Jump to content

2003 yukon 5.3 misfires


silveradosid

Recommended Posts

Posted

working on a 2003 yukon with the 5.3. it misfires on cylinders 5 and 8 and has low effiency code for bank 1. the misfires you can feel at idle but doesnt trip the ses light. as soon as you get to 2500 rpm ses starts flashing and scanner shows misfires on those two cylinders. if you take the engine up to 3000 rpm and higher the misfires stop. i have changed all the plugs and wires and the coils on 5 and 8 but that has not changed the misfires. i also changed the downstream O2 sensor on bank1 looking for some help as everything i have done has not changed a thing. the engine has 120k miles on it

Posted

I'd put money on an intake gasket leak.

 

Does the condition seem to improve with heat? In other words, does it run pretty bad cold, then get better as it warms up? Fuel trims improving with temperature? If so, it's a vacuum leak, either from the intake gaskets, or any of the vac lines.

 

Flashing light means a cat-melting misfire. If you have emission testing where you live, I wouldn't drive it too far like that. Cats aren't cheap.

 

A bad MAF can do this too, if it's making the engine run too lean. Normally you'll see a code for that, or a Random Misfire (P0300) code, lean codes, or any combination of these.

Posted

thanks jsdirt when i changed the plugs they all showed that it is running lean, all of them looked white. temperature doesnt seem to effect how the engine runs. fuel trims are constantly fluctuating. i am trying to get this pos ready for an emission test. the only codes are misfire and the cat code

Posted

today i cleaned the maf and the throttle body ran the engine no change while it was running i sprayed starting fluid all around the intake and vacuum hoses made no change in engine rpm so i think the intake gaskets are good. i also hooked up a fuel pressure gauge at koeo has 55 psi running at idle it is 45 psi i am beginning to believe the cats are plugged

Posted

Best way to check for plugged cats is by removing one or both upstream o2 sensors - if it runs better, then that's your problem. Also using an old school vacuum gauge can tell you alot, too. Low vacuum can be caused by plugged cats (as can valve train issues).

 

To absolutely rule out intake gaskets, I use just plain water in a plastic soda bottle with a 1/8" or larger hole drilled in the cap - squirt all along the gasket surfaces when the engine is cold, just after firing it up. Usually if the leak is big enough, you'll hear the water getting sucked in. You'll also get a big change in RPM, even if you can't hear any slurping water.

Posted

i am going to hook up a vacuum gauge just to confirm the scan tool is correct because it only shows 12 hg at idle which i know is to low unfortunately every time i get to work on the vehicle it is already hot many thx for your help jsdirt

Posted

No problem.

 

You have to add the MAP or BARO reading to than number - sounds like it's pretty close to normal.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • LOL west coast they need to see what the midwest actually has.  We have been holding at 2.99 for a few weeks now.  Even by work they have come down to 3.02 for the past week.
    • Diesel or gas?  The 37s will obviously, drastically reduce mpg, but the gasser will take a bigger hit to mpg, and power.  Rough guess, but I'd estimate at least a  2mpg hit on the diesel, and up to 4on the gasser. Maybe more.    I wouldn't sweat a gear change on a duramax at all, and unlikely on the gasser either. You're obviously not concerned with acceleration or towing, and the 10spd will find itself in the right gear without much hunting, if any.    If towing, mpg and acceleration are a concern, you're doing the wrong mods.  Either leave it alone, or do the lift/tires and let the chips fall where they may. 
    • I understand. It is disturbing to think a manufacture asks so much and gives so little in engineering support. This is not a GM issues, this is a greed issue and one the ALL practice.    My intent was not to remove the wind from anyone's sail but rather to point out the areas deficient so that they can be discussed with improvements the goal. But to do that you have to know the truth and what that truth is.    The commercial interest are honed in on a few select issues in which they control all the variables and are not forthcoming in the least with their customers about the details. Failure is the only thing that drives these people to improvement. One way not to fail it to manage public "expectations". The set a bar they can clear and put their thumbs under the suspenders with chest puffed.... Only the internal data tells the story fully. As we don't have access to that for decades then we have to generate it ourselves. UOA's with data that matters.  
    • I had skimmed through that article when you posted the link and honestly I felt rather defeated in a sense and realized that all these years in changing oil that in fact putting in what I was told was a good quality oil was probably not filtered as well as it should be although the filter put on the engine would be what ( as long as it never went into bypass mode ) would be the final filtering of the new oil that the engine components would first see, but then the filtering media itself is not up to par to what is ideal because a full flow filter would be too restrictive to filter fine enough for the engines best outcome in the long run. Only one of our tractors over the years which was a Versatile with a 855 Cummins had a separate bypass filter, some engine manufacturers did spec a partial bypass system within the main oil filter but I don't believe any other trucks or equipment I was servicing used such a filter. No doubt a product like the Amsoil bypass system is of benefit as long as nothing goes sideways with the extra plumbing and filter such as a rupture/leak that could cause the oil to pump out of the engine ( yes that Versatile had a remote canister with hoses routed to it as well ). With the idiot egr system on a diesel and as a result forcing a lot more soot into the oil, that certainly isn't helping the diesel engines cause or as you pointed out the GDI engine issue with creating more soot and aside from having a fancy secondary filtering system, changing the oil more often helping lower the total soot load.     So oil manufacturing and the end product is not something one can control and I wonder if there are specs on what various oil packaging companies produce in particle count or size. As to the filtering, if the OEM is not designing a filter size and spec that is really what it could be, they too are short changing the end user and so what is the answer. Of course as you say the oil side can only do so much if the air side isn't keeping up its end of the picture and air filters are only so efficient and if in a dusty environment such as farm or construction or driving gravel roads there is a lot of dirt to filter out and some of that ends up into the air stream.    Of course the irony in places like where I am where they dump the salt on the highways but also will mix in some calcium or outright pure calcium for problem road area's, or using calcium as dust control on gravel roads, the vehicle that gets used in that environment may rust out before a properly engineered engine and maintenance finally wears out so one has to face that reality in the rust belt. 
    • Has anyone run these on their 2500?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...