 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Nissan / Nissan Maxima / October 2007'00 max Mechanics Can't Solve.HELP. Rattle/Whiney
Hi, i own a 2000 maxima, 5 speed that I'm just about at my wits end with. It has 114,000 miles on it. I just recently took it accross the country (Mass to Vegas) But I was noticing the problem I will detail, long before the trip. It should be noted, however- that After the trip- and I mean right after, the problem has Magnified 10 fold. I have two sounds( used to be just 1 until about a couple of days ago) The biggest sound is one that sounds like a strong rattle towards the front end of my car. It used to be that it took a lot to hear this rattle, and I couldnt hear it if i was in neutral, only when it was in gear. For the most part, I still need to be in gear to hear it. The second sound I notice now is a whiney sound whenever I step on the gas. The revving of the engine sounds off- like a little too high pitched-.. I can be in neutral and Hear this sound. So I take it in to the mechanic today. They are supposed to be the best. He calls me back about 5 hours later and tells me there are two sounds.. then used words I really didn't understand. First he said there was a 'pre ignition sound".. then followed up with words like could be "air fixture," "timing cover" Tensioner..... and basically he said for some reason the check engine light isn't coming on so he can't tell what the problem is cause theres just too many possibilities... he Did ask me what grade fuel i was using, and i said regular- he suggested I step up to the next grade to see if that helps... Basically, to me it sounded like a convoluted way to say " look ,we dont know whats wrong-- heres some busy work and go get an upgrade in octane level".. I'm not sure if this suggestion is just off the wall, or maybe someone can help me out with why he might suggest that.. Can anyone- Anyone at all give me any type of suggestion as to what this could be? anything I might check to narrow down the problems? One other thing to note is that this sound(s) usually only occur after the car has been running for 10-15 minutes- then i can't get it to stop.. but for the first 15 minutes-- everything sounds and runs perfect.. what gives? To further help you- i took video/audio of the sound while it was happening and uploaded it to photobucket. The link is below.. I would really appreciate any type of help guys..thanks Heres the Link to the movie/sound.. 10 secs long. http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z261/mikemd21/?action=view¤t=db0b59d7.flv > Hi, i own a 2000 maxima, 5 speed that I'm just about at my wits end with. > It has 114,000 miles on it. I just recently took it accross the country [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > > http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z261/mikemd21/?action=view¤t=db0b59d7.flv First, you should be running 90 octane in it. Second, check the shields around your exhaust system. They come lose and rattle. >Hi, i own a 2000 maxima, 5 speed that I'm just about at my wits end with. >It has 114,000 miles on it. I just recently took it accross the country [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > >http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z261/mikemd21/?action=view¤t=db0b59d7.flv you need to use the proper recommended fuel - 91 grade premium. otherwise its going to pre ignition rattle like an old sowing machine. On 7/17/07 11:18 PM, in article 469d93dc.8724531@news.west.cox.net, "common_ >> Hi, i own a 2000 maxima, 5 speed that I'm just about at my wits end with. >> It has 114,000 miles on it. I just recently took it accross the country [quoted text clipped - 47 lines] > > otherwise its going to pre ignition rattle like an old sowing machine. Which would mean the knock sensor is not sensing. If you are not getting a code from it (have to check with a code reader, the KS does not light the engine light), then it has failed in a mode where it thinks everything is fine. Even though 91 is recommended, the car is designed to also run on regular without thrashing itself to death. The simple test is to run several tanks of 91 through it and see if it minimizes the problem. If so, then replace the knock sensor. I have heard that many times the problem is in the wiring rather than the sensor itself. Other possibilities, though more unlikely: - a failing timing chain/chain guide. It will also make noise out of gear at certain rpms if this is the case. - loose /rattling exhaust shields. Easy to check. Just poke them with a broom stick. - I had an old Altima for a while that sounded like it had a timing chain rattle. Turned out to be the accessory belt had thrown off enough chunks from the ridges that it made that same rattly zingy noise as the belt moved through the grooves in the pulleys. - don't overlook the gazillions of other sensors (O2, MAF, etc.) that feed the engine computer the data it uses to adjust timing and mixture. Most of these will throw a code and like the check engine light, but there could also be wiring problems that are tricking it into thinking everything is fine. - Have you tried running some top end cleaner (Sea foam comes to mind) through it. It may or may not make any difference, but it sure is fun to watch the neighbors freak when they see the massive cloud of smoke. >On 7/17/07 11:18 PM, in article 