H0H-Crankshaft Position Sensor recall

NHSTA PDF explaining 'it'.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...gg2MAQ&usg=AFQjCNFYjDQXFWfJNztKM7OIBie_qOXnvA

 

On the PS, thanks for correcting my dyslexia...but I expect most people got it. Dyslexics and Anal-Retentive types make for great forum interactions...

Then I assume this new sensor is "more sensitive" and if the old part # did fix the issue (like bshammer0's), then the part was updated before the part # was (?)...something still isn't right or rather, known information doesn't completely gel with experiences...your corrections not withstanding...thanks

Edit: After reading that detailed report it seems it's not the sensitivity of the CKP but rather it's inherent proximity to the rotor tooth based on it's location and size, so it seems logical that the new CKP is modified in some way to prevent this. Maybe as has been suggested, the part was modified before it's part # was changed which would explain bshammer0's experience...maybe.

 

That was much more thorough, thanks for posting.

 

Sounds like my part guy was correct.

Part ending in number 89 is affected. Part number 98 is the replacement and not affected CKP/CPS. While vehicles produced through 10/28/16 may be impacted, only vehicles equipped with engines manufactured through 11/30/15 would have the 89 part number, hence the variability with some within the production range not being impacted...non impacted vehicles have engines manufactured newer than 11/30/15 which makes sense.

 

For me, it begs the question, 'why am I not on the list'?
10/15 purchase date

 

I'm guessing something (one of the machines perhaps) on the production line fell slightly out of spec. We will probably never know.

 

It's actually very detailed in splitbolt's link

TL;DR: Coating thickness and thermal expansion reduced the gap between the sensor and the timing rotor, which created a contact scenario with the sensor and a static charge resulting in a malfunction in the sensor, hence why 'new' 89 sensors would fix it (though still likely to fail). The new 98 sensor has an ever so slightly greater gap which was tested to not show any additional abnormal readings.

However, they said they couldn't reproduce abnormal readings with the increased gap(new sensor). While I think it's probably true that the new sensor may no longer make contact and produce static to cause a failure, given the surging and other periodic strange behavior that folks have experienced (without having MIL or total ignition failure), I'd guess abnormal readings are still present. Not sure I'd call this issue totally fixed here.

 

Super helpful! Thanks for posting, as always. Interesting to see the history here and unlike some recall campaigns reading through this it really doesn't seem they "know" for sure when and how the coating was truly abnormal. They appear to be gauging this purely on the types of claims they've received vs. actually having a clear read on the parts. I need to go back and look, but though I didn't know what to look for at the time I am pretty sure my old CKP had scratches on the tip. Really informative - thanks again

 

They are saying the start production date is 9/17/15 so yours would have been produced prior to that.

 

I'm just glad they released this part! My truck died on the interstate a few weeks ago and I was told this was the cause (CPS failure). At the time, no part number had been released, so I was being told I could not touch/trade/sell my truck until this replacement part was released and installed. I've been stuck in a Corolla.

 

Gotta love it.

 

Looking for a white Knight? Here I am . No Recalls, no howls, no leaking, no rattles.... This truck kicks ass! Fun to drive, hauls shit I need it to, tows shit I need it to, hauls my family, starts up everyday even cold ass winter night when we get toned out, and of course does not look like a minivan. All this and just under 11,000mi and absolutely no issues - guess I'm lucky or as I believe normal.

 

Actually, I think you are right, you are "normal" but some of us aren't.

True Story

We bought a 2013 Subaru Outback for my wife. We were coming from a 2003 Honda Minivan with 156K miles on that we LOVED but were not willing to rebuild the transmission on for a 2nd time. My wife always loved Outbacks (she had an Outback Sport prior to us meeting), so when our Odyssey transmission died for the 2nd time in the middle of a 12 hour road trip we had it towed to the nearest Honda dealer. It happened to be affiliated with a Subaru dealer, so being fed up with the Honda and her wanting a full size Outback for years (tired of being a soccer mom in a minivan) we bought it and continued on our trip. No research at all other than knowing Subaru has a fairly good rep.

