Another Detonation thread. (DI failure related) Input Please.
 

Alright so I've read the hell out of most of the DI failure threads. It seems the common understanding is that this failure is caused by detonation, which absolutely makes sense. This detonation is caused by "fast shifts" (>0.6 sec as per defined by a Toyota) where the computer cannot compensate quick enough and the engine experiences detonation on some (or all) of the cylinders for the first few revs upon of the reapplication of throttle....

While I can hear detonation on a really quick shift, it seems I can hear it a LOT more often than that now that I am looking for it. I only use Shell VPower 91. When my car is fully warmed up, most of the time if i quickly apply throttle I will have a few knocks, whether I shift or not. (Due to my previous experience with autos, I know for sure it is detonation). In the sheet supposedly taken from Toyota which re-tuned vehicles in south africa, it claimed this issue ONLY happened above 5200 RPM where our ECU won't pull timing.)

While I have seen several threads saying my DI seals are shot if i hear this detonation, I disagree. I have only ever heard one actual "pop" from the car, and it runs great with no CELs.

SO, where should I go with this? Take it into the dealer and take a tech with me and show him/her I can make preignition happen on command? I know I have no issues now, but from daily driving this will undoubtedly lead to DI seal failure or worse...

I was thinking I would take a printout of that sheet about the tune in south africa.... Opinions?

Just found this thread, I'll move my shit there. Mods feel free to delete.


http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showt...t=42183&page=2

This is a myth, there is no official recognition of the issue by either Subaru or Toyota, NONE.

Just keep driving it. As soon as you get a CEL kill the engine immediately and have it towed to the dealer.

And welcome to the club, mine sounds like the 4th of july over 5k in 3rd gear (under load) but no CEL and 5k rpm in 3rd gear is considered reckless driving by the dealer (> 75 mph), so its a waiting game for most of us at this point.


I am guessing Toyota's silence on this issue has something to do with the late 2014 launch. They definitely want to clear out all the 13's before the 14's hit the dealers. Wouldn't be surprised if 14's come with upgraded cylinder heads.

So you're saying the Toyota South Africa TSB is a fake?

Toyota is a very large corporation. If one division finds an issue, it may take some time for that info to filter back through the rest of the company. Furthermore, anytime a manufacturer changes an ECM program, they have to certify it with the EPA in order to install that new program here in the U.S. That takes time as well.

It's not a TSB.

Make that the launch of 2016 FR-S and I can try to start believing it, maybe.

This is Toyota not GM have faith. I am laying odds on a new part number for 2014 cylinder heads at 1:4 I'll play bookie, pm me to place your bets :iono:.

Being that you're such an expert, how do you think an "upgraded cylinder head" is going to fix the issue? Keep in mind you're talking to an engine builder.

I'm not an expert. If I knew how to fix the issue I would. I am purely speculating at this point just like everyone else, the difference is a admit it, instead of claiming some obscure south African calibration of unknown source fixes the issue. We need solutions, not posturing and not denial, and not liars telling people the issue is fixed..

One hypothesis comes straight from Toyotas paper on the development of the D4-s. Which I have linked and copied several times (its a sticky in the engine subforum.)
Basically if the Port/DI ratio gets too high Toyota says the injector can get too hot (>150C) and deteriorate so when the paper was written port was turned off at WOT with d4-s.

With the FA20 port is not turned a off at WOT, assuming that a coolant passage was enough to keep the DI injector cool, possibly not enough cooling is happening and the cyinder head needs improved.

Being an engine builder perhaps you could add your own speculation? Have you looked at an FA20 head and seen the coolant flow in relation to the DI injectors, do you have any suggestions ?

Mr caped engine builder,

This is not the first car that has had issues with lack of cooling in the head sadly. The Mustang comes to mind.

Started back with the 03/04 Mustang cobra four valve cylinder heads (the Mach one also had these heads, but no supercharger to aggravate the problem more). Basically, cylinder 7&8 would fail because of a problem with a "heat pocket" in the cylinder heads. This heat would cause premature valve guide wear and in some cases, cylinder failure. This was "fixed" (created by forum members and venders mind you, not Ford) by pulling the freeze plug out and creating a direct rout back to the radiator, through a metal fitting mounted in the head and a hose running straight to the upper radiator hose just before the radiator. Having a very tight piston ring to wall clearance didn't help either.

