Engine slower to start than my old 3.0 - is that normal?

G

glastoveteran

Active member
 Bristol
Seems to turn over a bit more than my 3.0 si did, particularly when cold, but always starts without fail - I guess that's normal?
 
+1 When mine is cold its turns over on the key for a good 3 or 4 seconds before firing up. It does the same whether I've not used it for 1 day or two weeks.
 
It always seems to be that the more highly strung engines take a bit more coaxing into life than more normally tuned ones. I like it, it tells me something special is under the bonnet :D
 
Ditto. I was only thinking about this today and was wondering if it could be a potential issue starting to rear its ugly head. Much happier now to hear thats its normal.

P
 
Mine doesnt take 3-4 seconds more like 1-2 sec. Of course temperatures are generally higher here so maybe that makes a bit of a difference.. :idunno:
 
agreed - but the 3.0 was 0.5 seconds (i.e. you could not hear a turn of the starter motor at all) whilst the M is cranking and 1 - 2 seconds feels a long time then.
 
Same here, seems to take an age compared to the 3.0Si I had before. Occassionally it will start quickly, but not often.
Visited my folks the other day and my dad commented on it taking a while to start.
Think it's a characteristic of highly strung/high compression ratio engines
 
I have read somewhere that this is due to fuel pressure, but not real sure.
It takes a little longer for the fuel pump to reach optimum pressure (for the S54), DME senses when the pressure is in the correct range then fires the ignition.

I see the same issues, but if I had just turned off the car, then restart within the five minutes or so (approx), then I don't see a lag on starting. If the above is correct, then it takes a finite amount of time for the fuel rail to depressurize.

To go along with this, one other aspect could be the DME not allowing the engine starting in a lean condition which will damage your cats....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom