No problem Ricard - and i just read and replied to your PM too ! ( ie. I was given some incorrect info. from an LR person who may have thought I was doing some industrial espionage or some such !)
(A few odd 'plod' modifcations there.... makes it more simple of course but at what aditional costs ?)
Yes, Back on track now; No further mentions of RFID either !
Being a bit pedantic there Richard (although technically it partly depends on the specific frequency of the pulses used of course....) but then clearly the P38 'super-secure' alarm system is actually much more stupid than I thought ! Makes sense that these keys are not really an 'extra layer of security' at all (as I also reasonably thought) but just a way to automatically 'press' the fob button again once the key is in the ignition. Wonder why it was removed on your car for 'plod' though ? Maybe the cars were a bit obvious if stolen ? Oh well....
Perhaps this aspect should all be called "inductive immobilsation" instead ? Still not ideal though ! I know: !IJACOCUTSAFP"
(It's just a couple of coils used to simulate pushing a fob button press) Never mind....
Yes, I have seen the relevant coil/inductance inside the fob of course - but had assumed that was also coded for particular keys/extra security too.' aka real RFID....
but then that would probably have cost them an extra 50p.... ?
Overall, and considering the mess LR are (still) in with their latest generation of "Keyless" alarms now perhaps i should not be so surprised it is not that sophisticated...
Finally in the interests of further pedanticism (!) i will send a note to the purveyors of that (potentially-misleading) link I posted in #26 too.....
Or else someone else may read it and get criticised on a Forum too !
Slight diversion but Frank also initially said he wanted to learn more about P38s......
Whilst I have that original (Brabyn) content from -the other side- I could send him (8Meg/.pdf) to help with this I can't find the original link there
(ie. the one where someone had compressed all Brabyn's helpful "Troubleshooting Tips" down to a single file)...
Anyone recall who posted this up over there ?
To be fair Richard I have read ETMs / Owners Manuals / Rave / other stuff ad nauseum and they are (too often) contradictory !
Incidentally I am referring to the coil/fob combo which uses 'RFID' techniques for, I agree, immobilisation purposes as in:
(Range Rover familiarisation documentation)
Operation: Disabling passive immobiliser
"The BeCM receives a signal from the ignition key input switch as soon as an ignition key is inserted. In response that this signal the BeCM will provide a pulse output signal to the inductive wire coil fitted around the top of the ignition switch. This coil will in turn induce a pulsed voltage signal to a smaller wire coil incorporated within the ignition key assembly. Circuitry, also housed within the ignition key assembly automatically responds to the induced voltage signal detected by the smaller coil, by activating a remote lock signal. Providing the remote lock signal received is recognised by the BeCM as an authorised signal it will automatically remove the crank inhibition and re-mobilise the electronic engine immobilisation without there being a need for the driver to take any further action"
Ok, that is all in LR-speak but it seems to be saying that you (ok, Frank...) has to insert the key into the ignition (which is recognised via RFID), and then the fob sends the RF signal to the BeCM via the receiver etc etc to remove the "Disabled" condition (?).
My main question then is if the key is not first recognised via the RFID/coil system, will (just) pressing the fob button be the same ?
Or, and repeating this in another way, will the BeCM wake up (and also remove immobilsation) if the key is not actually in the ignition ?
You seem to be saying that once Frank's key is re-synched (via the door lock technique via a working receiver...) all will be fine; Lets hope so !
It is easy to get re-synchronisation and immobilisation confused in this mire....although LR's terminology is far too often truly awful of course.....
As is frequently the case: It is written by "those who know/understand" for those who don't.....and often still don't after reading it umpteen times !!
EDIT: Just had a thought; but it won't help much: If the coil/RFID technique is called "friendly re-synchronisation"
should the (universal) 'waggle the key in the door lock' etc method now be called "less friendly synchronisation" ?
Or perhaps even "aquaintance re-sychronisation" ?
Never mind....
There may be some confusion here (which I may have added to above when we wre not sure of the YM) ?