469d93dc.8724531@news.west.cox.net, "common_ > [quoted text clipped - 78 lines] >through it. It may or may not make any difference, but it sure is fun to >watch the neighbors freak when they see the massive cloud of smoke. nope,,, its a "knock" sensor - not a pre ignition sensor. It prevents KNOCK,,you will still have pre ignition rattle using sub standard fuel. And you will have the ECU retarding the timing and reducing HP and Fuel Mileage. This question has been gone over so many time in this group that it simply does not justify a reply. The car needs Premium - you should not have bought it if you do not want to feed it. On 7/19/07 10:04 PM, in article 46a02538.731234@news.west.cox.net, "common_ >> On 7/17/07 11:18 PM, in article 469d93dc.8724531@news.west.cox.net, "common_ >> [quoted text clipped - 87 lines] > standard fuel. And you will have the ECU retarding the timing and > reducing HP and Fuel Mileage. Actually in the FSM, they call it a detonation sensor. It is actually a little microphone bolted to the top of the engine. In any event, experience says you are wrong. Exactly what Nisson do you drive and what experience have you had that proves your assertions? The five Nissons rolling around my family for the past 10 years ('96 & '97 i30s, an '02 Pathfinder & a '91 240sx) all run just fine on 87 octane without any human audible pinging and rattling. The manufacturer provided owner's manual for each of them says the same thing: "regular gas of at least 87 octane is required. Use 91 for increased performance." I have tested each with multiple tanks of 91 and multiple tanks of 87. There is no rattle or ping detectable by a human. The mileage difference is approximately 1 MPG, and that only on the Pathfinder, and then only when cruising it at 80 MPH. > This question has been gone over so many time in this group that it > simply does not justify a reply. And yet you do... > The car needs Premium - you should not have bought it if you do not > want to feed it. That car does not need premium. You start screaming this every time anyone says they put regular in one of these cars. Never mind the fact that Nisson says it only requires regular gas, but premium for "increased performance". These cars will run just fine on 87 octane gas without thrashing themselves to death. If the OP is experiencing rattling and pinging, then something else is wrong. On 7/20/07 9:32 AM, in article C2C631A9.25699%epmeyer50@msn.com, "E Meyer" <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote: > On 7/19/07 10:04 PM, in article 46a02538.731234@news.west.cox.net, "common_ > [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] >>>>> >>>>> Heres the Link to the movie/sound.. 10 secs long. http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z261/mikemd21/?action=view¤t=db0b>>>>> 5 >>>>> 9d >>>>> 7.flv [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > drive and what experience have you had that proves your assertions? The > five Nissons rolling around my family for the past 10 years ('96 & '97 i30s, '98 Maxima 5-sp, > an '02 Pathfinder & a '91 240sx) all run just fine on 87 octane without any > human audible pinging and rattling. The manufacturer provided owner's [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > to death. If the OP is experiencing rattling and pinging, then something > else is wrong. >On 7/20/07 9:32 AM, in article C2C631A9.25699%epmeyer50@msn.com, "E Meyer" ><epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 125 lines] >> to death. If the OP is experiencing rattling and pinging, then something >> else is wrong. Nissan says it requires Premium, and can run on regular, with reduced performance. Just like any other of a dozen other high compression preformance cars I could name. Your rattles, you just are to cheap to notice it. wrote: >>On 7/20/07 9:32 AM, in article C2C631A9.25699%epmeyer50@msn.com, >> [quoted text clipped - 148 lines] > Nissan says it requires Premium, and can run on regular, with > reduced performance. Not quite. The manual recommends 87 octane. It also says for increased performance to use 91. It says nothing at all about 'requiring' premuim. I can scan the page and upload it if you like. > Just like any other of a dozen other high compression preformance > cars I could name. > > Your rattles, you just are to cheap to notice it. Mine doesn't on 87. Mind you, the altitude could have something to do with that. It DOES perform better on premium though and that is what it usually gets. If you can buy the car, you can afford good gas. > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 164 lines] >what it usually gets. If you can buy the car, you can afford good >gas. I have the manual right in front of me - it recommends 91, and says it can run with reduced performance on as low as 87. On 87 its going to retard the hell out of the timing (within the range allowed by the ECU), and its going to "rattling sound" under heavy acceleration. And yes,,if you live in Denver, in a cool climate, that reduces the octane requirement across the board - 87 becomes 91. You probably can buy 84 in Denver. The original poster admits to using 87 octane, and is complaining to his mechanic about a "Rattling noise". So in order to save 5 percent on fuel costs, he is going to have the mechanic do what? This fuel issue has been thrashed over so many times it hardly is worth the time to type