Bore Wash Fixable?
 

I had an episode of bore wash about late December. I fixed it with some excellent advice from the people on this forum. I'm going through my second episode now and it is only February. Can bore wash be fixed permanently? The car is unreliable but is worth fixing.

Flase alarm
 

False alarm. What really happened is I was trying to fix the aircon and found a blown fuse. 10 amp #1 in the engine bay aircon clutch. I pulled #2 as the manual said it wasn't used but dropped it down into the washer bottle area, never to be seen again. So I looked again and #12 10amp wasn't used so I carefully got that one out. Test run, car wouldn't start. After a couple of attempts to start it I suspected the worst. Best to walk away and ponder what next. I started thinking, maybe the fuses are used as there are also empty places in the fuse compartment. Jumped into the ute and got a half dozen 10 amp fuses. Installed #'s 2 and 12 and .. you guessed it, she started. All is forgiven. The symptoms I had for the aircon blown fuse was just hot air coming out.

Phew! No worries.

You have to love an easy fix!

Attachment 166493

As above....you gotta love an easy fix that costs like :icon_twocents::icon_banana:

From what i've learned about bore wash (the hard way) the only way to prevent it is always get the car up to temp before switching off and don't rev it before switching off.
Anyone else ?

Yes I'm very focused when I start and stop that car. Try not to run her in anything less than 10 mins. Sometimes it is unavoidable but try not to. Thank for all you comments. This is a great forum.

Hornet,

What do you mean by 'borewash'?

Cheers,

Languid

More commonly "bore wash" I think - see google etc as well as this site and try both spellings.

briefly, where unburned fuel (petrol/gas) washes the oil from the bore resulting in dire compression and thus no-start

JagV8,

Thanks for that. It's what I thought he was saying, but I didn't want to comment without making sure.

The car's a '99, and I suspect that the news for it isn't good. My gut feeling is Nikasil, and our fuel over here wasn't exactly brilliant here in Aus back then. It aint perfect now, but it has gotten a lot better.

Someone is going to have to break the bad news to Hornet, and I guess it might as well be me.

Cheers,

Languid.

Hornet,

Gut feeling is that the problem is a little worse than a 'quick fix', unless you consider the term a little more laterally.

Your car is a '99, and that could mean a Nikasil Bore coating, or more accurately, the lack of the coating on the bore. The only cure is a 'heart transplant'. If you can post your engine number, or if you want send me an email (I'm in Brisbane) we can give you an answer very quickly.

Cheers (might not be quite the right expression),

Languid

Languid,
It really was a quick fix this time with a fuse and not bore wash.
So your report of the death of Hornet's car may be premature.

Hi Languid. I think the car is alright now, it does have nikasil cylinders. It was a politician reaction(Knee jerk). The car wouldn't start and I immediately assumed the worst. Once I replaced the fuses, that I had removed, it started. I then drove into town and got fuel. On the way the aircon worked brilliantly. Perhaps it will happen again. I have an Autoenginuity scan tool and is showing a DTC B1201 which will need addressing. Thank you for the information, if it needs a "transplant" I'll give you a bell.

If it's lived this long I think you can ignore Nikasil issues!

Which module gave B1201?

Hi JagV8. The Rear Electrics Module. In many cases using the Autoenginuity, the DTC's comes up with "manufacturer specific code". I bought the Jaguar Enhancement package for the program and installed it. Seems strange to see this "manufacturer specific code" using the enhancement package. Still, I think I have value for money with Autoenginuity it has proved to be a help. I also have a poor copy of the JTIS which lists all the codes so I use it in conjuction with the other program. I bought the JTIS on ebay but had install problems. I'm using XP on my laptop so it should have been no problem. Anyway thanks for your help.

That's odd. AE hasn't done that to me.... though I've not had B2101 :)
Worth reporting to them as when I reported a bug they fixed it and sent me the fixed version to test.

If you can at least get at the JTIS files, you can find b200025.pdf (on mine it's in data/dtcen) and then open it with any PDF viewer. B1201 is in there, with details. It's a fuel level sensor circuit fault and worth reading the details.

(Possibly it's on the net or even in FAQs.)

The P1201 is for a fuel level sensor circuit fault from the RECM Instrument pack and the possible causes are RECM to fuel level sensor circuit(s) (CA101-15, CA101-16): open circuit, short circuit to ground, short circuit to B+ voltage, short circuit to each other, high resistance. Fuel level sensor failure.

As for the Nikasil you can check and see if your car falls into that category by checking the birth mark on the engine block. This link should help JagRepair.com - Nikasil Engine Block .

We recently had several different episodes of no start that were not related to Nikasil and I would suggest strongly before you spend a great deal of time getting it started. I recently put this together and I hope it helps JagRepair.com - No Start

Interesting.

Have AutoZone changed to use a battery tester that actually works? I mean, for modern cars i.e. with electronics which cannot tolerate spikes etc. From experience here and UK forum it looks as though the battery tests are worse than useless because they can make a bad battery look OK. Unless AZ have changed I'd delete that part.

You might want to add a special part for the fairly rare bore wash issue the 4.0 can suffer. Usually (always?) provoked by starting the car then shutting off the engine while still cold.

You also might link to the diagnostics PDF(s) about no-start.

And what would you replace it with?

Battery retailer tests are fairly reliable. It is certainly at least a good first level approximation. It is certainly better than shooting in the dark.

Since the article is addressed to a diy audience who may or may not know much about batteries, it is a good suggestion. Many home shops may have a dvm, but a load tester would be rather rare.

Anyways, it is almost never the battery in and of itself, but rather the state of charge, and connections that cause problems. Once the charging system and connections are addressed, the battery itself is usually serviceable with a full 24+ hour trickle charge.

I'd delete it because what we've seen time after time is that the battery tests as good. The owner then struggles trying to fix the car's problems. Eventually they replace the battery and everything is OK.

It's because the battery tester drags a heavy current, but it's not the lack of current that causes the weird problems. They're caused by the voltage dropping due to the failing battery. Yes, the battery that tested "good", but wasn't.

edit: on more thought, I'd delete it but replace it with detail about how such a test is liable to mislead (see above)

A real test would be to simulate trying to power up and then start the car, all the time monitoring the voltage with the equivalent of a logic analyser triggering on any voltage below a threshold (9.8V?). If the trigger occurs then the battery is no good. I'm guessing hardly anyone has the tool required, however.