All Dicso TD5 owners change your MAF sensor now!

This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.

borntobemild

Active Member
Posts
109
Location
Sheffield
Hi all,

Recently bought a DII TD5 (2000) after many years of LR's, last one a 90. First thing I bought was a NANOCOM. Got mine off the internet you don't have to pay £230.

Nanocom gives so much information that first I was swamped. Slowly looking at all forums both here and abroad I started to learn. As the TD5 was a good price I decided that I was willing to spend a couple of hundred quid to make it run better as I thought it should.

The readings at first terrified me. I logged them as my starting point and then cleared them. After every fuel fill, approx. 570 miles I checked the fault codes. What a relief they all disappeared. Some one had been looking after this machine but it still didn't pull like it should.

Now I had a staring point to improve its performance. This was a Disco showing no diagnostic faults and yet it didn't drive as well as I expected it to.

First thing, according to all you lot here is get rid of the EGR set up. Imediate result. Difficult to quantify but certainly an improvement and the knowledge that your not throwing more crap into your engine.

Secondly a free flowing filter and Hiclones. I know there's a lot of cynicism out there about these magic devices but having run them in my old 90 the difference was amazing then so I thought I'd give them another go.

The Hiclone before the turbo gives the biggest and most noticable difference. The turbo does kick in a lot earlier. Not so sure about the Hiclone before the inlet manifold. Do it on the cheap and only go for the one before the turbo.

At this point I had a fuel consumption comparison to make. First tank 29.68 mpg, second tank 31.28 mpg. Yes I know that fuel consumption varies enormously but I was encouraged by this.

After trawling the Australian websites for Disco2 stuff (very informative lot they are) I found a thread about electronic diagnosis. It tells you what 'normal readings' are for a Nancom.

I had recorded all my fuelling parameters between each improvement to see what could be gained. The Aussie guys said that a Disco TD5 should be pulling at tickover between 55 and 65 Kg/Hr fresh air on the Nanocom readings and plus 500 at full power. Looking back on my readings I had a maximum flow rate was 32-33 at tickover. The obvious thing to do was check out the MAF sensor.

Luckily I had bought a pile of stuff from someone and he threw in a brand new MAF sensor, it was sitting in my cellar.

I took the old MAF sensor off and it looked clean and tidy. They have been descibed as coated in dust/rust/oil etc, mine looked brand new.....but

Fitted the new one this morning and WOW! All of a sudden the thing pulls like a train and showers you with compliments, well I made the last bit up but what a difference. It pulls smoothly throught the rev range from incredicly low revs and the acceleration is collosal (don't forget the Hiclones and filter).

Well the results are in and after connecting the Nanocom it tells me that at tickover I now have readings of between 52 - 53. That looks like new engine readings to me.

So if you want to improve the performance of your TD5 dramatically change your MAF sensor now! This should be treated as a service item and not a 'wait until it goes wrong item'.

I will post at the end week and let you know if the readings when pulling increase from the present 220-240 to what the Aussies say I should be getting.

I may also in time take out the Hiclones when I've got some repeatable results but for now change those MAF sensors.

Regards to all
 
Treat a MAF as a service item - I dont think so ! Test and check,not all of them fail and at £100 odd thats an expensive throw away.
 
Am I missing something here? I checked my MAF when I first got my disco as there was quite a bit on here about cleaning etc...so cleaned it with carb cleaner. Looked ok when i took it out and wasn't dirty or anything but cleaned it all the same. I've de egr'd it and that has made a difference but what can go wrong with a MAF that you can't see with the naked eye?
 
I suppose MAF sensors a bit like a light bulb. The light works but you don't notice it getting slightly dimmer over the years until you fit a new oneand realise how much brighter it is.

MAF sensor at £100 + can be bought for a quarter that price.
 
I suppose MAF sensors a bit like a light bulb. The light works but you don't notice it getting slightly dimmer over the years until you fit a new oneand realise how much brighter it is.

MAF sensor at £100 + can be bought for a quarter that price.
Yes and they rarely work properly - esp if you want it to read CORRECTLY.If disconnecting the maf shows an increase in performance then its a good sign its failing.Leave it disconnected till the next service and ask for it to be tested.
 
So if you disconnect the MAF will the engine be fuelled properly? If you can leave it off till the next service can you just leave it off permanently?

Got a rough idea of what it does, but how does it do it?

I know I may be asking thicko questions but am still relatively new to Disco ownership...
 
So if you disconnect the MAF will the engine be fuelled properly? If you can leave it off till the next service can you just leave it off permanently?

Got a rough idea of what it does, but how does it do it?

I know I may be asking thicko questions but am still relatively new to Disco ownership...

Yes and no, yes it will be fuelled for you to drive it, and you most likely wont notice "much" difference, maybe 1-2 mpg down and a "little" lack of power on long hill climbs,

No it wont be fuelled properly as the ECM goes to a default fuelling map, so it won't "exactly" fuel the engine as per all conditions, temperatures / loads etc etc, hence the increase in MPG etc.

Will it do any harm, no it won't, is it better to have it working, yes it is and if you do need a new one, dont bother with pattern ones, buy a genuine MAF and be done with it.

It also controls the EGR system, if you have blanked and removed it, then that "may" compensate for the defualt fuel map, if your vehicle is as is out the factory with the EGR, then the MAF controls when and how much exhaust gas to recirculate etc etc, so def better to have a working MAF in that instance.
 
Thanks UP, you've just condensed into a paragraph what 40 minutes of googling told me! :)

Yeah, de-egr'd it and that made a difference, going to clean the IC as soon as I get the guts to do it but don't want to fanny about this much then be let down by what is basically a miniature lightbulb filament!

Anyone got a good stock of excuses for having the bonnet of a disco up every chance you get? The wife keeps saying that her Golf is as tech advanced as my Disco but she doesn't see me "faffing about with it" as she calls it:D:eek:
 
It also controls the EGR system, if you have blanked and removed it, then that "may" compensate for the defualt fuel map, if your vehicle is as is out the factory with the EGR, then the MAF controls when and how much exhaust gas to recirculate etc etc, so def better to have a working MAF in that instance.

I have de-egr'd.
So if I disconnect my MAF & it runs better, leave it or replace? What are the odds buying a new LR one will keep it running better?


cheers
 
Hi again,

It's taken a long time to get back to the subject but I've now had this TD5 back on the Nanocom for a run after the MAF sensor change of the title of this thread. As i said I was getting a reading of 220-240 for the air flow before I changed it and now get a reading of 490 at 70 mph (close to the over 500 the Aussies say it should be).
So I assume that if the engine thinks its getting a greater air flow then it will fuel accordingly.

It certainly runs so much better than it did when I bought it. So in summary I've de-EGR'd, fitted a TD5 Alive free flow filter, hiclones and silicone turbo pipes and changed the MAF sensor, less than my original couple of hundred quid I was willing to spend.

Results are a much smoother, quieter, more powerful car. Gone are the gear changes when pulling up a hill.
70 mph (my test speed on the same piece of flat road) now runs at 2680 rpm as opposed to the previous 2730.
And fuel consumption down by a very decent 10% with around 32mpg at the last tankful. This is the least confident improvement as I've covered only a few tankfuls and I'm still finding out how to drive it economically.

Is it worth it? Well obviously I'd say yes. If you want to get the car back to what it was originally like then it takes about a couple of hundred pounds and a couple of hours. Mine is 9 years old with around 72500 miles on it and I intend to keep it for a long time.

Regards borntobemild
 
Back
Top