^^^ Jack - it must be my thick Aussie accent, or the fact that Antipodeans speak quickly (I apologise for both) - but what you have highlighted on your is EXACTLY what I have "boxed" on my - see post #12 on this thread.
As I have said:
My first hypothesis was that the 5V rail in the engine prewiring harness was produced by the 2 x pins on the that I have boxed in my above. But this doesn't make sense since your method allows for the to remain (wrong- I meant "clear"] with the T105 connector pulled (this implies that the 5Volt rail is produced elsewhere).
Don
You are suggesting that T103 /35 is the power source for the 5V rail in the engine prewiring harness (and by inference, T105 /33 is the earth for said 5V rail). Good - we both agree!!
BUT- consider the implications of our mutual agreement on your methodology: If the T105 connector is pulled - then as a consequence, the 5V supply disappears from every sensor, sender, valve etc that relies on the prewiring harness power supply.
You have asserted (and I have accepted) that if "t
he the fault doesn't reset with unplugged on engine harness side, th[e]n there is a problem at "
This method allows the counterfactual scenario: that is - "the fault" is reset - meaning that the "problem" is NOT in the .
So here's the issue - if the 5V rail is indeed generated in the (as I think we both agree) and if the connector that distributes this power supply to the myriad of sensors, sensor etc in the prewiring harness is pulled - how can the ever be cleared?
Without intending any offense - doesn't this dichotomy mean that if the T105 connector is pulled - the result of the methodology will ALWAYS point to a faulty (i.e. resulting in false positives when the fault may be elsewhere)?
This is do'in my head-in big-time
. I'm desperately trying to understand where the logic in my thinking is wrong - help!!!
Don