yet another reply. Go to maxima.org and see what kind of fuel they say you need. And I agree 100 percent, if you can afford this car, you can afford to forego one Star bucks Latte a month for the right fuel. wrote: >> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 168 lines] > I have the manual right in front of me - it recommends 91, and > says it can run with reduced performance on as low as 87. Mine says it recommends 87. It also recommends 91 for best performance. > On 87 its going to retard the hell out of the timing (within the > range allowed by the ECU), and its going to "rattling sound" under > heavy acceleration. Nope. Not for me. I drive my car quite hard. I like how it sounds when it pulls hard. > And yes,,if you live in Denver, in a cool climate, that reduces > the octane requirement across the board - 87 becomes 91. You > probably can buy 84 in Denver. Don't live in Denver but we are about 2800ft here. I have used 87 but I usually use 91 as it does make a difference in performance. > The original poster admits to using 87 octane, and is complaining > to his mechanic about a "Rattling noise". So in order to save 5 > percent on fuel costs, he is going to have the mechanic do what? I am not arguing that point. I am saying you are wrong in your information to him. Another poster has told you the same thing as I did. > This fuel issue has been thrashed over so many times it hardly is > worth the time to type yet another reply. Go to maxima.org and see > what kind of fuel they say you need. No need. Been there, done that. I don't need anyone to tell me what I need. I am telling you what worked for me. Pardon the pun but your mileage may vary. End of story. > And I agree 100 percent, if you can afford this car, you can > afford to forego one Star bucks Latte a month for the right fuel. No disagreement there. > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 208 lines] > >No disagreement there. Here is the exact quote from the original post.............. "grade fuel i was using, and i said regular- he suggested I step up to the next grade to see if that helps..." I do know how to read....... > Here is the exact quote from the original post.............. > > "grade fuel i was using, and i said regular- he suggested I > step up to the next grade to see if that helps..." > > I do know how to read....... I never said you couldn't. Did you get this part? "It used to be that it took a lot to hear this rattle, and I couldnt hear it if i was in neutral, only when it was in gear. For the most part, I still need to be in gear to hear it." Did you understand that? How many times have you made your vehicle knock with regular fuel in NEUTRAL? Also this part. "The second sound I notice now is a whiney sound whenever I step on the gas. The revving of the engine sounds off- like a little too high pitched-.. I can be in neutral and Hear this sound." Doesn't sound like an octane ussue to me. It doesn't really matter as I am not looking for an argument. I was simply stating that your comment about his Maxima 'requiring' premium was not correct. That seems to be the view of the couple others that have posted in this thread as well. I know premuim is better, just not required. >> Here is the exact quote from the original post.............. >> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > >I know premuim is better, just not required. again,,you need to READ "I couldnt hear it if i was in neutral" - in reference to the rattling noise. what is it about "couldnt" hear it you do not understand ? that would be as in - could not hear.....as in only happened under acceleration. >"The second sound A high pitched whine is not due to low fuel quality...and thats not the posters original primary question. >>> Here is the exact quote from the original post.............. >>> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > again,,you need to READ I read fine. I also comprehend quite well. Something you seem not too good at. > "I couldnt > hear it if i was in neutral" - in reference to the rattling noise. > > what is it about "couldnt" hear it you do not understand ? "It used to be that it took a lot to hear this rattle, and I couldnt hear it if i was in neutral, only when it was in gear. For the most part, I still need to be in gear to hear it." What part of used to be don't you understand? Do you comprehend what 'for the MOST part' means? I will help you. It maens MOST of the time but NOT always. Want to give it another try? > that would be as in - could not hear.....as in only happened under > acceleration. That would be as in CAN hear it in neutral, just not all the time. I find it strange that, being the expert you are, you never asked him if the car needed to be under load to hear the noise. If it makes the noise when he has backed off and is coasting, in gear, would it be caused by regular fuel in your expert opinion? That was a rhetorical question by the way. > A high pitched whine is not due to low fuel quality. Good guess. > and thats not the posters original primary question. The OP said "I have two sounds(used to be just 1 until about a couple of days ago) What part of 'two sounds' do you fail to understand? You took it on yourself to decide which fauult was most important to him. When you assume things you set yourself up for mistakes. He also said: "One other thing to note is that this sound(s) usually only occur after the car has been running for 10-15 minutes- then i can't get it to stop." Does your car 'ping' even when you don't have your foot in it? Do you think putting premium fuel in it will stop it pinging at zero throttle? Pay attention to your name and try using a bit of it. >>>> Here is the exact quote from the original post.............. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 81 lines] > >Pay attention to your name and try using a bit of it. he never posted anything like that,his car pings on acceleration, not at idle. He never said anything about idle. and exactly what is your insane complusive proplem with my name, and commas?? wrote: >>>>> Here is the exact quote from the original post.............. >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 84 lines] >> > he never posted anything like that, He posted EXACTLY that as I cut it from his original message. > his car pings on acceleration, not at idle. Where did he say that? > He never said anything about idle. No one said anything about at an idle. I said not under load. Do you understand the difference? You can be reving high and not be under load. > and exactly what is your insane complusive proplem with my name, > and commas?? Commas? Can you read? I said "Pay attention to your name and try using a bit of it". You name is 'common_ sense'. That is what I said you should use. You been on the peyote? On 7/22/07 5:31 PM, in article 46a4da3e.7884953@news.west.cox.net, "common_ >> On 7/20/07 9:32 AM, in article C2C631A9.25699%epmeyer50@msn.com, "E Meyer" >> <epmeyer50@msn.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 143 lines] > Nissan says it requires Premium, and can run on regular, with reduced > performance. You must have different manuals than the rest of us. Nissan says it requires 87 and can make use of 91. > Just like any other of a dozen other high compression preformance cars > I could name. > > Your rattles, you just are to cheap to notice it. BS >On 7/22/07 5:31 PM, in article 46a4da3e.7884953@news.west.cox.net, "common_ > [quoted text clipped - 155 lines] > >BS It says it will run with reduced performance on 87. wrote: >>On 7/22/07 5:31 PM, in article 46a4da3e.7884953@news.west.cox.net, >> [quoted text clipped - 174 lines] >> > It says it will run with reduced performance on 87. Doesn't say anything about pinging though. That is far worse than reduced performance. > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 179 lines] >Doesn't say anything about pinging though. That is far worse than >reduced performance. No actually that's what the original poster, who was using reg gas, was asking about - a rattling noise under load. Not at idle, but when he was in gear, under acceleration. His mechanic even told him to try premium. What is it with basic reading comprehension that plagues this news group.??? >>Doesn't say anything about pinging though. That is far worse than >>reduced performance. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Not at idle, but when he was in gear, under acceleration. He never said anything about being under acceleration. He did say that, at first, it needed to be in gear but that wasn't necessary later. Remember this: "It used to be that it took a lot to hear this rattle, and I couldnt hear it if i was in neutral, only when it was in gear. For the most part, I still need to be in gear to hear it." Did you get the 'for the most part' part? > His mechanic even told him to try premium. Sounds like his machanic was a moron. Did you see the other things his 'mechanic' said? > What is it with basic reading comprehension that plagues this news > group.??? It must be the fact that no nothing 'experts' keep trying to give poor advice. Surely you see that you fit nicely into that category. Look son, you are wrong, you could admit that or continue looking like a fool. Do you remember cars without knock sensors, fuel injection, computers and air flow sensors? I do and I remember turning the distributor (do you know what that is) and advancing the timing when I had premium fuel in it to see the power difference. There were no computers and knock sensors that did that back then. Grow up a bit and come back when you have some experience to back up what you like to tell. >On 7/19/07 10:04 PM, in article 46a02538.731234@news.west.cox.net, "common_ > [quoted text clipped - 118 lines] >to death. If the OP is experiencing rattling and pinging, then something >else is wrong. Actualy,,I designed and built the knock sensors,,, and your qualifications are? wrote: >>On 7/19/07 10:04 PM, in article 46a02538.731234@news.west.cox.net, >> [quoted text clipped - 140 lines] > > and your qualifications are? Well, I can read and it says 87 octane under the fuel door. Can you read? > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 145 lines] >Well, I can read and it says 87 octane under the fuel door. Can you >read? No it does not,,,,my 2000 Maxima : It says "Premium Fuel Recommended for Maximum Performance". Its right on the fuel door in 50 point type. In the owners manual it defines Premium Fuel as min 91 octane. Apparently you are the one with the reading problem. wrote: >> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 157 lines] > > Apparently you are the one with the reading problem. No, I don't have a 2000 Maxima. > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 161 lines] > >No, I don't have a 2000 Maxima. so why are you posting on a Maxima group - regarding a 2000 Maxima? wrote: >> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 168 lines] > so why are you posting on a Maxima group - regarding a 2000 > Maxima? Just to piss you off maybe? I have had a couple Maximas and it was pretty well the same with them all. Never had an'00 though. Is yours your first? > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 175 lines] >I have had a couple Maximas and it was pretty well the same with >them all. Never had an'00 though. Is yours your first? how is posting facts being "pissed off" IT NEEDS 91 OCTANE fuel,,, Reduced performance using 87, means"reduced" performance. wrote: >>> so why are you posting on a Maxima group - regarding a 2000 >>> Maxima? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > how is posting facts being > "pissed off" You are posting facts. You are posting your opinion. The manual says 87 is OK just not the best. > IT NEEDS 91 OCTANE fuel,,, Not according to the manual. Are you smarter than the guys that wrote that manual? If so, why don't you work for Nissan and help write the next one? > Reduced performance using 87, means"reduced" performance. Your fuel door says: "Premium Fuel Recommended for Maximum Performance" Recommended MEANS recommended NOT must use. So, I gather it IS your first one. Funny how having one Maxima makes you an expert. BTW, you are far too sensitive, I was only kidding about the piss off thing. If your skin is that thin, perhaps usenet isn't the place for you. > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] >thing. If your skin is that thin, perhaps usenet isn't the place for >you. So "OK" equals best performance,,?? Funny how owning the very car you do not makes me an expert. On 7/24/07 11:02 PM, in article 46a7caf9.21715828@news.west.cox.net, >> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Funny how owning the very car you do not makes me an expert. Has anyone noticed that the OP has not returned. You don't suppose all this ridiculous BS scared him off? > On 7/24/07 11:02 PM, in article > 46a7caf9.21715828@news.west.cox.net, "common_ sense@netscape.com" [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > Has anyone noticed that the OP has not returned. You don't > suppose all this ridiculous BS scared him off? Probably. Then again, that was the only message the person had ever posted. He doesn't seem to have posted anything anywhere else either. Surely he isn't that scared ;-) From 2000 Nissan Maxima SE Owner's Manual on pg 10-2 Technical and consumer information: Recommended specifications Unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91 AKI (RON 96)*1 > From 2000 Nissan Maxima SE Owner's Manual on pg 10-2 Technical > and consumer information: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91 > AKI (RON 96)*1 I see you are another that figures 'recommended' is the same as necessary. Recommended is necessary for the best performance. If you only drive around in the city, you don't need it. That is why they say recommended. If any engine damage would happen without premuim fuel, they would say necessary or must be used or something like that. BTW, how do you manage to get your messages spaced so poorly? I had to do a lot of repair to get it legible. Wait I see now. OE, figures. >> From 2000 Nissan Maxima SE Owner's Manual on pg 10-2 Technical >> and consumer information: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >BTW, how do you manage to get your messages spaced so poorly? I had to >do a lot of repair to get it legible. Wait I see now. OE, figures. so optimum or best performance is not something you want from a 30k car...?? Spark Knock, retarded timing, and low fuel mileage are worth saving 5 percent per gallon? Hmmmm...???????? and if all you worry about is commas, spacing, and format in peoples postings - then you need to get yourself some serious professional psychiatrist help. > so optimum or best performance is not something you want from a > 30k car...?? Spark Knock, retarded timing, and low fuel mileage > are worth saving 5 percent per gallon? Hmmmm...???????? Look sunshine, you are talking oranges and apples. YOU said that the guy's Maxima MUST run premuim. Several have told you you are full of sh.t, myself included. No one here has EVER said that premium isn't needed for the best performance. > and if all you worry about is commas, spacing, and format in > peoples postings - then you need to get yourself some serious > professional psychiatrist help. I 'worry' about very little. I have enough money, a home and plenty to eat and all of my family is in good health. What I 'dislike' is some wet behind the ears kid driving his momma's car a couple times a week trying to give advice as though he actually had a clue. >From 2000 Nissan Maxima SE Owner's Manual on pg 10-2 Technical and >consumer information: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Unleaded gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91 AKI (RON >96)*1 Thanks ,,,, That is what it says - as is common for most high performance engines. Why anyone would make up nonsense to support using anything else is beyond me? Apparently there is a cult of psychotic "low gas price" at any cost junkies that simply can not read, or understand the basics of combustion theory. wrote: >>From 2000 Nissan