2.5 ECU one of the 45

[SimonJW]

Car fails MOT for first time...hmmmm

Emissions shot to high heaven.

Low down is I still have original problematic ECU fitted (I know) which has a reduced wiring loom therefore no ability to take input from more than one Lambda sensor and fitted Lambda sensor was 'dangling in the breeze'. AFAIK.

Would 2k for replacement/repair and remap including ancilliary repairs to other 'bits' and oil/filter and air filter change seem appropriate?

Is there a need to advise repairer of a specific ECU to fit or are there after markets available which could do the job as well/better.

Excuse the question if it is on the forum somewhere but the 'Search' facility is under maintenance at present.

Thanks in advance

Simon.

Bondy if you read this Geoff estimates £300 ish for 6000 mile service.

Cheers for info

[FUNKSTER UK]

SimonJW said:

Car fails MOT for first time...hmmmm

Emissions shot to high heaven.

Low down is I still have original problematic ECU fitted (I know) which has a reduced wiring loom therefore no ability to take input from more than one Lambda sensor and fitted Lambda sensor was 'dangling in the breeze'. AFAIK.

Would 2k for replacement/repair and remap including ancilliary repairs to other 'bits' and oil/filter and air filter change seem appropriate?

Is there a need to advise repairer of a specific ECU to fit or are there after markets available which could do the job as well/better.

Excuse the question if it is on the forum somewhere but the 'Search' facility is under maintenance at present.

Thanks in advance

Simon.

I'm Not sure of the route you want to take but there is a second hand 2.5 ECU on the parts section at the moment for £200.00.

http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/445119.htm

Apart from that I believe that Gadgeroonie on here has good Knowledge about ECU's.

Matty.

[mgbond]

If its the magnerelli (Something like that) then you can't just swap to a MBE.

The wiring loom will need to be changed.

Gadge can fit an aftermarket one or Noblemods also do an after market option.

You can also go for the MBE but this route may turn out more expensive than the other two options.

Bondy

[NickyTwoHats]

Yup talk to Gadge

[Adrian W]

NickyTwoHats said:

Yup talk to Gadge

John Noble do a drive in drive out service using Omex

[NobleGuy]

Do you definitely need a new ECU?
Could simply a new lamda sensor fix your problem, or am I being thick?

[SimonJW]

Yes, according to Noble the original ECU's, which they only fitted to the first 45 cars, were not as requested and led to anomalies with non-tunability and lambda sensor input. Which strikes me as a design issue which should have been rectified by recall?

However once this model ECU fails on CO2 emissions, especially as badly as mine has, the only real option, AFAIAA, is to replace it with a tunable multi input version. This as other people have stated brings in the problem of the wiring loom as well.

At present the car is with a local tuning company who race prep RX7's. They seem more than up to the job so I am putting it in their, far more capable than mine, hands.

Thanks for all info so far. The mention of contacting Gadg, is he happy to receive emails through his work email address as the email link through his profile on here is disabled?

Cheers

Simon

[NobleGuy]

SimonJW said:

Which strikes me as a design issue which should have been rectified by recall?

[snuffy]

NobleGuy said:

SimonJW said:

Which strikes me as a design issue which should have been rectified by recall?

I think under consumer law, a product should be fit for purpose for 7 years. And as an ECU is not a consumable part then if it fails it should have been replaced at Noble's cost. It's rather like the Esprit V8s not having the cylinder liners sealed correctly. They had to be retified by Lotus at their expense because it was clearly a manufacturing defect.

To give you another example, I bought a new fridge-freezer a while ago. It failed after 15 months ( a total failure which was not economical to repair ). Of course, it was out of the 1 year warrenty. I spoke with the supplier who actualy agreeded that the warrenty period was not relavent in this case and replaced it with another one of the same value. If a company supplies products that are not fit for purpose then they are are dodgy ground if they refuse to do anything about it.