As Frank's is a later model the re-syncing is done via the fob/ignition barrel coil combo... ie. not the earlier fob/receiver technique
-And LR used another misnomer for this too of course; " Friendly re-sychronisation " !!
A-ha ! Then it is definitely one of the later types Frank (so some of the above is definitely irrelevant) !
So.... what messages (eg "Engine Disabled") come up when you open the car and insert the key in the ignition ?
Possibly semantics Richard but you have to admit the LR related descriptions are ‘unclear at best’ too…. and so we all need a Forum to understand them as the Owners Manuals are rather ambivalent (and possibly deliberately ) ?!
-My comment was again made primarily in the context of “synchronisation” ie. for the earlier models you can do this via the door lock/fob, later ones use the ignition lock/fob combination.
-Accordingly the earlier type uses the RF receiver/fob and the later uses RFID/coil techniques: Overall therefore on the earlier type we have to press (non-passive) the fob button to sync (whilst it is in the door lock) to resync whereas on the later ones,as this is done passively......
Anyway, this is till not much help for Frank - who is probably thinking ‘WTF ?’ by now…
Frank:
When in ‘97 was the car first registered ?
(I’m now guessing early half)
Is the Blue (antenna) wire to the Alarm Receiver actually fitted ?
(To repeat what has been said before the fob won't resync if the alarm receiver is inoperative, notably on earlier vehicles)
Yes, both methods described 'leave something to be desired' (such as in the first one you have to turn the key to Lock/Unlock position whilst pressing the appropriate fob button..)
The main point though is that as Frank's is a '97 which type is it ?
(And I am sure it must be mentioned elsewhere but I do wish LR had written that "passive immobilisation" is simply
just a fancy name for having an RF pick-up coil aroud the ignition barrel..... ie 'passive' is basically a misnomer too !
Smiler wrote:
I am probably wrong but did the later models have a slightly different method to sync the key-fob by inserting it in the ignition barrel and pressing the unlock button? Or am I thinking of a completely different vehicle?
Not quite, and it depends on the year Smiler, as in the "Sync. Procedures" note in:
http://www.reset.rover-tech.info/rangerover_keyfob.htm
Frank's is a '97 and might be either (?!)
Yes a clamp ammeter can be very handy indeed - but 'difficult' to read with the bonnet closed of course !
It is quite easy to fit/remove a cheap in-line analogue without interupting the supply; In one incarnation I had the meter in an upside-down coffee jar duct-taped to the windscreen. This allowed me to read the current being drawn with the car on the drive out the house window.....
There is a market for a device that shows your car volts remotely for that matter; Once when i was having similat battery problems I started to design one based around standard 433Mz modules.. whoops....! (ie. self-generated RF interference !!)
-Alternatively: ebay 293251567665 (plus some binoculars ?)
Might take a while that Chris ! Are you sure frying a few of these (or similar) would not be quicker ?! ebay 302919434102
Incidentally I first used this method when I tired of sitting inside the car like some kind of Ninja waiting for the dim 'P' led to go out.....!
Odd to start and then just die like that of course....
As part of your investigation (in the garage) consider removing the earth lead from the battery and wire an analogue 0-5A meter in series with it instead. Lock the car and monitor the meter... regularly... and if there is excessive current draw (after the BECM has gone to sleep) proceed from there - ie. removal of individual fuses to find the cause/s. It would take a few amps (continous) overnight to cause the flat battery of course.
-These meters are just a few pounds on ebay of course... and will happily melt if (Ooopps) you forget it is there and maybe try to start the car...
Alternatively use a cig. lighter led voltmeter (as already suggested); Lock car monitor.
Don't know just how many charge/(complete) discharge cycles you have endured but the battery will not like this either !
Like many I have had BECM staying awake (RF interference), faulty cell on battery and a wet fusebox (condensation) cause this kind of problem.
Similarlyan internal light staying on does not help either...
Good Hunting !
Pricey bit of plastic indeed Rob, should be -literally- 'ten a penny' ....
Not exactly a critical component though: Its primary purpose of course is to allow oil vapours to condense back into liquid on it .