Maxima SE Owner's Manual on pg 10-2 Technical >>and consumer information: [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Why anyone would make up nonsense to support using anything else > is beyond me? You are such an easy mark. No one 'made up' anything. If yopur reading comprehension was better, you would understand that. Do you believe EVERYTHING everyone tells you? The interesting part is what Bob left out. Let me quiote the entire section: FUEL RECOMMENDATION Unleaded premium gasoline with an octane rating of at least 91 AKI (Anti-Knock Index)number (Research octane number 96) If unleaded premium gasoline is not available, unleaded regular gasoline with an octane rating of at least 87 AKI (Research octane number 91) can be used. However, for maximum vehicle performance, the use of unleaded premium gasoline is recommended. You can see this here: http://www.courtesyparts.com/nissan-manual/pdf/2000-Nissan-Maxima.pdf Notice that it says premuim fuel is RECOMMENDED for maximum performance. No where does it say it is required for daily operation. > Apparently there is a cult of psychotic > "low gas price" at any cost junkies that simply can not read, or > understand the basics of combustion theory. It is far more apparent that there are people with their heads up their arse giving advice when they should be studying the facts. BTW, it doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the price of the gas. You are wrong no matter what the fuel costs. > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 45 lines] >BTW, it doesn't have ANYTHING to do with the price of the gas. You >are wrong no matter what the fuel costs. you need some serious help... What is about the difference between "maximum performance" and not maximum performance that you do not understand,,?? The car is going to run like a turtle and get poor fuel mileage using 87 octane gas,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,the manual says so, it doesn't say we want you to use Premium, but Reg is OK,,,and dosent make any difference. Why would Nissan say to use Premium, if the car didn run best on Premium,,,????? My last car said it would run, if need be, on 84 octane (common in Mexico), but did I run around looking for 84 octane to save a nickel...? You are a blithering idiot. nocommon_sense wrote: > What is about the difference between "maximum performance" and not > maximum performance that you do not understand,,?? I have no problem understanding those concepts. The point is, that isn't the issue. You told a person here that premuim fuel was REQUIRED to operate his car on. That is utter bullshit and you have been told that by more than one. It appears that you are having some real issues with getting a grasp on the difference between REQUIRED and RECOMMENDED. > The car is going to run like a turtle and get poor fuel mileage > using 87 octane gas, Do you ever stop with the BS? As I have mentioned before, my Max runs pretty well on regular. It just performs BETTER with premium in it. > the manual says so, it doesn't say we want you to use Premium, but > Reg is OK,,,and dosent make any difference. The manual doesn't say that. Are you unable to comprehend even such a simple statement? Perhaps you can get your mom or dad to read the manual to you and explain what it means. > Why would Nissan say to use Premium, if the car didn run best on > Premium,,,????? Why doesn't it say to run avgas for 'ultimate' performance if higher octane is better? The point is, Nissan does NOT say it is REQUIRED to run the car. YOU do. > My last car said it would run, if need be, on 84 octane (common in > Mexico), but did I run around looking for 84 octane to save a > nickel...? As was mentioned before, the cost of fuel still does not make your claim correct. It wouldn't matter if premuim was cheaper than regular. Premium fuel would still not be REQUIRED to run the car. > You are a blithering idiot. I am amazed that you can determine that when your head is so far up your arse. I remember you from some months back getting slapped around over this same issue by several people. You used a different handle then but your argument style and lack of comprehension was EXACTLY like it is now. >nocommon_sense wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] >your argument style and lack of comprehension was EXACTLY like it is >now. You paid over 30 grand for a car that runs "pretty well",,, LOL nocommon_sense wrote: > You paid over 30 grand for a car that runs "pretty well",,, Are you on some sort of drug? I said it runs 'pretty well' on regular. I also said I use premuim fuel most of the time. Sometimes, where I drive, premium isn't available so I use mid or regular. Is that concept too difficult for you to grasp? There was NEVER an issue about premium not being the best choice. What I am doing is calling bullshit on your statement that it is the ONLY choice. Give this message to your parents so they can explain it to you. I have lowered my writin as low as I can go. If you still don't get it. you need help. I find it funny that you will not admit you are wrong in your statement that premium fuel is REQUIRED. Very childish of you. >nocommon_sense wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >I find it funny that you will not admit you are wrong in your statement >that premium fuel is REQUIRED. Very childish of you. so where in the 