Airbox changes and CEL

[drledford93]

Hey all,

So I've had my '07 MS3 GT for exactly one week now and I decided to put a K&N filter (drop in) and take the bottom of the airbox off. (It was held in by zip ties.) Everything was fine for the first ~25 miles of driving until the CEL came on and the turbo would not spool up. I took it to the dealer and they said there were 15 (!!!!) codes on the ECU and when flashed, 9 came back, including a boost spike and one that said the ECU could not recognize the position of the crank.

I've done this mod to several different cars without a problem in the past. It has 600 miles on it now and I have only taken it over 4k rpm 3-4 times for break in (which I learned wasn't necessary...:o)

Has anyone seen this before, and if so, did I just screw myself in doing this small mod? Any insight would be appreciated...

Daniel <==Not feeling too smart right now...

[Abaddon]

Well, if it cant find the crank position.. then its probably the crank position sensor.. which you could not have effected with your "mod". Unless you somehow pulled or cut a wire harness when you did it.

[drledford93]

I didn't pull or cut any wires to do this, thankfully. Has anyone else had a crank sensor go out before?? Just curious...

Daniel

[desperado-c]

I didn't pull or cut any wires to do this, thankfully. Has anyone else had a crank sensor go out before?? Just curious...

Daniel

I had one go on my minivan. Ran like it was on 1/2 it's cylinders. No way your mod had anything to do with that. This guy did have a bad crank sensor: http://www.msprotege.com/forum/showpost.php?p=3283959&postcount=1.

As far as other CELS, the drop-in with no bottom on the box might have leaned the charge out way too much. More than the ECU could compensate for. I don't know how that would cause overboost, but I suppose it might have. Maybe somebody more knowledgeable can weigh in.

[Craighjr]

Put it back to stock, disconnect your battery for 5 minutes. Drive it like hell for a week and see if that light comes back.

[SharkDiver]

I put a K&N filter and I cut alot of holes in my stock box and didnt get any CELs.They were 3" holes and I put about 8 in it.It also sounded louder then my cai.

[LENNY127]

that mod would have nothing to do with your issues unless you disconnected ,cut , burned a wire or two. the k & n is not a dry filter so in theory it could affect your maf but again that has nothing to do with the crank sensor, I would first disconnect the battery , let it reset , try it again stock with og filter and see.....after that if it persits let the mazda grease monkeys figure it out.

[drledford93]

Thanks guys! It had to spend the night at the dealer and I have yet to hear from them about the prognosis. I did put it back to stock before I took it to the dealer. I'll let you guys know what happens...

BTW, they gave me a Kia as a replacement. I feel dirty...

Daniel

[drledford93]

Now they're saying it's the cam sensor, not the crank sensor...does this make any difference? I still wouldn't think so, but...

Daniel

[Craighjr]

Doesn't matter which your under warranty unless you doof'ed and screwed something up. My dealer gave me a chevy cobalt with a am/fm radio only I guess thats class compaired to a kia.

[drledford93]

I don't see how I could have cut or fried any wires...it's just the removal of the bottom of the airbox! Sorry, I'm just a bit stressed! (I was supposed to get my wheels powder coated black today...)

Daniel

[Abaddon]

It may have just failed...

Anything electronic can fail at any time for any reason; including but not limited to manufacturing errors, water, corrosion, the dark side of the force, vibration.. etc.

[Rotus8]

It may have just failed...

Anything electronic can fail at any time for any reason; including but not limited to manufacturing errors, water, corrosion, the dark side of the force, vibration.. etc.
In the electronics industry we have a thing called the "bathtub curve". The reliability of electronics is a bit lower at the beginning of life, then gets better, and then gets worse again when it nears end of life, thus forming the shape. Some early failures are a fact of life. It's statistics and you got bit. Sorry.

[drledford93]

That's ok if it's reliability...not a problem. I can understand that. I'm just a bit nervous about me causing the failure. As it seems now, it doesn't look like I did...

Daniel

[desperado-c]

That's ok if it's reliability...not a problem. I can understand that. I'm just a bit nervous about me causing the failure. As it seems now, it doesn't look like I did...

Daniel

Maybe Rotus can correct me if I'm wrong, but it's hard to imagine how you could have caused the engine to operate outside the parameters of a cam sensor. If that's the problem, and they deny warranty coverage, it's just b/c they're screwing with you. Maybe b/c they think you're screwing with them given all the codes that were set off. Who knows. Anyway, if they do screw with you over this, you might want to start looking around for the next closest dealer.

P.S. Hey, Rotus, from your avatar, etc., looks like you dropped 3-speed transmission in your car. Now that's REALLY old school, even for an old fart.

[drledford93]

Just to sum it up, the MAF sensor was "loose" and caused all of this. He blamed me for it, but I didn't touch it! Dealers...

Daniel

[drledford93]

Ok, so the Mazda techs said that K&N filters (OEM replacements) throw oil onto the MAF, causing it to malfunction. I know a bunch of you use K&N stuff (as I have for the past 10+ years), so have any of you had problems with the drop in filters? Just curious...

Daniel

[fourthmeal]

the problem with K&N Filters is that its way too easy to over-oil the filter, which will coat the MAF.

[drledford93]

This one was brand new and out-of-the-box, fwiw.

Daniel

[desperado-c]

This one was brand new and out-of-the-box, fwiw.

Daniel

Yeah, the problem happens when the owner cleans and re-oils the filter, not with the ones just out of the box oiled by the factory. Accordingly, your use of a drop-in was highly unlikely to cause the MAF to be coated with oil (if it ever was).

Also hard to see how you could have loosened the MAF just by removing the bottom of the airbox. Mine was quite firmly attached when I pulled it out of the stock box to put it in the CAI. Even if it was loose and shaking around a fair amount, it seems the screws would keep it securely in place.

What was the problem according to them? The MAF got oiled up or the MAF was loose? Or both? I smell BS.

I think when they see an overboost CEL they figure you're up to no good and start looking for whatever reasons they can find to deny warranty coverage. If you already came clean with them about the K&N and removing the bottom of the box and they're still screwing with you, sounds like you've got a fight on your hands.

[drledford93]

Um, I did not tell them about the removal of the bottom of the airbox. They covered it and are replacing the MAF.

It was kinda amusing--they said they fixed it by tightening the MAF (I didn't loosen it, but they tried to say I did) and as they're driving it up for me to pick up at the door, the CEL came back on and they are overnighting another MAF to be installed tomorrow morning. At this rate, I hope that's it.

I also have K&N on my side wanting the original MAF for testing at an independent lab...this could get interesting...stay tuned...

Daniel

[Craighjr]

Um, I did not tell them about the removal of the bottom of the airbox. They covered it and are replacing the MAF.

It was kinda amusing--they said they fixed it by tightening the MAF (I didn't loosen it, but they tried to say I did) and as they're driving it up for me to pick up at the door, the CEL came back on and they are overnighting another MAF to be installed tomorrow morning. At this rate, I hope that's it.

I also have K&N on my side wanting the original MAF for testing at an independent lab...this could get interesting...stay tuned...

Daniel

Well fat chance of mazda giving you the sensor. Under warranty they have to return that to get paid. Even then mazda may deny the claim when they see k&n oil on it and the the dealer will eat the cost of the repair.

[fourthmeal]

Then there is the fun part about how an auto maker (like Mazda) must allow other brands that are established to make replacement parts for their cars (like the airfilter.) They are not allowed to require you to use Mazda only parts. If there is any part on a car that is designed to be replaced regularly (filters, as a primary example), they must allow the aftermarket to make products that work. If they deny aftermarket companies the ability to do this, then Mazda would have to supply you for FREE the replacement parts for life.

So, K&N, fully knowing this, builds filters that should replace OEM parts, per this design criteria. If this part causes failure in the car, then K&N must step up to the plate. Which, BTW, it sounds like they are doing. Especially if you just dropped the filter in. INTERESTING, and slightly convoluted.

Good luck, and post some results and lets get some data on this issue.

[Craighjr]

Then there is the fun part about how an auto maker (like Mazda) must allow other brands that are established to make replacement parts for their cars (like the airfilter.) They are not allowed to require you to use Mazda only parts. If there is any part on a car that is designed to be replaced regularly (filters, as a primary example), they must allow the aftermarket to make products that work. If they deny aftermarket companies the ability to do this, then Mazda would have to supply you for FREE the replacement parts for life.

So, K&N, fully knowing this, builds filters that should replace OEM parts, per this design criteria. If this part causes failure in the car, then K&N must step up to the plate. Which, BTW, it sounds like they are doing. Especially if you just dropped the filter in. INTERESTING, and slightly convoluted.

Good luck, and post some results and lets get some data on this issue.

No dry oem replacement Wix, Kem, Napa, Carquest, Autozone, Pepboys and all the others know that. K&N is not a stock replacement. K&N is a wet type filter which is not stock. The dealer could have just cleaned his maf element but he is getting a new one that he has to wait for. I don't know I would just want my car back faster with a clean maf.

[drledford93]

No dry oem replacement Wix, Kem, Napa, Carquest, Autozone, Pepboys and all the others know that. K&N is not a stock replacement. K&N is a wet type filter which is not stock. The dealer could have just cleaned his maf element but he is getting a new one that he has to wait for. I don't know I would just want my car back faster with a clean maf.

They did not offer to "just clean" the MAF. Granted, this could have worked, but they did not put this up as an option. What they insinuated was that the MAF was totally dead...I pretty much had no choice but to leave the car.

Daniel

[destrux]

If I were you I'd insist they find a repair. Codes dont just come up for no reason, there's ALWAYS something wrong if a code comes up. It might be a simple reason, but it's never just a fluke. I also seriously doubt the air filter itself caused it, but it might have been something you bumped (that you might not even realise you bumped) when changing the filter. Heck, it could have even been caused by a mouse eating some wires (they love copper for some reason) or something boucing up off the road and hitting some wires underneath. I see it all the time.

btw... are the dealers you guys go to for warranty work also kia and chevy dealers? I asked what the loaners are at our local dealer and they lend volvos or mazdas only... I'd actually be pretty pissed if I had to be without my $25k car because of a warranty or recall repair and they gave me some $5k cavalier to drive. I'd at least want a base model 3.

[GoFast]

Dear K&N Consumer:

K&N Engineering, Inc., is informed that some automobile dealers and manufacturers are telling their customers that the factory warranty on their motor vehicles is “void,” if an original equipment (OE) replacement air filter, manufactured by K&N, has been installed on their vehicles. K&N finds such instances disturbing, and while it does not purport to give legal advice, K&N would like to refer you to the federal Consumer Product Warranties law, often referred to as the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which states, in part, in Title 15, United States Code, Section 2302, subdivision (c), as follows:

“No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name; except that the prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the [Federal Trade] Commission if –

(1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted product will function properly only if the article or service so identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and

(2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public interest. The Commission shall identify in the Federal Register, and permit public comment on, all applications for waiver of the prohibition of this subsection, and shall publish in the Federal Register its disposition of any such application, including the reasons therefor.”

Under this federal statute, a manufacturer, who issues a warranty on your motor vehicle, is prohibited from requiring you to use a particular brand of air filter, oil filter, or other service or maintenance item, unless such item is provided, free of charge, under your warranty or unless the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) waives this prohibition against the manufacturer. K&N is unaware of any exemption or waiver granted by the FTC to any motor vehicle manufacturer, which pertains to air filters or oil filters.

K&N interprets this law to also prohibit the motor vehicle manufacturer from restricting your use of a particular brand of air filter, oil filter, etc. K&N’s interpretation of this law is consistent with the interpretation given it by the FTC, the government agency responsible for the interpretation and enforcement of this federal law.

The rules and regulations adopted by the FTC, to govern the interpretation and enforcement of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, are set forth in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 16 - Commercial Practices, Chapter I - Federal Trade Commission, Subchapter G - Rules, Regulations, Statements and Interpretations Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, Part 700 - Interpretations Under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Contained within these rules and regulations is Section 700.10, which states, in relevant part (with specific language highlighted by K&N), as follows:
“(c) No warrantor may condition the continued validity of a warranty on the use of only authorized repair service and/or authorized replacement parts for non-warranty service and maintenance. For example, provisions such as, "This warranty is void if service is performed by anyone other than an authorized 'ABC' dealer and all replacement parts must be genuine 'ABC' parts," and the like, are prohibited where the service or parts are not covered by the warranty. These provisions violate the Act in two ways. First, they violate the section 102(c) ban against tying arrangements. Second, such provisions are deceptive under section 110 of the Act, because a warrantor cannot, as a matter of law, avoid liability under a written warranty where a defect is unrelated to the use by a consumer of "unauthorized" articles or service. This does not preclude a warrantor from expressly excluding liability for defects or damage caused by such "unauthorized" articles or service; nor does it preclude the warrantor from denying liability where the warrantor can demonstrate that the defect or damage was so caused.”

We think this FTC rule is pretty clear and unambiguous. Please note that the FTC requires the “warrantor” (this would, generally, be your motor vehicle manufacturer) to “demonstrate” that the defect in or damage to your vehicle was caused by your installation or use of a K&N air or oil filter, or other “unauthorized” part, before a warranty claim can be denied. We contend that this requires credible proof as to the cause of a failure and not merely your dealer’s guess, speculation or unfounded opinion as to the cause.

Therefore, K&N considers any threat to void your factory warranty, or the actual voiding of your factory warranty, solely for the installation of a K&N replacement air filter or oil filter, to be a violation of federal law.

The foregoing addresses only your rights and protection under federal law. Of course, you may have greater rights under the consumer warranty laws applicable in your state.

If you have encountered a motor vehicle dealer, who has failed and refused to “demonstrate” or prove, as federal law requires, that your K&N air filter necessitated a repair for which warranty coverage has been denied, or a manufacturer, who refuses to perform warranty repairs on your vehicle, merely because you have installed a K&N replacement air filter or based on inaccurate information from your dealer, then we ask that you request that the dealer or manufacturer set forth, in writing, the warranty denial, together with a written statement as to the specific reasons for the denial of warranty repairs, and that you send a copy of this written statement to K&N. We also ask that you direct your dealer and manufacturer to the federal law quoted above. K&N assists consumers in this situation through the K&N Consumer Protection Pledge. For details please go to the K&N website at KNFilters.com or contact our customer service department at 800-858-3333.