Fast forward to the new mustangs and some are still having this issue. cylinder 8 keeps failing. So far, to my knowledge there hasn't been a single failure of cylinder 7&8 on cars that have installed this "head cooling mod," although, I haven't paid too close of attention since I bought the FRS.

If this is a heat issue, there is no reason why a revised head wouldn't help fix the issue, of course, like @regal pointed out, this depends on the routing of the cooling passeges on whether or not this is even a viable option. Since I have no idea what the passeges look like, I have no idea on it being a true solution.

Good point there seems to be fairly widespread agreement that the oil temps get too hot even with the stock car (one of the few things this forum agrees on.)

DI is a new realm for "engine builders" and all of us. I guess we shouldn't be surprised that Subaru has dropped the FA20 in favor of their own FA20DIT before the FA20 even finished its freshman year. Turbos really help DI engines meet that compromise of tuning for power, emissions, and reliability.

Hopefully with the help of the internet we will get resolution from Toyota. With CSGmike's story of two engines both failing for the same problem and subsequent warranty denial there are a lot of others out there with this issue but they can't be vocal for the fear of warranty denial, that's why this forum has been fairly silent about the issue.



Until then I am parked and man it sucks to drive my Yaris after driving the wonderful FR-S for almost a year :brokenheart: Without a doubt the FR-S is a $10k better car than an econobox, as long as Toyota nails reliability on the engine this car will be a huge success.

I haven't seen the coolant passage design on these heads. To be honest I don't want to delve into speculation on this as like you, I admit all of it is pretty useless. Until someone gets adventurous with their engine and posts the results we are truly throwing axes in the dark. Unfortunately I currently don't have the funds to be the adventurous one (Damn university)


:respekt: Another worthwhile post. You described the situation perfectly. (No sarcasm FYI) Once I can get SCCA to amend the regulations for STX class to allow an oil cooler, i will be going down that route immediately. Until then all I can do is try to take it easy.

Couple things, I did see the article about the turbo, but then also read that it wasn't for our cars. While I will admit that I know very little about turbo setups, I do, however know my fair share about supercharging setups. The simple solution to a turbo/oil cooler can be found in the tune. Some of the hard core trackers had an oil cooler for their cars, but most just fixed their heat issues in the tune. I had two tunes on my cobra. One for the street (basically a safe tune, but did have the potential to get hot), and an open track tune (less timing more fuel). While putting down less power, the car could take a beating, and run throughout the entire session without going into limp mode. There is no reason why a similar tune can't fix the detonation AND heat issues on the car. The trade off will be less power...which this engine really can't afford. Obviously just adjusting the tune at that point will have a smaller effect on the car (fuel at tip in), so I don't see that as being a bad option for a "fix." Being that my car is under warranty, I'm waiting on Toyota to actually do that fix without having to go to a third party tune.

As far as you not driving your car, you're crazy! :thumbup: I don't know how you can stay away from her! I get up every morning and figure out somewhere for me to go so I can drive her around. Daily driving the car doesn't seem to creat these issues, so I'm not overy concerned. I have 60k miles before I have to come up with my own solution. Until then, if a DI fails, I have a second car (Toyota also provides one), and I won't have to pay a penny to have it fixed. Win win! :burnrubber::burnrubber: The DI scare of 2013 is no reason not to enjoy your car and rack up mileage. :happy0180:
I know you won't respond to me, but the good news is that as far as I'm aware, no one has had issues with the DI system on these cars because of autox, which is AWESOME. Because there is only one shift in the beginning, the lean condition never arises. Furthermore, because the races are so short, there really isn't a need for an oil cooler. Obviously, if you plan to OT the car, it's a different story (longer sessions, more heat, higher RPM's, more shifting), but there should be no negative failure from the DI system from autox.

BTW if you have a DI issue please vote here:

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=38397