The instructor said several times during the class "GOD SAVE THE CAT!)
We tend to think about emissions and MPG and such, but realistically, the
cars CPU's job is to save the cat regardless of the consequences to
drivability. IF the Mil comes on' its saying "something is wrong that may
damage my cat"
The car's response is to adjust fuel trim and such to correct the numbers.
But as the test showed, the rear sensor, (that I was told was just a
monitor) (and by the way was also shown as a monitor for the cat effiency in
the ASE Test) radically screwed with the fuel trim because it didn't like
what it saw.
I believe the instructor said in starting in the 2005 year of cars, "rear
fuel trim" (a term not normally used) will start showing up on scan tools
and therefore start becoming a normal diagnostic tool.
Why it wasn't acknowledged? who knows.
>> I'm just really curious why this function would be
> sometimes undocumented,
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> "optimizing catalytic converter performance /via/ fuel
> control input."
I think you on to something there... It effects fuel control but only to
assist the cat in it's job.
> Of the information from three manufacturers Steve lists, the
> Toyota's rear O2 sensor appears to have the potential for
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> operating conditions, does the rear oxygen sensor sacrifice
> MPG to improve cat converter efficiency?
Yes it did in the Dodge experement.
If it does, it
> surely must be such that the overall deleterious emissions
> from the car are less /per mile yada/ than if the rear
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> to minimize emissions near the end of life of the cat
> converter.
Elle - 25 Dec 2005 16:42 GMT
> The instructor said several times during the class "GOD SAVE THE
CAT!"
> We tend to think about emissions and MPG and such, but realistically, the
> cars CPU's job is to save the cat regardless of the consequences to
> drivability. IF the Mil comes on' its saying "something is wrong that may
> damage my cat"
> The car's response is to adjust fuel trim and such to correct the numbers.
But assuming other symptoms (codes) come up that tell the
owner to get the car into the shop, this makes sense: The
catalytic converter is expensive. In abnormal conditions
that could damage the CC, having the car go into a mode that
preserves it is a good engineering choice.
So we could throw out my proposition that the fuel trim
input from the rear oxygen sensor has the net effect of
reducing emissions. It probably doesn't, because your
evidence shows MPG goes down in response to a signal from
the rear oxygen sensor in abnormal conditions. Emissions go
up, but the Cat is saved.
> But as the test showed, the rear sensor, (that I was told was just a
> monitor) (and by the way was also shown as a monitor for the cat effiency in
> the ASE Test) radically screwed with the fuel trim because it didn't like
> what it saw.
But that was in a radically abnormal operating condition,
correct? So the owner-operator of such a car would, in
theory, be hustling to a shop because of other symptoms,
ISTM.
> I believe the instructor said in starting in the 2005 year of cars, "rear
> fuel trim" (a term not normally used) will start showing up on scan tools
> and therefore start becoming a normal diagnostic tool.
> Why it wasn't acknowledged? who knows.
For now, I still think it's minimized because its
significant only in highly abnormal operating conditions.
As for "rear fuel trim" becoming a term that is more widely
used in the future: I can't say for sure, but ISTM its just
adding another diagnostic to the toolbox. Perhaps a good
one, especially for a tough diagnosis. (I really couldn't
say exactly. I'm only going by what I think your summaries
are saying. Maybe if I sat in this class, my take would be
different. Ultimately, though, I think we have to believe
that the designers of the rear O2 sensor fuel trim input
were rational people. Why adjust the fuel trim in part in
accordance with what comes /out/ the cat converter? The only
reason would be to preserve the expensive catalytic
converter, ISTM.
Elle - 25 Dec 2005 17:13 GMT
> I believe the instructor said in starting in the 2005 year of cars, "rear
> fuel trim" (a term not normally used) will start showing up on scan tools
> and therefore start becoming a normal diagnostic tool.
> Why it wasn't acknowledged? who knows.
Which CTI course are you taking again?
Just googled for "rear fuel trim" and got only one hit:
Another course offered by Carquest Tech Instititute. It's
relevant and a little interesting. Here's the description:
---
Total Fuel Trim Diagnosis
Fuel Trim is the technician's best chance to find the right
diagnostic path to solving most all drivability and engine
performance problems. This course will dispel the myths
about short and long term fuel trim and Adam will introduce
the concept of Total Fuel Trim. It is important that the
PCM's total fuel modification be taken into consideration
when diagnosing these problems. The effects of Rear Fuel
Trim found on most all vehicles today, will also be
explained. This is a must see class that will open your eyes
to the power of Total Fuel Trim diagnosis.
---
http://www.asashop.org/cars05/attendees_tech.htm
(This site lists a course with evidently a nice plug for
technicians using online discussion groups to troubleshoot,
as well.)
Stephen H - 26 Dec 2005 06:28 GMT
Yes, this sounds like the class I went to.
Am scheduled for 5 more next year, using "Volumemetritc efficiency" to
diagnose problems. And I just deleted my calculator

Signature
Stephen W. Hansen
ASE Certified Master Automobile Technician
ASE Automobile Advanced Engine Performance
ASE Undercar Specialist
http://autorepair.about.com/cs/troubleshooting/l/bl_obd_main.htm
http://www.troublecodes.net/technical/
>> I believe the instructor said in starting in the 2005 year
> of cars, "rear
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> technicians using online discussion groups to troubleshoot,
> as well.)