Almost immediately, before I ever looked at a forum I notice the Outback likes to "wander" on the road. I check the tire pressure, it's all good. I take it to the local dealer, they look at it, it's all good, including the alignment. I ask them to check the wheel balance, it's all good too. It STILL felt like it was wandering to me. I then go on the forums and lo and behold I'm not the only one who notices it. There is a vocal presence on the forums of people who make the same claims I do...and there are "white knights" defending Subaru claiming they have no issues. I think they are both right...relatively speaking, and here's why.

I took the Outback (still with less than 5k miles on it mind you) to a local independent Subaru specialist. These guys work on every kind of Subaru imaginable...from nearly new strictly family haulers like mine to WRX Stis setup for rallying. They know their sh1t and have a awesome rep. I explain my complaint to the owner/expert tech. He assures me I'm not crazy, I'm just one of the small % of Outback owners who notice the issue I'm talking about. ALL of the Outbacks like ours do it, but most people are just not that sensitive too it...and the ones who aren't think the ones that are are crazy. He told me the only thing to do was try running high tire pressure and it that didn't help significantly (it did help slightly, but not enough to make me happy) then we could replace the rear-stabilizer bar with a larger one from another Subaru model or an even stouter aftermarket one. I ordered one (only $100) and was about to do this, but before I installed it we decided we missed the van so much we just traded it in on another Odyssey. Even with the transmission going out at 123k miles (and again after a not great rebuild at 156K) we loved the functionality and the way it drove so much were were willing to risk it again.

My point being that some people are just not the sensitive to how vehicles behave relative to other vehicles and some people are very sensitive to it. It doesn't mean either camp is crazy, it just means their expectations are different based on their differing sensitivities. If my Tacoma accelerated/shifted like my 2016 Odyssey and got even 70% of the MPG (which is the same weight with a 3.5 liter V6 rated at 250/250), I'd be happy as a pig in sh1t...but it doesn't, so I'm not, because I think it CAN and SHOULD.

YMMV

 

I fully agree with this and often wondered this. Great, now I'm gonna go drive our 2011 Outback and feel this wandering- THANKS A LOT just kidding and just won't tell wifey. This outback has been awesome besides head lights love to burn out and I have become really good at changing them. We have 110,xxx miles and this sucker is still running very strong.

 

LOL...hilarious you own the same model Outback too! We really liked ours, damn thing would go anywhere and would get traction in anything. The wandering "problem" didn't really play a role in the trade-in for the van...it was more that the van's capabilities just fit our lifestyle better and it took my wife 3 years to admit it to me... My wife never complained about the wandering, but she has remarked how much "smoother" the Odysseys (both of them) are than her Subarus were...but I think that is more a compliment to the Honda than a knock on the Subaru. We are still hoping that by the time our kids are out of the house Subaru builds their interpretation (diesel/electric hybird AWD!) of a 80's VW Westy...we would be all over that!

 

90919-05089 is the original number, 90919-05098 is the new part number.

That said, and this is somewhat interesting because Toyota rarely does it, but they have updated the parts catalog for the Tacoma and it now lists 90919-05098 for all 2016+ V6 Tacomas. Looking your truck in the parts catalog will not tell you what your truck came with or if it has the latest sensor, because it will show 90919-05098 for all of them. I suspect the reason for this is because the 90919-05089 sensor is still a valid sensor for other vehicles (Lexus IS, GS, RC, and NX). The production range with the original sensor as per Toyota's recall information is mid-September 2015 (start of 2016 MY production) to late October 2016 (early 2017 MY production).

tl;dr: The parts catalog won't tell you which sensor your truck came with.

Jeff

 

Is there a part number stamped on the sensor itself? My dealer keeps saying I am not affected, yet mine falls withing those build dates (FEB 2016)

 

There isn't, though the number that is stamped on the sensor may vary between the two as well.

PS: PM me your VIN, I'd like to look at it.

Jeff

 

I'm ordering a new 98 sensor just for peace of mind. I'll do my best to compare the two and report back any differences in drivability. At worst I'm out a few bucks.

 

Interested to see your results!