Ahsai

Good to hear the progress but did I read it right that your current engine oil is 2 yrs old?! No, I would not put seafoam as it could dislodge the accumulated gunk and wash them toward the lifters, which have dead end oil holes. I would just change that oil and filter (of course check for debris in the filter too). Keep in mind even if there are no error codes and you fixed the variocam activation issue, there's still too much cam deviation that needs to be addressed eventually.

Fair enough. I think evetually gcp got everthing working and he was able to activate variocam so the only thing left was the bank1 vs bank 2 description. Perhaps both sides were already too fed up to continue working out the only remaining issue. It's a shame but I can imagine.

Yes, I understand the cases you are talking about but I think it's more fair to treat these as case by case basis. I cannot comment on the other cases as I have not been following those. For this case though, all it takes is a simple checking on Durametric side whether it's indeed a typo or not. It does not involve complicated testing of the cable nor the users setup/car. It's not like this bank1 bank2 value can be flipped by the laptop or the cable. It's very simple. Either it's a typo or it's not. If it's a typo, they can just fix it, benefit all the other DME 7.2 users, got the royalty back from gcp, got a good rep and kudos from the forum. Win-win situation. Why is it so difficult? Is it too much to ask for? Is it fair to gcp? Remember gcp could read the cam deviations w/o any problems. That means his car, the obdii port, his laptop all work just find so clearly it's not a connection or playform issue. Again, I'm just focusing on this specific case.

I think in most cases people are happy with Durametric because it's the only economical scanner that can read vital info such as cam deviations. However, when it doesn't work or worse gives wrong info, I can understand the frustration to the user. The way I view this case is a simple typo in the error code description triggered a lot of unnecessary grief making the owner not trusting Durametric anymore. It's just unfortunate. I would think Durametric could have handled it better by as least checking their codes and confirm or deny whether there's a typo or there are other explanations. In fact, if it's truly a typo, Durametric should thank gcp for reporting the bug.

This one? https://www.ecstuning.com/Search/Y_Pipe/ES1881669/

The DME is under t e right rear seat parcel shelf so it's not anywhere close to the floor but it should be obvious once you get to it. You can check for dampness.

I see now. Variocam works like this. It only activates above some rpm (2k?) and under some other conditions (e.g., oil temp greater than some temp). At idle it's not activated and that explains the engine idles OK despite the CEL. When the key is turned to the last position before cranking, +12v is supplied to pin 1 of BOTH solenoids so you should check you have +12v at the solenoid connector pin 1 (test #1). The DME is connected to pin 2 of the solenoids individually and it grounds each solenoid individually to activate them. That's how Durametric activates each solenoids like you did in post #21. Durmatric commands the DME to ground the solenoid individually. Since the solenoids normally operate only when the engine is not idling, when you activate it during idle, the engine will run rough, which is normal and expected. You wrote in post #21, "Bank 1 start increases idle but not by much, idle is rough. Bank 2 start makes no perceptible difference, idle is still rough" This proves Bank 1 variocam activates correctly and not bank 2. We also saw that bank2 timing was not advanced together with bank 1 in the same post. Further proving that bank 2 solenoid is not activated. 3 possibilities: 1) The solenoid is not getting either the +12v or the ground from the DME 2) The solenoid gets power alright but it doesn't work 3) DME itself is bad so it doesn't supply ground properly to the solenoid Test #2: unlpug the solenoid and check the resistance of the solenoid pins. Should be ~13 ohms Test #3: Use a 9v battery to power the solenoid +ve on pin 1 and -ve on pin 2 and try to feel if anything moves inside the solenoid Test #4: Disconnect the battery and unplug the DME. Check continuity between its plug V/pin 3 and pin 2 of the bank 2 solenoid. You should have continuity. Check short to ground by continuity test between plug V/pin 3 and the chassis. Should have infinite resistance. Test #5: This will need engine running. Unplug the solenoid and connect a small peanut 12v bulb (3~5w) to it and rev the engine beyond 2k like you did in post #21. The bulb should light up. Test #6: Unplug the solenoid. When engine is idling, power the solenoid like in Test #3. Engine idle should change. Also check out another post I helped another owner. His uses DME 5.2 (non-egas) so it's a little different than yours (DME 7.2 e-gas) but the principles are the same. http://rennlist.com/forums/996-forum/815258-variocam-actuator-trigger-voltage.html Photos of DME here http://www.renntech.org/forums/topic/33878-dme-location-for-a-99-996-cabrio/

My point was bank1 and bank2 could be a simple typo in the error dscription by Durametric but that doesn't mean all the other cam deviation readings are wrong because it's a lot harder to get those wrong. The reaosn is those values are reported by the DME dynamically in real-time. Durametric just queries the DME and displays exactly what the DME returns. What have been taken off so far? Based on that I can probably suggest some testing. Also do you still have the Durametric? We could use its variocam activation functions you used before in earlier posts.