3rd world do you live that 91 octane is not available..??? The gas cap tells you to use 91 octane. ROTFL,,,??? Not wrong about anything - the car requires 91 octane to run correctly,,,try to remember through your drug induced haze, the post that I responded to - he was having pre ignition rattling, using 87 octane. nocommon_sense wrote: > so where in the 3rd world do you live that 91 octane is not > available..??? I Canada travelling across the country, often small farming communities have no premium. Too bad you really don't have a clue except about your local area. Is the heat in Arizona burning your brain? > The gas cap tells you to use 91 octane. Bullshit it does. > Not wrong about anything - the car requires 91 octane to run > correctly, Not what my manual says. Want me to scan and post it? If you weren't such a lame a.s, I would make you a wager. > try to remember through your drug induced haze, the > post that I responded to - he was having pre ignition rattling, > using 87 octane. His 'mechanic listed that as well as a half dozen other things he 'thought' it might be. Remember this? "First he said there was a 'preignition sound".. then followed up with words like could be "air fixture," "timing cover" Tensioner..... and basically he said for some reason the check engine light isn't coming on so he can't tell what the problem is cause theres just too many possibilities." Your proctologist is looking for you. It seems he has found your head. New to site so problem might be repaired already. However Ihad a noise that drove me crazy,dealer chargred me 95 to basically say live with it, took car and put on lift and found that a ground strap with a weld nut on the end had broken off and as banging against the exhaust pipe at times and the rear muffler had a hole and was also at times banging into the body frame, Fixed the hanging ground strap and muffler andits quiet again, The grnd strap is located above the front resonator and hard to find unless looking for it -- Message posted using http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/alt.autos.nissan.maxima/ More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html > New to site so problem might be repaired already. However Ihad a noise > that [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > http://www.talkaboutautos.com/group/alt.autos.nissan.maxima/ > More information at http://www.talkaboutautos.com/faq.html === Looks like you have learned about dealing with a Nisson dealers service Dept. If they can't skin someone they could care less. >> New to site so problem might be repaired already. However Ihad a noise >> that [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >Looks like you have learned about dealing with a Nisson dealers service >Dept. If they can't skin someone they could care less. Oh right,,your the guy that got fired by Nissan - under yet another new posting name. wrote: >> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > So "OK" equals best performance,,?? Who said anything about OK? You said required. I said bullshit. End of story. You are wrong and that is all there is to it. Let me try again. Premium fuel is NOT required to run the car. It is for maximum perforamnce. You suggest damage if you run regular. I say bullshit to that as well. > Funny how owning the very car you do not makes me an expert. That would be better in English. I think you said you own the same car as I do. You don't. Perhaps you meant to say: Funny how owning the very car you do does not make me an expert. That makes much more sense. > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 49 lines] >Perhaps you meant to say: Funny how owning the very car you do does >not make me an expert. That makes much more sense. In no post have I ever suggested damage. and again - instead of an intelligent post - we get a 5th grade english teacher critiquing the spelling checkers program. > In no post have I ever suggested damage. I guess you don't know what the 'knocking' does then. Perhaps you should learn more before you give advice. > and again - instead of an intelligent post - we get a 5th grade > english teacher critiquing the spelling checkers program. No, what we get is someone that has a true clue instead of some kid driving his first car or, dare we say, his parent's car. Remember, I am not the only one that has told you are full of sh.t on this. It appears to be the general concensus. >> In no post have I ever suggested damage. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Remember, I am not the only one that has told you are full of sh.t on >this. It appears to be the general concensus. general consensus is you? did you go to Maxima.org,,,? Have you pulled all the posts on this topic here - its 10 to 1 in my favor. do you own a maxima? Do you have an IQ over room temperature - I do, I am a Chemical Engineer, and built the Space Shuttle , F16, F18, Hubble Space Telescope - your qualifications, aside from your lack of comprehension, are? You fail, even after I have explained it as simply as possible, the difference between spark knock, and pre ignition. The original posters Mechanic told him it was pre ignition, and to use premium. wrote: >>> In no post have I ever suggested damage. >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> > general consensus is you? Nope, there was more than just myself. Check the thread. > did you