty easy thing to check and clean from time to time.
As for drivers like Diesel, who've gone forever without cleaning it...I imagine that under normal operating conditions, the sensors accumulate only so much soot and that the operating parameters of the sensors are designed to accommodate that. Just like EGR systems; they may look all yucky and gross, but that's just part of the design, and that's how they're designed to work.
To comment on the fuel economy, I have noticed that it's not quite as good as it was when new, but not far off overall.
41 - 60 of 111 Posts
Chevrolet Cruze Forums
CruzeTalk.com forum, news, discussions and the best community for owners to discuss all things related to the Chevy Cruze.
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Cruze CTRL
75 Replies
Cruzing12
54 Replies
Valpo Cruze
50 Replies
Recommended Communities