[Adrian W]

SimonJW said:

Yes, according to Noble the original ECU's, which they only fitted to the first 45 cars, were not as requested and led to anomalies with non-tunability and lambda sensor input. Which strikes me as a design issue which should have been rectified by recall?

However once this model ECU fails on CO2 emissions, especially as badly as mine has, the only real option, AFAIAA, is to replace it with a tunable multi input version. This as other people have stated brings in the problem of the wiring loom as well.

At present the car is with a local tuning company who race prep RX7's. They seem more than up to the job so I am putting it in their, far more capable than mine, hands.

Thanks for all info so far. The mention of contacting Gadg, is he happy to receive emails through his work email address as the email link through his profile on here is disabled?

Cheers

Simon

I think it would be foolish not to get a price from JNM as they have a solution developed for this, including all wiring, so should be cheaper.

[joolski]

SimonJW said:

Yes, according to Noble the original ECU's, which they only fitted to the first 45 cars, were not as requested and led to anomalies with non-tunability and lambda sensor input. Which strikes me as a design issue which should have been rectified by recall?

However once this model ECU fails on CO2 emissions, especially as badly as mine has, the only real option, AFAIAA, is to replace it with a tunable multi input version. This as other people have stated brings in the problem of the wiring loom as well.

At present the car is with a local tuning company who race prep RX7's. They seem more than up to the job so I am putting it in their, far more capable than mine, hands.

I would strongly suggest you give John Noble Motorsport a call. I'm not trying to say that your local tuning company is not a good one, but JNM have more than 10 years experience on nobles. They'll get the job done.

--Jools

[daddysumo]

Simon

If you are refering to Re worx then yes they are capable, and here's the but ! JNM have a better ECU IMHO that has a well developed map available so the all round drive / performance will be better.
HTH

Steve

[NobleGuy]

And they're not as expensive as you might think for their (absolutely definite) technical expertise. They're not cheap, but....

[SimonJW]

Thanks for all the advice guys.

I'll let you know how I get on.

Hope to meet some of you this year.


Simon

[joust]

snuffy said:

NobleGuy said:

SimonJW said:

Which strikes me as a design issue which should have been rectified by recall?

I think under consumer law, a product should be fit for purpose for 7 years. And as an ECU is not a consumable part then if it fails it should have been replaced at Noble's cost. It's rather like the Esprit V8s not having the cylinder liners sealed correctly. They had to be retified by Lotus at their expense because it was clearly a manufacturing defect.
To give you another example, I bought a new fridge-freezer a while ago. It failed after 15 months ( a total failure which was not economical to repair ). Of course, it was out of the 1 year warrenty. I spoke with the supplier who actualy agreeded that the warrenty period was not relavent in this case and replaced it with another one of the same value. If a company supplies products that are not fit for purpose then they are are dodgy ground if they refuse to do anything about it.

The law you are quoting is not just consumer law I'm afraid.

The SoG&SA says that products must be fit for purpose. Statutory law sets a 6 year limit for all claims.

The two are unrelated in that therefore it is not automatic that everything must last 6 years. It is down to a court to decide under the SoG&SA what is "reasonable" for a product, or it's copmponents, to last.

This was really first tested by a case brought against John Lewis over a TV some years ago. The court found that as TVs had become so reliable it was not unreasonable to assume that a TV should last 3 to 5 years, and hence allowed the claim by the person that John Lewis should repair/replace the TV after it failed after 4 years.

However, there are also cases where shorter terms are deemed 'reasonable' that have been through the courts, and you couldn't clearly use this to claim that a pair of Nike trainers had to last 6 years....

Given the status of the Noble it would be exceptionally hard to claim that it was reasonable to expect an ECU to last 5 years+ on a hand-built, limited run sportcar where the cars were the first made and hence likely to have issues. There is plenty of public documentation available documenting the issues with these early ECUs, and the principle of 'buyer beware' applies here.

Also, to put a final nail in this coffin, your claim in the first position would be against the person who sold you the car. If you bought it 'as seen', you would have no-where to then go.

J