Over time (years) there is a build of 'crud' within the separator. Without it this all just happens in the breather hose instead ...
(also takes a while but) this possibly causes the hose to rot more rapidly (?)
Incidentally the other hose (on the throttle side) is more critical - at least if/when it falls apart and allows air in instead !
Thanks for the heads up Rob: An /'nteresting' seller indeed.... Did a few DVLA Checks and his definitions of Pristine and Immaculate are 'generous' to say the least: The reg on this one does not even exist: "2000 Range Rover Autobiography 1 of 1 in Praire Rose" - and "Caveat Emptor" indeed !
(Also on 'Car and Classic' too)
From "the Dark Side"
" I am afraid that I am hurdling towards a donation if nothing changes. Not much help over on the Pub. Yes they are like a pack of wolves granting a series of random explanations and not really alot of help "
'Charming' David - although we did not buy the car, you did ... and then shipped it to a place where they don't have/understand them !!
Don't just 'lash out' at those trying to help.... it is unlikely to 'encourage' further help !
Still not 'random' but:-
PS: It is NOT the battery....
PPS: Check you are getting (constant) power to the fuel pump: Change the CKP/CPS too ....
This might help, and IS 'random' !
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78b67l_yxUc
Fair enough Rob !
Have to say I am apalled at the "Garage" saying they will not do any of the work until the car can be started !
It would take 10 minutes to do the basic fuel/spark checks of course...
Impressed you can tell the year/engine from the video Rob.....(!!)
Obviously you have more to worry about than your suspension but form your woes it would also be a good idea to get your
cylinder compression checked too (and that should also be cheap/easy)
EDIT; Ah..... I see now Rob, it's also over on the 'Dark Side' Site !
From the extra info. there the diagnosis/advice is the same though...
David, just take a deep breath and provide us with some more details !
eg. Are all these baterries you are fitting going flat from all the cranking or overnight ?
I agree totally with Sloth, indeed on the video it sounds like no fuel whatsoever ; And the CKP/ Crankshaft Position Sensor is another likely culprit (but a P38 sometimes starts with a bad one but then runs really badly). A CKP is only about 50 bucks... and fairy easy to fit.
As Sloth stated - do you actually have a spark ?. Did you (or a garage) look at the plugs at all ?
The fact that this was jump started and ran OK for a while could be fuel (marginal pump) - or a marginal CKP...
Almost all the parts you have ordered will not help the bad starting issue of course....
"EAS Manual" is a 'red herring'... with the engine not running and your Electronic Air Suspension is just right down on its bump stops by now...
unless it has steel springs now... High Mileage: 222K miles and everything is probably 'a bit tired'.. (?)
Something that might help, better/cheaper than SyncMate (but in OZ) !
Even though based on the last point above this will also (likely) get me castigated, although it's a Tim B-L quote:
"I think people's fear of bad things happening on the internet is becoming, justifiably, greater and greater. If we leave the web as it is, there's a very large number of things that will go wrong. We could end up with a digital dystopia if we don’t turn things around. It's not that we need a 10-year plan for the web, we need to turn the web around now".
The three principle the contract sets out for governments are:
Principle 1 Ensure everyone can connect to the internet
Principle 2 Keep all of the internet available, all of the time
Principle 3 Respect and protect people’s fundamental online privacy and data rights
For companies, the following three principles have been put forward:
Principle 4: Make the internet affordable and accessible to everyone
Principle 5: Respect and protect people’s privacy and personal data to build online trust
Principle 6: Develop technologies that support the best in humanity and challenge the worst
General citizens have not been forgotten; they have three principles of their own to abide by:
Principle 7: Be creators and collaborators on the Web
Principle 8: Build strong communities that respect civil discourse and human dignity
Principle 9: Fight for the Web
Together, the principles seek to ensure that everyone has access to the internet and that faith in the web can be restored.
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................
My involvement with some of these initiatives is why I won't be drawn on revealling personal stuff on the Web either
Remember: There Are Bots About !