Traction control ? 94 q45

[TmaCular]

so ive had my car for 3 years and the traction control has never worked! well this winter all of a sudden is decided to start working then stopped. now whenever i start my car it works every time and once in a while it will turn off while im driving. a friend said it could be magnets on my abs sensor? is this true..what should i look into for this.

[Q45tech]

Follow the detailed diagnostic proceedure in your FSM......the TCS computer [in trunk] provives code flashes to look up...........and how to read the individual sensors on front [ABS] and the tone wheels on the differential.....no magnets per se, since it is avariable reluctance system.

Do your tires comply with oem 1994 softness level [fast wearing 200] that the software is set to accept? Otherwise the TCS will go off too soon and too frequently............wear out rear brakes and electric pump system.

[qship96]

Do your tires comply with oem 1994 softness level [fast wearing 200] that the software is set to accept? Otherwise the TCS will go off too soon and too frequently............wear out rear brakes and electric pump system.

As a owner who has personally driven well over 200,000 miles on my Q with traction control with tires well above the "fast wearing 200" treadwear index{ current Exaltos are 400 wear index, IIRC}, I gotta strongly disagree with the above statement........TCS does NOT go off too frequently, and I consistantly get over 50,000 miles from rear brake pads- actually I have 70,000 on the current rear pads and they were inspected less than 2 weeks ago while I had the Q in for servicing- plenty of pad life left.....same with front pads, 1/2 worn at 45,000 miles.Electric TCS pump is also original and operating fine at 245K miles, as are both TCS relays!

[Q45tech]

Obviously if you drive without WOT and near WOT acceleration the TCS doesn't engage PLUS the milder [1st] gearing in the 94-96 reduces the torque enough to mediate the problem vs the 90-93 gearing.

Of course in snow and ice or even rain Aggressive driving should engage TCS.

The 96 is such a mild accelerator anyway compared to even a 94, that it is like another world. The 1997 is actually faster than a 1996.

[qship96]

Tough to admit when you are wrong, huh? There is less than .5 second difference between any stock 90-96 q45, at best.

[Q45tech]

Bull Squirrel! Anyway 1/2 second is 40-50 lb/ft of torque.The 1996 needs 16.0+ seconds to complete quarter mile at least the 3 I've driven in ATL did.One of our previous techs bought a 1996 and fought and fought it for 6 months trying to make it accelerate.Everyone we serviced was a DOG, even those with 60k.

The 1995 was a runner up in doggishness: 1995 Infiniti Q45t 7.9 16.2 even that year is more than 0.5 sec.

I'll be happy to drag you for titles [a real drag strip] and I will spot you 0.6000 secs

[qship96]

Bull Squirrel! Anyway 1/2 second is 40-50 lb/ft of torque.The 1996 needs 16.0+ seconds to complete quarter mile at least the 3 I've driven in ATL did.One of our previous techs bought a 1996 and fought and fought it for 6 months trying to make it accelerate.Everyone we serviced was a DOG, even those with 60k.

The 1995 was a runner up in doggishness: 1995 Infiniti Q45t 7.9 16.2 even that year is more than 0.5 sec.

I'll be happy to drag you for titles [a real drag strip] and I will spot you 0.6000 secs

Dont forget that by the time these expensive cars ever saw anything but dealer service, they were older and usually multiple owner relics...not surprised the cars you had access to at T3 were in poor operating condition. Might want to check the posts here and you will see Rsiwicki had his buddy with him at the track,where a 100% STOCK peoperly running 1996Q ripped thru the 1/4 mile at times quicker than any other reported 90-95Q here.......imagine that. At most, the early cars may have had 20-30 hp more than the later cars, which would be .2-.3 difference in 1/4 mile times......all academic as even a 1990 with modified ECU is no prize compared to even a modern v6 Camry/Accord/altima......time has marched forward.

But your beliefs regarding traction control system operation and treadwear index are just plain wrong.........but not surprising since your Q does not have it.

[ozzinc]

i would have to agree with you on this one q45tech, and as for theses toyota camrys and altima's, they may have a little gusto off the line but after that they are out of breath, and at a buck 140mph im still climbing in my 91 q45 and they have run out of steam, theres definently a difference when it comes to the earlier q45's and the later ones minus the 2002 and up.