go to Maxima.org,,,? Have you pulled all the posts on this > topic here - its 10 to 1 in my favor. It is 10 to 1 in your favour for using premium fuel for performance. There has never been any disagreement about that. YOU said it is REQUIRED. THAT is what is BBS. > do you own a maxima? Sure do. So does my wife. I mentioned that in a previous post. I also said that I have burned regular with no issues but DO use premuim usually for the performance boost. Don't you pay attention? > Do you have an IQ over room temperature Sure do, do you? I mean like standard temperature? Not that of an igloo. > I do, I am a Chemical > Engineer, and built the Space Shuttle , F16, F18, Hubble Space > Telescope - your qualifications, aside from your lack of > comprehension, are? Wow, I thought when you grew up you wanted to be a fireman, my bad. Please upload scanned copies of your qualifications for my perusal. If you don't do that, you are as full of BS as your advice was. A free place to do that is here: http://www.imageshack.us/ > You fail, even after I have explained it as simply as possible, > the difference between spark knock, and pre ignition. You explained nothing to me. Go here for some enlightenment: http://tinyurl.com/2d9pot Don't try to make an issue over technicalities in a lame attempt to evade your incorrect advice. You said premium fuel was REQUIRED to operate the car. I said bullshit and I am correct. It is not REQUIRED but it is RECOMMENDED for maximum performance. Regular fuel will NOT harm the car. Do you care to argue that point? > The original posters Mechanic told him it was pre ignition, and to > use premium. The OP's mechanic said it was several things. "First he said there was a 'pre ignition sound".. then followed up with words like could be "air fixture," "timing cover" Tensioner..... and basically he said for some reason the check engine light isn't coming on so he can't tell what the problem is cause theres just too many possibilities... " He also suggested trying premium fuel to see if it made a difference. Good advice, unlike yours. > wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 69 lines] >He also suggested trying premium fuel to see if it made a difference. >Good advice, unlike yours. He was running reg gas,,and complaining about pre ignition noise - which you will have running reg gas in a car optimized for premium. and the car had 130k miles on it, which if run all on reg gas, would cause lots of carbon build up, and increase the octane requirements even more. Compression ratio sets the octane requirement - the maxima engine is a high compression engine. and please quote back to me where I said it had to run on premium - never ever made such a statement. you sir are a moron. > He was running reg gas,,and complaining about pre ignition noise - > which you will have running reg gas in a car optimized for > premium. Bullshit. That is what the ECM is for. Yopu are thinking of fixed timing as in a distributor. As I said, I have driven my own Max with regular and it DOES NOT ping. > and the car had 130k miles on it, which if run all on reg gas, > would cause lots of carbon build up, and increase the octane > requirements even more. More bullshit on your part. You are suggesting that regular fuel causes carbon fouling. Thay is utter crap. What do the people that drive cars requiring ONLY regular fuel do then? Do all of their cars get carbon fouling because they don't burn premium? You need to get the difference between octane and detergents figured out before you look more like a fool than you do now. > Compression ratio sets the octane requirement - the maxima engine > is a high compression engine. In part that is correct. So does timing, temperature, altitude and a bunch of other factors. > and please quote back to me where I said it had to run on premium > - never ever made such a statement. You said that premium was REQUIRED. What does that mean to you? http://groups.google.com/group/alt.autos.nissan.maxima/msg/44e13de8e5 c4dcfa IT NEEDS 91 OCTANE fuel,,, http://groups.google.com/group/alt.autos.nissan.maxima/msg/6bb462242b 3a97b2 you need to use the proper recommended fuel - 91 grade premium. otherwise its going to pre ignition rattle like an old sowing machine. Maybe you should go back to building those models of the F18, F16 Space shuttle etc. You seem to do well in your dreamland. Your memory sucks badly. > you sir are a moron. I find that hilarious coming from you. Pull your head out of your arse and admit you were wrong. TRY to act like a grounup. Not sure if this is the problem, but I was hearing a rattling sound in the front end of my car too. I have a 2003 Altima. The dealership kept telling me it was my brakes, but I was hearing it all the time. Took it to another place and it turned out to be something simple. One of the heat shields covering my exhaust came loose and was rattling. They sautered it back on and presto the rattling stopped. Just an FYI to maybe check there as well...as for the whining sound..not sure.. >Hi, i own a 2000 maxima, 5 speed that I'm just about at my wits end with. >It has 114,000 miles on it. I just recently took it accross the country [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > >http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z261/mikemd21/?action=view¤t=db0b59d7.flv |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.