Please keep in mind that a motor vehicle dealer is, generally, not the “warrantor” of your vehicle. Your dealer may be assisting you as much as possible in getting the manufacturer to cover repairs of your vehicle under warranty, but the factory may still refuse to cover the repairs. If this happens, then there may be nothing further that the dealership can do, and it should not be blamed for the actions of your vehicle’s warrantor. A dealership’s control over the approval of a warranty repair is usually limited to properly diagnosing and reporting the cause of the repair. K&N only takes issue with those dealerships who advise consumers that the mere installation of a K&N air filter on a vehicle “voids” the factory warranty, or they convey to the manufacturer an unsubstantiated opinion or conclusion that a K&N air filter caused an engine or component failure, without any objective proof to support such a statement, which results in the denial of a legitimate warranty repair.

Sincerely,

STEVE ROGERS,
President & CEO
K&N Engineering, Inc.

[drledford93]

The above was told to me tonight by a K&N service rep. Pretty solid stuff...

Daniel

[fourthmeal]

LOL...That is exactly what I said before....

Then there is the fun part about how an auto maker (like Mazda) must allow other brands that are established to make replacement parts for their cars (like the airfilter.) They are not allowed to require you to use Mazda only parts. If there is any part on a car that is designed to be replaced regularly (filters, as a primary example), they must allow the aftermarket to make products that work. If they deny aftermarket companies the ability to do this, then Mazda would have to supply you for FREE the replacement parts for life.

Under this federal statute, a manufacturer, who issues a warranty on your motor vehicle, is prohibited from requiring you to use a particular brand of air filter, oil filter, or other service or maintenance item, unless such item is provided, free of charge, under your warranty or unless the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) waives this prohibition against the manufacturer. K&N is unaware of any exemption or waiver granted by the FTC to any motor vehicle manufacturer, which pertains to air filters or oil filters.


I just de-legalfied it. Except I put for life, and in reality it is only while under warranty. Close though.

[ERIC-TC]

Oh by the way...

Uncorking the intake on the MS3 will result in boost spikes. Folks with CAI see this all the time, especially in the higher gears. I experienced it myself as well spiking all the way to 20 psi. On the MS3 w/ stock intake the boost spikes to 16-17psi. Make a large reduction on intake restrictions and the boost will spike even higher and with it the engine error codes will come.

[fourthmeal]

If I had to extrapolate all the data from all the CAI results...I'd say the reason for the spiking in the aftermarket CAI systems come from the fact that they are not 100% exactly the right diameter at the MAF housing, changing the calibration that the OEM MAF housing and MAF have.

CPE seems to be the only ones who have nipped this.

[destrux]

What about the MS CAI?

[fourthmeal]

since AEM made it for MS, I think they are in the same boat. Bad move, IMO.

[ERIC-TC]

If I had to extrapolate all the data from all the CAI results...I'd say the reason for the spiking in the aftermarket CAI systems come from the fact that they are not 100% exactly the right diameter at the MAF housing, changing the calibration that the OEM MAF housing and MAF have.

CPE seems to be the only ones who have nipped this.

The ECU on the MS3 controlls the boost pressure in two ways:

#1 It does not allow the throttle body to go wide open while you are buidling boost.
#2 It controls the duty cycle of a selenoid that sends boost pressure to the wastegate actuator.

If you reduce intake and or exhaust restriction the boost curb on the car changes. Unless the ECU learns how the car builds boost the compressor will spool too quickly causing a boost spike. If the spike stays around for more than a second or two the car will do a soft fuel cut. It appears that the MS3 does not re-adjust the gain on the wastegate boost solenoid. Otherwise the car would learn the new boost curb and avoid the spikes -but the boost spikes never go away...

Folks w/ CAI and boost gauges record boost spikes all the time in the higher gears. This has been well documented. It's not so much a factor of whether the CAI inner diameter for the MAF is 1/16" more or less than the stock air-box ID -It's more a result of reducing the restriction on the intake.

[fourthmeal]

I am definitely considering your point, but I think it all stems from a slightly inaccurate flow count from the MAF. If the MAF is accurate, then the computer's computations will be accurate compared to current situations. The computer modulates those two parts you mentioned, no doubt about that. But I think that it is forced to modulate them when the MAF sensor is giving false information.

There is one way to verify this, naturally. Get a MAF adaptor that is exactly the same size as the factory one, and get a nice highflow filter attached. From there, we should be able to sample the results.