Don't get discouraged by that Durametric mistake (could be just a simple typo on Durametric part. Durametric mistake is quite rare though I must say). Its capability to activate the variocam and reading cam deviations already helped you a lot. Like John said, it's obvious from the Durametric cam readings that you have two problems: 1) Cam deviation out of spec (spec is 0 degree with +/-6 degree tolerance. You're way above that on both banks) in BOTH BANKS 2) You have a variocam activation problem in BANK 2 only. Note this problem can be a few things: transistor inside the DME/bad wiring/bad solenoid/bad actuator. You need some strategic troubleshooting to pinpoint the exact culprit.

gcp, please re-read John's and my posts. I believe all your questions have been answered. I think my major confuion is you keep saying P1325 is bank 1 because Durametric indicated bank 1 and you keep looking at bank 1. Per Porsche diagnostic manual, P1325 is bank 2 so it seems Durametric is wrong in that regard. The cam sesnor is the hall effect type, which needs to be powered before it can be tested properly. Not all electronics components can be checked by a simple resistance test.

I re-read this thread and I must say I'm very confused. 1) What year and model is your 996? 2) P1325 should be "Camshaft adjustment bank 2" (not bank 1). Bank 2 is the passenger side. 3) P1325 complains about the bank 2 variocam activation not as expected and it can only be tripped if there's no cam sensor errors. the code is not complaining about any sensor! 4) Cam sensor has 3 pins. There's no documented resistance test for those pins but it's irrelevant anyway given the above. Usually you test if the power supply pin gets 5v when the key is ON. The signal pin you have to check it with an oscilloscope when the engine is running. 5) What are the exact codes you currently have?

Guys, this thread was 2yrs old :)

P1124 is bank 1 running lean P1126 is bank 2 runnng lean P1397 is bank 2 cam sensor P0140/1411 SAI not operating properly P0446 evap sutoff valve P0102 MAF Loos like you have some vacuum leak, which can also affect the SAI operation. Can you hear the SAI pump runnng the first minute of cold start?

These are not easy to deal with codes. I suggest at least get a scanner first if you want to troubleshoot these yourself. Also expect quite involved processes sine these involve the SAI system, the evap system, and the MAF.

^This. Just replace the coils if they are original.

Congrats! So any idea what helped set the flag at the end?

:thumbup:

Plots look good. I think it's time to visit a shop to force the tests.

BTW, I just checked your log today briefly. The fuel trims and MAF are beautiful now. STFT +/- a few % and MAF at 4~5g/s at idle. Perfecto!

Glad to hear that! This must be the longest MAF thread on renntech and thanks for the reps. Appreciate those. Looking back...this could have been solved on page 1 after post #14 :)

Thanks for the update and I'll keep my fingers crossed for you :)

The steady 5.2 in H2O is a very good sign.

Based on your last drive log (4:19pm today), everything looks pretty normal now! Warm idle MAF reads 4~5g/s..right on. Would be good to log the O2 sensor readings as well. Let's see if it cures the cold start issue on Thurs.

Yes John. You, Loren and me all had mentioned the MAF but the OP did replace the newly replaced MAF with yet another new MAF in post #31. I assumed that was a Bosch unit as a response to our comments but it was not. So this will be the first time a Bosch MAF is fit in this case.

That sounds promising. I look forward to seeing less crazy MAF reading. In your old logs, a lot of times, the engine was pegged at full rich with no a/f control at all at idle. O2 sensors flat lined at 0.7v or so (rich) and not swinging. Yes, those AOS o-rings are easy to crush. I replaced all 4 on mine. You can use some rubber grease (or engine oil) to lube the new one to make it easier to install and less prone to damage as well. Also make sure the locking connectors click.